Because this is when the Movement Goes national, right . This is when the Movement Goes national. People are sending in money from all over the world. The Movement Goes international, actually. There are political cartoons you can find in french newspapers talking about the boycott. The Movement Goes national and international. So if you think, and put that in a cold war context, too, thats part of the reason people are interested. And it inspires a similar boycott in south africa. So people are paying attention to this, in a way that had not gotten that attention before. Why do you think this one got so much attention . Its not that that hadnt happened in montgomery before. Why did this result in a National Media event . The answer is implied in the question. [laughter] student because they had media available . [laughter] prof. Greer to some degree. You cant take out the fact, we have this idea of a movement in the postwar moment, without considering the circumstances. The cold war, something to consider. We had new technology, and this is the first example of a movement that is considered nonviolent direct action. Not the first time that strategy was used, but this is one that becomes publicized. The leaders, Martin Luther king, are talking about nonviolent direct action. And were owing to talk about nonviolence in terms of a strategy, in relationship to other strategies that come later. But i need to be careful when i say this, because i do not want to dismiss the idea that these people participating in the boycott were dedicated to a doctrine of nonviolence for moral, civil, principled reasons. But its also pageantry, right . It is also pageantry. And when you have media cameras, have people coming down, and you see these crowds, row after row of welldressed africanamericans stoically, peacefully walking through the city, walking to the court buildings, thats an image of blackness that hasnt been mainstreamed before that point in time, right . And subsequent activists take note. Were going to talk about that, when we talk about little rock and birmingham. So this nonviolent direct action, certainly this is a strategy used in other moments, other movements, becomes something people understand as defining the movement. That comes out of montgomery, in that sense. So it has this National Presence that also, to your earlier point, is scary to the virulent segregationists. But theres no angry black people, theres no weapons, right . Nobody is demanding. Nobody is demanding. Theyre just peacefully refusing, peacefully refusing. And they are litigated against many times during that, for doing that. The bipod is considered illegal boycott is considered illegal. They take king, and charge him on conspiracy grounds, and bring all these other people, including robinson and parks. How many of you have seen the picture of parks, the mug shot of rosa parks . That is not when she was arrested. Thats from when she had to participate in this conspiracy trial, and everyone in the trial is saying, she is not leading this boycott. You have all these africanamerican people in montgomery show up to the courthouse. They find that king has been arrested, and they say, where is my warrant . This has never happened before, where africanamerican people arent afraid to go to the jail. They get in their best clothes. They drive to the jail. People lined the courthouse steps, to make sure they go in and out. They turn themselves in. That is a shift in the relationship of africanamericans toward law enforcement. You dont take yourself to jail in africanamerican jim crow south. But they show up, and it takes away the leverage the city authorities have in that sense. So someone bombs kings house. They put in an injunction against the free taxis, and they do all these things trying to cut the legs out from underneath the boycotters, but unsuccessfully. I think all that pageantry is what allows for the idea that we have of the montgomery bus boycott as being short and being an action of martyrs and saints. Martin luther king marching the masses to freedom and the wall comes tumbling down and that, right . So you can see why i find that problematic, because that isnt a useful history, at least in my mind. It is inspiring, and many people find it compelling and inspiring, and that is important. You dont want to rip down an origin story, a myth, without putting some thing else there. And i think if you have an idea of how they are organizing, how they were successful. This was one of the more successful social movements in history, right . At least in u. S. History in the 20 century. They were successful. But if you dont know anything about it, and king and parks appear to be these figures . Who on their best day can be as saintly, or courageous as king and parks, as these things make them appear . And they certainly were courageous, right . But they were people, with complex things, and put in these situations for a myriad of reasons. Then, you start to think, oh, that is possible. Lets look at what they did. Of course, you cant take their strategies and map them to the 21st century, but you can take their strategies and adjust for historical circumstances. Thats useful history. This is not a useful history, as far as im concerned. So i give you these facts, this timeline, i want you to have a sense of the timeline. I will send it to you. Dont worry about it right now. Going backwards. I also want to point out parks role. Before she ever got on the bus, before she ever made her stand. This is important, because people always say she was either a plant or she didnt mean to, but was inspired. She doesnt have to be an naacp plant. She was entirely inclined to do what she did on the bus that day. It didnt have to be preplanned. She was entirely inclined to do that. Then you have the Supreme Court ruling that ends the bus boycott. And i want to point out all these other women, just make sure. Ill end here. The symbolic myth of rosa parks, propping up this montgomery myth. And the other thing we will if they do speak about it in its truest form, it might almost ignite the feeling in these young children. That is the case. I often say, i dont have time to talk about the brown case. We talked about the decision. We dont know about the nine children involved in the brown case. You dont know anything about them. That is not sexy. The decision was sexy, the boycott was sexy, in that case. Part of why you should question whether or not there is a movement now, because we are not seeing sexy, not seeing pageantry stuff lately. That doesnt mean there is not organizing going on. The article, part of why i gave you that, he said men led, but women organized. You may have to consider your ideas of what leadership is and what organizing is, right . The wtc kind of crumbles his thesis there, at least for me, but only if you allow yourself to consider, what did they mean by leadership, what did they mean by organizing . I was reading about the and it till, the bus emmett till, the bus movement, and i dont think they get enough credit as leaders in the movement as they should, and they relate to amy bradley, and in this situation the women were the one who built the whole infrastructure that allowed them to do some thing like that. I was really thinking about those mothers. Prof. Greer and we will talk more about this. The need for people on the ground in the mid 20th century to keep their activity secret, and the consequences of that, as i told you earlier about this book all black lives matter by barbara ramsey. That gets into the details. It really tells you whats going on right now, or in the last couple years, and it is the first time reading something i had some optimism. Im not seeing it, because people have adopted different ideas about how to approach this, im not seeing it as publicly or in the media to such a degree. It doesnt mean its not happening, doesnt mean it is not actually resulting in some victories, right . [laughter] see you guys next time. [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2020] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] watching American History tv, only on cspan3. Is onrican history tv cspan3 every weekend. I said then that i was making this decision because of our despite our concern over increased enemy activity in cambodia and south vietnam. Time, i warned that if i concluded that increased enemy activity in any of these areas endangered the lives of americans in remaining in vietnam, i would not hesitate to take strong and effective measures to deal with that situation. Despite the warning, North Vietnam has increased military aggression in all of these areas, particularly in cambodia. After a full consultation with the National Security council and my other advisors, i have concluded that the actions of the enemy in the last 10 days endangered the lives of those in and would constitute unacceptable risk to those who would be there after a withdrawal of 150,000. To protect our men who are in vietnam, and to guarantee the success of our vietnam it our programs, i have concluded that the time has come for action. You can watch this and other American History programs on her our videosere all archived. That is cspan. Org history. You are watching American History tv with eyewitness accounts, archival films, lectures and college classrooms, and visits to museums and world war ii veteran and democrat nelson served as wisconsins governor to 1953 and in the u. S. Senate from 1953 to 1981. He was later counselor to the Wilderness Society and was ordered a president ial medal of freedom. He is the founder of earth day for first observed in 1970. Up next, the cspan interview with senator nelson, which we recorded in 1990. Nelson. Rd various articles say you are the father of earth day. How is your offspring doing . Nelson well, there is more awareness, concern, understanding about the issue now than there was. There is an important recognition on the part in general, that the activities of actuallye planet are dangerously degrading the that sustains all of us. Oceans, airports. We have a long way to go, but at least there is it better public understanding by the legislators, governors, congress, that this is a vital issue. Air, water, soil, rivers, oceans, and so forth. Determines our standard of living in the quality of our all of these resources for many years, it is time we undertake a very serious effort to stop the degradation and help to give nature a chance to do some restoration, at least where the damage has not then irreparable. You mentioned the public and legislatures. What do you hope people will take away from this in 1990 . I think the objective, the most important effective, objective of this the same as 1970. My purpose than was make demonstrations so big that politicians would have to wake up, and force the issue into the political arena. 20 Million People forced the issue into the political arena, edit was a big educational effort. Hope that the heads of state around the world would take the issue seriously and start leading in their own countries. Been one of the big an unfortunate vacuums of the whole thing, that leaders at the president ial level, except for a like the Prime Minister of norway and the Prime Minister of australia, about the only two heads of state who really have addressed this issue seriously and it hasnt stopped their agenda. I hope it will have the impact of shaking the leadership out of its lethargy. 1970, a tremendous l effort. A education is at the bottom of it. For most 10 years, when i was i wasor of wisconsin, concerned that here was an issue of primary importance to how we and thethis planet, Political Leadership of the country was paying attention to it. I came to washington in 1962 and met with Bobby Kennedy and went through it with him. I brought along strap scrapbooks to show the publicity by advocating protection of the environment. I came to washington as a senator in 1963, i spoke with Bobby Kennedy again and told him the president ought to do a nationwide tour and with the president doing it, that would give it the visibility, notice, needed toion that it and the press and media on the issue. The president decided to do a nationwide tour in august of 1953, and he wrote me a letter and asked for some ideas and i wrote him a five page letter and then at the beginning of his tour, i took off with him, along with hubert humphrey, gene mccarthy, and the senator from pennsylvania, and we left the white house by it helicopter to the air force base, and headed finally inding minnesota, then the president gave a speech in wisconsin, and that he gave another one at jackson hole, and he was off on his conservation tour, which i he gotighted about, that to salt lake and he said something there about Foreign Policy which got headlines all over the nation. That was the end of the conservation tour. Support forve much the concept of the idea. His advisers did not think much of it. Anyway, that was the end. What i hoped would happen did not happen. It did not really get the issue into the political arena. Years went by and i kept thinking, 37 states, between was on a1970, i conservation speaking in late july and early august of 1969, and i the west coast, spoke at the university of california Santa Barbara and headed from there to speak at a conservation conference and on the way out, i picked up a and there were antiwar protests all over the country. Guardven had the national on the university of wisconsin campus. I was flying to berkeley and reading the article about the. Ietnam war head,denly popped into my why not have a nationwide . Nvironmental teach in so at berkeley, i gave a speech and spoke with students and professors and they all thought it was a wonderful idea. Andme back to washington set up a nonprofit organization, made all the preparations and plans, and then announced it at a conservation speech in early september, seattle, and it made the front page, a lot of newspapers. Off, a really remarkable, grassroots response. It got so big that after three months, i could not run anymore in my office. All of the telephone calls and stuff could be referred to. The last three months, it kept going. Not have to do an awful lot. It just grew on its own. What was the reaction in the places you spoke . Were you the voice in the wilderness . Did they listen to what you had to say and say that is nice and met not pay much attention . I did speak to the legislature in massachusetts. Practicallyd was every member of congress got on a campusto speak or at some event in their own state or their own congressional district. Requests forout 86 members of congress for concrete from members of congress for copies of speech is because they had not given any speeches and what are the issues . Politicians respond to a grassroots demonstration of concern. Congresss and those in were all disposed and congress adjourned for the day so they could go out. It was a very positive, very good event. We have i do not know what. Many conservationists and environmentalists, well it knowledged, voted in the senate. In 1970, you were quoted as saying represents the antithesis of freedom. That is an excerpt out of the speech. What we have been doing is taking away from people by polluting the air in the water, polluting the soil, destroying wildlife habitats, we have taken away one of the fundamental , without of life people having really very specific participation or decision in it. Allowed industry and business to externalize their costs by degrading the air and the rivers and the lakes and charge you to the public. That was a sentence out of the speech where i was making that kind of a point, depriving the people of important rights to have a decent environment. And that is an important right. It is not legally enforceable, of course. We do not want to live in a dirty environment. You mention in 1970, congress have the day off. What impact did earth have on congress . It has the impact i had hoped for. I was only hoping it would be a demonstration so big that it would force the issue into the political dialogue. Force it to the attendance attention to the politicians who were not paying attention to it. It did that. Any number of friends of mine up there said you know, i had not given a thought to this issue in the past. It has never been raised that i can see it is an important issue. There were some good people out there already but there are many more now. Forefrontstay to the of 1970 or do they go back quickly thereafter . For 18 years, i would get calls and say, whatever happened to earth day. I only organized it for one purpose. It never went on the back burner. President reagan was opposed to it. He did not see any point to any of the environmental things. Which was quite tragic because it cost us and eat your loss an eightyear loss. From which we never recovered. Year, thesingle interest and concern of the people kept arriving, so it was on the back burner because you had it a resident who was antienvironmental, pointing everybody to every conceivable position you could point, who did not believe in the mission of the agency they headed up, whether it is the epa, the but the concern of the public kept rising. Every single year, something that dramatizes to the people the fragility of the environment. Whether it is the oil spill, or the threat of global warming, or Hazardous Waste dumps into the underground water supply. People are more sensitive now than they were. How is president bush doing in regards to the environment . Sen. Nelson i hope you will become an environmental president. I hope he will give a message to the congress and country and layout in agenda and ask for public support. Was we lack for many years president ial leadership and went i hope we get it from president bush. He wrote a letter asking mr. Gorbachev to participate in earth day. Did you hear back . Sen. Nelson no. We sent that letter and copies to the embassy here. He is going to be in this country and in washington. We simply invited him to address , andonservation groups were hoping he will. He has had other issues higher up on his agenda. But we hope when he comes here, he will. Saidet already already that the economy and the environment are two of the most serious challenges he faces. In the newsletter that is out, you have written that president bush would inspire the you would propose that the u. S. And the soviet union would mutually reduce military expenditures by 50 in the next 10 years. Explain that. Sen. Nelson and another 50 in the decade after. The soviet union and the United States have been engaged in a totally irrational race. Everyou consider that single year, we spent more money and we have become less secure. 35 years ago, we cannot deliver multiple warheads. This was around the world in 20 minutes or half way round. So what would you say and what would you think of a society where were spending huge amounts of money to become less secure than the year before . Race ought to stop. The president ought to step forward and say lets have a worldwide conference. The publicese for support in all countries would be tremendous. Pregoofy when you get down to it. No point with the soviet union us continuing that. Spendingf us have been 600 million 300 and dollars a piece. We are to have a target getting the down to 50 billion, maybe below that. That ought to be a target, start using these sources and allocating half of these resources to being the resources of the planet, to sustain our life here. How foolish can we be . The threat of nuclear war is not nearly as serious as the declining environment because that disaster is inevitable unless we do something. Is time for someone to step forward and say ok, we do not need all of these goofy expenditures and all of that stuff. Lets get down to the business of making this a livable planet. The public would support that all over the world. Do you suggest the savings be used to help the environment . If you just put enough dollars into the issue, is a just a question of my question mark no. A larger allocation and we have. We are spending it in another way. We are the assets and county on the profit side of the ledges the ledger. Andre polluting the air polluting the oceans, polluting the rivers, the waste, eroding the soils in this country and all over the world. The assets and determine the wealth of any country. We are paying a big price for that. It would be a lot cheaper for us to do things to bring this aggradation to a halt. People say you cannot afford to stop this. We cannot afford not to stop this because we would go bankrupt the way were doing. In articles, you have written about earth day. One of the goals is to change the attitude. We have, ever since our ancestors landing here, we viewed the country of unlimited abundance. Therefore, we could spend it and all the water and the soil, and that nature, would take care of it. That is not so. Have done all kinds of things that are terribly costly and cost us 100 times as much to curate to stop it into the first place. And all of that. I think when we talk about what , thee most important issue most important conservation issue, everyone would list all kinds of things. Exponential population growth. Probably beyond the place can support. You get ex potential population growth. Groundwater pollution, the ocean water pollution. Most important issue is the one rarely mentioned