Transcripts For CSPAN3 Lectures In History The Civil Rights Movement 20240712

Emphasize was the fact that ordinary people were becoming much more militant and aggressive in defending their civil rights. Im going to continue that theme tonight and, indeed, i think its even more so the case in the 1950s and 1960s that ordinary people became the engines of the Civil Rights Movement. We tend to think about the Civil Rights Movement as Martin Luther king, jr. , fanny hammer and largerthanlife figures. The Civil Rights Movement was made up by ordinary people including and youll find out tonight a lot of College Students. A lot of College Students. In fact, in some ways the driving force of the Civil Rights Movement came from people who were probably no older than you in this room. I want you to remember that. College students were the main force in terms of the Civil Rights Movement. Okay. I want us to keep that in mind when we talk of the evolution of this movement. Ill begin the lecture by discussing the decade of the 1950s because the 1950s really provide, i think, the impetus for what will be the what most historians call the grand Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s. There are three episodes. Episode number one is brown. The brown decision in 1964. Brown v board of education. Well say a little more about that later on. Episode number two is the montgomery bus boycott. Of course that boycott was important for a variety of reasons, not only the fact that it catapulted Martin Luther king, jr. To fame but also because it was the First Successful movement in the deep south that actually challenged racial segregation. Then, of course, there was the Central High School desegregation crisis at little rock, arkansas. Everyone has probably heard of little rock. Youre generally familiar with what went on. What ill talk about tonight is the fact that all three of these episodes, especially little rock, were going to, in effect, lay the foundation for what would become the more active Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s. Each of these episodes indicated profound changes in Race Relations and black progress. And as ive argued all throughout this class, when we talk about black progress and Race Relations were not talking about black people gaining new rights, were talking about africanamericans seeing thing rights that they lost in the 1870s finally restored. In other words, when we talk about voting rights, blacks were essentially trying to get back thing rights that were supposed to be guaranteed by the 15th amendment that was ratified finally in 1870. Let me show a couple of slides that reflect on what i call this rising militancy and trying to change the narrative of the civil rights struggle. First of all, militancy is the watch word. Africanamericans throughout the country either inside the naacp or beyond the naacp were much less tolerant of the racial order after 1946. In other words, the war itself had made people impatient with racial segregation and Racial Discrimination. No longer would africanamericans simply wait for the laws to change, now they would force that change. Secondly, the 1940s, especially in the 1950s indicated that the federal government would increasingly use its authority and its power even in the form of troops if necessary to defend black rights. I love this photograph. Its provocative in so many ways. It is evocative in so many ways. First of all, technically its u. S. Forces, u. S. Army forces defending the freedom riders bus near the mississippi alabama border in 1961. Some of you know about the freedom riders and well at least mention them in passing. But i think whats more interesting about this and the subtext that people dont know is virtually all of these young and they were young men, probably between the ages of 18 and 22, almost all of these young men were southern boys. But they were also members of the u. S. Army and they were sworn to defend the constitution and in this instance, they were sworn to defend black people who were protesting for their civil rights. There are a couple of other images that i want to show because they are showing the role of the federal government and the way in which that role became, if you will, popular at least in the north in the 1950s and 1960s. You probably dont remember this episode but this is ruby bates. A Norman Rockwell painting of ruby bates. She was a young africanamerican girl whose parents sued to have her integrated to a school, ironically in the ninth ward of new orleans, the ward thats now overly black. At the time it was white. Ruby bates, her struggle was captured by Norman Rockwell in this very famous painting. But i want to pull this up. This is the actual photograph of ruby bates. Why is this important . This is the federal government defending the rights of blacks. In this instance defending the rights of a little girl. This is powerful. This is evocative. This is reflecting the changes taking place in American Society and particularly the attitudes. Of the three episodes that i mentioned earlier, the brown decision is by far the most important. The brown decision reflects on two very important changes that have and the place in the 1940s and the 1950s. First, i want to pull this image up. Theres a change in the courts. Now im showing here the u. S. Supreme court. Interestingly this is the Supreme Court in 1954, it was all white and all male. And that was, you know, that was pretty well the norm at that time. But whats more interesting is that that Supreme Court will rule in 1954 unanimously in favor of racial, the end of racial segregation in the Public Schools in the south. What does that mean . It means that the Supreme Court is moving in a particular direction but it also means at least i argue that it also reflects that a whole host of other courts were going to follow suit and they were going to issue orders or they were going to make decisions that would help to break town to break down the wall of segregation. I will take this a little bit farther. I argue that its the courts that were the one arm of government at that particular time that were most committed to making sure that the rights of africanamericans were wellrespected. And ill let you in on a little secret, you may already know this. There is absolutely no way the congress of the United States would have taken a similar state a similar step like this in 1954. And theres no way, in fact, that the president of the United States, president dwight eisenhower, would have taken that step without the prompting by the courts. Now, part of this is almost obvious. The Supreme Court is appointed. The the appointments are for life. The appointments of the federal judges in the south were also for life. As a result they are in some ways insulated from public opinion. In ways that the congress and the president are not. But congress and the president certainly were not embracing of civil rights at that particular moment as the Supreme Court was and as other courts. And i make this argument had it not been for those courts, had it not been for the courts, i doubt if we have much to say about the Civil Rights Movement. In other words, they played a crucial role in terms of laying the foundation for what would come in the 1960s. But i suggest there are other changes taking place as well. One of those changes was in the naacp itself. The National Association for the advancement of colored people as we talked about in this class, the National Association for the advancement of colored people in some ways lost its energy, lost its drive, lost determination in the 1930s, partially because it was attacked by the communists and the left. We talked about scottsboro. You know the significance of the case. Even though the communists didnt get those young men off, even though the fact the communists were more assertive and aggressive in terms of challenging for their freedom put the naacp in the shadow, out of which it found itself very difficult to emerge. By 1940 certainly by 1942, 1943, the naacp was reemerging as the major Civil Rights Organization in the country. It was beginning to, if you will, regain the militancy it had in its first two decades. Part of that is because of the war itself. Part of it is because world war ii, of course, brought large numbers of africanamericans out of the south and as they went to these various other cities they often joined the naacp. Ill give you and example here, a local example. This is the naacp dinner at the Mount Zion Baptist church in seattle in 1945. Whats important is not that these people were celebrating and having a great time at the dinner. In 1940 there are only 140 members of the naacp in seattle. By 1945 there were over 3,000. Over 3,000. This kind of growth is pretty well typical, reflective of the evolution of naacp chapters in a number of cities across the country. This was happening in the north. What was happening in the south was even more dramatic. In the south, essentially the naacp for the first time became a Major Organization to contend with. Our best estimate is that between roughly 1940 and 1946, naacp membership in the south increased from about 25,000 to over 400,000. 25,000 to over 400,000. Now this is not just about numbers. Its not just about the growing ranks of the naacp. Its also about whats happening within the organization itself , and in the 1940s, theres going to be an increase, a dramatic increase in the number of lawsuits filed by naacp local chapters, local branches. In other words, whats happening here is that the National Leadership of the naacp is in many ways being pushed by the people at the bottom. The National Movement is increasingly becoming a movement thats driven by ordinary people in various naacp chapters across the country, and as youre going to see, this will have profound implications in the 1950s and 1960s. During the 1940s, and we talked about some of this before, during the 1940s, the naacp local chapters, local chapters were going to engage in a whole host of lawsuits. They were is going to file a whole host of lawsuits against Racial Discrimination. Let me give you one example here. Well well start with this one. The restrictive covenants. We talked about restrictive covenants before in this class and im not going because the cameras are rolling, i wont ask you to describe them. Essentially you know the problem with restrictive covenants. You know that they were a major force in terms of keeping africanamericans in the ghettos , in urban north and in some places in the south as well. And i would say in the 1930s , there was a Small Movement of naacp types in los angeles to challenge restrictive covenants. That Small Movement became a larger movement. It eventually spread beyond los and by the 1940s, the Supreme Court by 1948, the Supreme Court would finally rule against restrictive covenants. This is not the naacp leadership from the top down saying we have to deal with restrictive covenants. These are local people, people in local branches beginning with l. A. , who are saying that we have to challenge restrictive covenants and eventually the naacp National Leadership got on board. Now they got on board in a big way. They provided significant lawyers, they provided financial support. But the impetus for this came from the bottom up. Came from the naacp branches in los angeles and elsewhere. Theres Something Else thats going on by the 1940s as well i am sorry, ive got this out of order. These are the boilermakers. I dont know if you remember our discussion of boeing, but in portland the big struggle, the big political struggle was among the boilermakers, the black boilermakers who were discriminated against. The naacp in portland led the campaign to get Racial Justice for the boilermakers. Let me repeat that. The naacp led, the local naacp led the campaign to get Racial Justice for the boilermakers. In fact, there were going to be at least three lawsuits that would eventually end discrimination by the boilermakers in portland and elsewhere. But let me suggest that the naacps composition is changing, its growing as an organization, and its growing much more militant in terms of its willingness to challenge the status quo, and particularly the people at the bottom are much more militant. But theres also a huge change at the top thats going to be crucial in the long run. Between roughly 1938 and 1942, the naacp will secure a number of new attorneys. And these attorneys will be critical in terms of winning cases for the organization. Im going focus on three of them. The three that are on the screen here. And in some ways these attorneys were the people who were going to help to create the style of the naacp, the legal style of the naacp, not just in the 1940s, but well beyond that. Let me talk about each of them briefly. Charles houston. I dont know how many of you are familiar with charles houston, but in a variety of ways, he is the architect of the modern Civil Rights Movement or at least the legal phase of the modern Civil Rights Movement. Hes the man who actually planned the legal strategy that would eventually result in brown v board of education. Charles houston was the dean of the Howard University law school at the time. He was also a harvard graduate, Harvard Law School graduate. He was the first africanamerican to edit the harvard law review. I know, in the last campaign with barack obama there was a great deal of emphasis on barack obama being the first person to run the harvard law review. Technically barack obama, the president , was elected to head the harvard law review, but the person who was selected first, the africanamerican who was selected first was charles houston. Charles houston was a brilliant legal strategist. And he set the direction and tone for the naacp throughout the 1930s and into the 1940s. His cousin, william hasley, in the middle was the second to edit the harvard law via. Law review. We went to work for the naacp in the 1940s. The third person here is one im sure youre most familiar with. Thats Thurgood Marshall. How many of you have heard of Thurgood Marshall before . Ok. Youre already familiar with Thurgood Marshall as a legal figure. Marshalls case is interesting. He wanted to go to the university of maryland law school. He could not because he was africanamerican. And so eventually he settled on going to the Howard University law school and its there that he met charles houston, he came under the tutelage of charles houston and the rest as they say is history. Because of houston marshall would devote the rest of his life, the rest of his career to the civil rights litigation. In fact, houston, hasley and marshall, these three attorneys would win almost as many cases for the naacp as most of the leading lawyers of the naacp had done in the previous 15 years. In other words, they were remarkably successful, especially marshall, especially Thurgood Marshall and of course, partly that success would lead to his being on the Supreme Court eventually. One of the things that i think has to be said about this, though, the irony of all this is that houston, hasley and marshall would be successful with the naacp at least in part because there was nowhere else for them to go. The best black lawyers today would do what . They go into Corporate Law or other laws. In 1948, the best black lawyers did civil rights law. They did it in part because thats what they wanted to do but they did civil rights law in part because other areas were closed to them. In a sense, ironic sense the discrimination against them by many of the law firms would lead them to be involved in the kinds of activities that would help to change American Life and particularly africanAmerican Life. Let me come back to charles houston. As i said before, hes the one who would chart the legal strategy that would lead to brown. That strategy was very simple. At least im going to simplify it. Essentially it was this. The culprit is segregation. Racial segregation. But one cannot confront segregation directly in 1940. One has to confront the edges of segregation and essentially what these lawyers were trying to do was to look for, if you will, the weak spots, the weak places, the edges as i said before, the edges of segregation. Whats the edge of segregation . Well, the schools in the border states. So they would go after they would attempt to desegregate schools in places that were on the border of the u. S. South or on the border of the u. S. South and u. S. North. Whats another edge of segregation . They would go after graduate schools because they tended to have older students. And older students theoretically are more acceptable of desegregation. The naacp launches a series of lawsuits against various institutions in the 1940s and the early 1950s. Ill give you three examples. I wont talk about all of them. 1948, the naacp initiated a lawsuit against the university of delaware, against its graduate program, and as a result of the lawsuit that program accepted black students for the first time. 1949, the university of kentucky integrated for the first time and essentially its graduate Program Integrated for the first time as a result of the naacp. In 1950, Louisiana State university, and this is significant because this is actually a deep south institution. Louisiana State University integrated its graduate programs for the first time as a result of the naacp. And then, of course, theres the university of oklahoma. I dont know how much time i want to spend on this, but this is a this is a photograph thats evocative of the struggle that was going on in the 1940s and early 1950s and how that struggle had ebbs and flows. The naacp brought a lawsuit against the law school at the university of oklahoma. Eventually or at least they thought they prevailed. The naacp thought it prevailed because the federal judge said the city of Oklahoma Law School should integrate the student body. At that point, the university decided to technically integrate by providing a separate area for the one black student that was enrolled at the university. Before they got to this, they actually put the single black student, g. W. Mclauren, essentially in the Capitol Rotunda and had one Law School Faculty member teach him. This was a farce. This was clearly not an integration of the university of Oklahoma Law School and to be honest, this is not true integration of the university of Oklahoma Law School, but it reflects on the fact that there is this tension going on throughout the south against africanamerican entry into various schools. This was considered a victory and eventually the university of Oklahoma Law School integrated. But not without some difficulty. Not without considerable difficulty. Nonetheless, it was argued that the integration of these law schools, the professional schools, the graduate programs , was fairly easy compared to, if you will, the 800 pound elephant in the room and thats Public School segregation. Public school segregation. I want you to look at this photograph for a minute. This is a typical black school not only in arkansas, but throughout the south. Racial segregation was the law of the land and a number of land in a number of states across america but nowhere was it more pronounced than in the deep south. You probably see a number at least i hope you see a number of things going on. You can see theres a whole host of kids here. These schools were supposedly separate and equal. That was the idea that came from plessy v ferguson. In point of fact, there was nothing equal about these schools at all. The black schools were clearly, they were patently inferior, and if anybody wanted to really investigate for five minutes , they would find out that this was the case. This was the situation that the naacp was going to have to take on. And, indeed, it took it on partly because or i would say mainly because there were a whole host of parents of africanamerican students who were upset at these kinds of conditions. Theres a lot of discussion about why blacks chose to try to desegregate the Public Schools in the south. We can get into all kinds of theories, but my idea is fairly simple and its an idea that came from my parents. Because my parents went through this along with a whole host of others. I wont get into my own integration experience but let me suggest to you that youre looking at someone who went to segregated schools up until 1965. So this is not just some story, this is not just ancient history, this is something that would affect the lives of a whole host of people. For my parents and a whole host of other black parents in the south, there was a very interesting situation. Throughout the whole period of segregation, throughout the whole period of disenfranchisement, thats when black people didnt have the right to vote, there was never a time when africanamericans were relieved from paying taxes. Let me repeat that. During the entire of segregation, during the entire period of disenfranchisement, there was never a time when black people were relieved from paying taxes. Folks, im doing this on camera on national tv but im going to do it anyway. Ill never be asked to do this again. But i can tell you, i can remember my own parents going down to the courthouse and literally going to the courthouse back door to pay their property taxes every year. And they did so at a time when they couldnt vote, they did so at a time when they didnt have the rights and the safe guards of quote normal citizens of the United States. As i said before, this is the paradox. Black people continued to pay taxes, including take taxes to support the schools in the south. And much of that money was going to be diverted to pay for the schools of others in the south at that time. I also think, again, we need to remember that most black parents werent thinking in terms of School Integration as essentially putting their kids in proximity with white kids. They were thinking of School Integration as the only way, the only way to make sure that their kids had a quality education. The only way to ensure that the education that their kids received would prepare them for the future. I mean we can argue that parents may have put too much stock in education. We can argue that they may have spent too much time focusing on education. But i think i understand at least, my own parents and i know that for them that was the biggest civil rights battle of all and indeed even when you talk about getting the right to vote, getting the right to vote was at least in part to make sure that one had access to the best education. That one had access to education. Now let me talk about the inequality. Let me pull up a couple of images that reflect on this. Arkansas children receiving polio shots 1957. You guys dont know this. Polio was a major debilitating crippling disease at the time and only in the 1950s was there a vaccine that was available to counter polio. So what we have is modern technology, at least modern technology for 1957 and modern medicine being made available but being made available in a segregated context. In other words theres the black polio line, the black kids in line for their polio shots, the white kids in line for their polio shots. They are not going into the same room. I use this slide, i use this photograph because as i say its so evocative of the divide, the racial divide in the American South at the time. Let me give you another example. Again, this may be unsettling but ill show it anyway. This is an example of the inequality of facilities. This is the cafeteria for a black school in alabama in 1954. If you multiplied this scene by a whole host of other scenes then you begin to get the sense of what africanamerican parents well what africanamerican students and their parents were up against. Let me repeat this. There was no separate but equal facility in the south at this time. Every facility that was segregated, if it was for blacks it was going to be patently inferior. Let me pull up a chart that reflects on this. The cost of segregation. Look at the numbers, the average daily pupil expense in all Public Schools in the south in 1950, look at the difference for whites and blacks. Now let me remind you that this is at a time when black students , dependingbout 40 on the state, some states larger , but generally for the south represented about 45 of the students in the south at the time. But you can see clearly the difference. Then if you get into the individual states, look at the differences. Look at georgia, but whats worse look at mississippi. In other words, there is as i said before, theres no separate but equal here. Clearly the facilities that the africanamericans had were going to be less because the allocation were going to be significantly less. I put up the figures for california, new york and washington, they were not segregated areas but i put up the figures in comparison and youll notice right away that the area of the country that provides the least for education, the south, provides significantly less for africanamericans. Provides significantly less for africanamericans. Again, i will get myself in trouble here but people talk about the achievement gap today. This is the root of the achievement gap. This is where it came from. It came from decades of poor training and the aftermath of that poor training that extends into contemporary society. By the early 1950s, africanamerican parents in south carolina, in virginia, in delaware, in the district of columbia initiated a series of lawsuits against segregation that all eventually would be collapsed under brown v board of education. I want to bring up linda brown. Shes the key to all of this. Linda brown was a young girl who resided in topeka, kansas. Lets me clear. Clear. Be clear. Topeka, kansas, is not the deep south. But kansas maintained a segregated school system. Linda brown was bussed and i use this word intentionally, i use it for dramatic effect. She was bussed across town to go to a segregated black school even though she lived two blocks away from a white school. We talk about it and maybe rightly so how bussing is used to promote racial integration and how that creates disharmony , and that is correct, but what about bussing being used for years to maintain racial segregation . In other words, the bus was going in the opposite direction in order to make sure that blacks were in allblack schools. The other thing thats interesting about the brown suit, and this is all by circumstance, the famous Supreme Court case became the brown case essentially because oliver brown , the plaintiff, the father of linda brown, came first on the alphabetical role. In other words his name came up before the others and as a result all of this was lumped under brown. Whats interesting about the campaign in topeka is not just that topeka is involved in a lawsuit against segregation or in favor of desegregation whats interesting is this is not the first lawsuit. What is interesting the very first lawsuit filed by black parents in topeka, kansas to challenge racial segregation, racially segregated schools was filed in 1879. The very first suit was filed in 1879. Folks, this is long before the naacp existed. So the naacp is hardly responsible for this. At any rate, im not going to get into a lot of detail here. You know the rest of the story. The Supreme Court will make its decision. That decision is handed down on may 17, 1954. And that decision is going to be monumental. Legal scholars consider it one of the three or four most significant decisions by the Supreme Court. Im only providing bit of this here. But that decision would send shockwaves through American Society and in some ways, in some ways were still dealing with it today. In some ways when we talk about, as i said before the educational gap or when we talk about segregated schools even in seattle in the year 2012, were dealing with the consequence of the brown decision. But let me talk about the immediate consequence of the brown decision because that was going to be a huge reaction on the part of the white south to what happened. The white south, well let me pull this up. The white south reaction to the brown decision was swift and it was equally negative. And it set the tone for a pattern of resistance to desegregation that would extend, i have down here on the paper for 20 years. I think we can argue it would extend for 40 years. That would extend for 40 years. This was called the massive resistance campaign. The massive resistance campaign. Folks, you know, this is not ancient history for me at least. I can remember seeing these signs in tennessee and mississippi in the 1960s. The idea of impeaching earl warren, and impeaching earl warren because of the brown decision, was something that was politically popular for a very, very long time. Southern states would pass new laws to prevent integration. Let me give you some examples of these laws and in some ways they are almost humorous except for the consequences that they bring about. Several states gave their governors the power to close schools that were order to ordered to integrate. Let me repeat that. Several states gave their governors the power to close schools that the courts ordered to integrate. And in virginia, the law went Something Like this. A governor can close a school thats been ordered to desegregate by declaring that school inefficient. Inefficient. And there were governors who would do so. But the grand example of what would happen, this is essentially the governor stepping in, the grand example was Prince Edward county, virginia between 1957 and 1960. In that county, after a federal court had ordered Prince Edward county, virginia to integrate its schools, between 1957 and 1960 there were no publicly operated schools in that county. That . I repeat between 1957 and 1960 there were no Public Schools operating in that county. Virtually all of the white students attended private schools. And the blacks who remained in the county, many of the blacks actually sent their kids out of the county, but black kids who remained in the county received no education at all for those three years. I use Prince Edward county only because i want to give you a sense and its hard to imagine in 2012, this kind of reaction i want to give you a sense of what would happen and what in fact did happen after the brown decision. As i said before, virginia passed a law to deny funding to inefficient schools and inefficient schools were the schools that were declared racially integrated. But whats even more interesting and maybe in some ways more sinister, in the wake of the brown decision, new organizations arose that would make it their business to prevent not just the desegregation of the schools, but the desegregation of all of southern society. There were a host of these organizations, ill give you a couple of names. Ill give you three names. One of the names you may be familiar with, the White Citizens Council. Some of you, i think, eric has heard how many of you have heard of the White Citizens Council . Ok. Some people call them the uptown clan. They were people dedicated to the idea of maintaining racial segregation and they were often very powerful people in the community. My personal favorite in terms of these new organizations was the National Association for the advancement of white people. This was an organization that was created in order to try to stymie racial integration. Perhaps the most sinister of these organizations, im sorry, i should have pulled these up, these are images that reflect the opposition, growing opposition to segregation. I love the Woman Holding the sign, integration is a moral sin. That opposition was palpable. Ill give you some more images in a minute. But i want to talk about this one. The Mississippi Sovereignty Commission. This was one of the organizations that was established to try to block not just block desegregation in mississippi, but to try to block any effort to change the racial status quo. How many of you heard of the Mississippi Sovereignty Commission . Im not surprised. Because it was a much more Secretive Organization than the White Citizens Council and it was much more sinister than the National Association for the advancement of white people. The Mississippi Sovereignty Council or commission was essentially an organization of very, very powerful private citizens, some of the richest citizens in the state of mississippi plus very powerful public figures who secretly belonged to this association. The governor of mississippi belonged to it. Other Public Officials secretly belonged to it. And there are some who argue that it was behind much of the socalled klan violence in mississippi in the 1950s and 1960s. The Mississippi Sovereignty Commission came to the fore recently or our knowledge of it came to the fore recently because of a woman who has a seattle connection, rita bender. You know rita. Yeah. I dont know if you know her first husband. Her first husband was one of the three People Killed in mississippi in 1964. Go ahead. [indiscernible] i did not know david duke lived in seattle. Thats news to me. But rita bender, and maybe i should pull up the second image. No its on this one. This is michael schwerner. Theres no reason for you to know the name now but those of us who lived in the 1960s and into the 1970s knew his name very well. He and these other two gentlemen were killed by klansmen in mississippi in 1964 because of their Civil Rights Activity. There was a very famous book written about them called three lives from mississippi. Rita bender was the wife at that time, or actually the widow of schwerner. Also a civil rights worker on her own in mississippi. And she always believed, at least this is what i interpret from her, she always believed that the Mississippi Sovereignty Commission was behind her husbands death. And she continued to investigate it and that investigation continued into the 1990s, into the first decade of the 20th century and finally there have been indictments handed down against some of these people who were in the background. Not the people who actually did the killing. Most of those are dead. But against the people who provided, if you will, the money, the resources, helped to create the climate that would allow this kind of killing to take place. Rita bender is a hero to me. She came from the Civil Rights Era and continued to fight the good fight long after most of us were no longer interested in that direct civil rights campaign. Let me come back to the national story. Remember i talked about barack obama and the whole relationship to communism. Remember we talked about josef stalin and some of you discussed stalin in your exams how the communists got involved in africanamerican Civil Rights Activity in the 1960s. This is the shadow of this. This is, if you will, the mirror opposite of it. In other words, when people began to be involved in Civil Rights Activity in the 1950s and 1960s, it was very easy for the opposition to say what . These people are communists. It was very easy for the opposition to make the communist argument. And this was going to be very powerful and as you can see, Arkansas State law in 1958 anybody who knows anything about the naacp would be hard pressed to imagine the naacp is the captive of the International Communist conspiracy, but nonetheless thats the law that was going to be passed in 1958. And it was passed for a specific reason. Most of the naacp members in arkansas at that time were school teachers, black school teachers, and this law was seen as a way of making sure that they would no longer be involved in civil rights work, that they would no longer be involved with the naacp. This situation is heating up dramatically. Theres an escalation ever tension and ill show you where that tension leads. In fact you can see it almost happening. These are black students turned away from North Little Rock high school in 1957 and of course the antiimmigration protest in clinton, tennessee. There was a race riot in clinton, tennessee over the idea of integrating the schools. In other words, theres growing tension all over the south. There are a group of senators almost every senator from the south and every congressman from the south signed a petition calling for the, if you will, the removal of the brown decision, or at least the negation of the brown decision. I think this is almost unprecedented. Its hard to imagine a scene ande most of the senators congressmen from one particular region came together over one issue but they did at that particular time. School integration, as far as they were concerned, was a major step towards the destruction of their society, and as a result they were going to try to do everything they could to stop it. And that, of course, leads us to the governor in little rock. I dont know if we can do this while the cameras are rolling but ill ask if this works. I will ask how much you know about little rock. How much do we know about little rock . Steve, tell me what you know. It was a school under federal order to integrate, and when local authorities attempted to bar desegregation, president eisenhower sent troops for intervention of force. Direct intervention of force. Thats key. Ill talk about that in a minute. What about the background . What prompted this . Actually, naacp lawsuit. An naacp lawsuit calling for the desegregation of central high, the Major High School in little rock. The lawsuit went to a federal court, the federal judge said, yes, central high should be desegregated, and he ordered the entrance, the allowing of eight young women and men into little rock high. Then it becomes very interesting because when these people, when these kids show up to go to school, under this federal order, they are turned away by a mob. They eventually show up again, they are turned away about the away by the Arkansas National guard. And essentially orville becomes the first of governors to stand in the school house doors to prevent these kids from going to school, from going to little rock Central High School. This is a photograph thats been seen all over the world. This is elizabeth. One of the eight students. Shes walking. Shes surround by a mob. You can see the Arkansas National guard people. We say Arkansas National guard, but they were under the control of the governor at that moment, essentially standing by as shes attacked. Every one of these students had to run the gauntlet, if you will, the gauntlet of hate in order to try to get to the schools at that particular time and ultimately desegregation was not successful. Ultimately, ultimately the federal court order was being defied. Its at this point, its at this point that president eisenhower steps in. Theres a back story i wont get into and a lot of detail but eisenhower felt he had an agreement with orville to allow for the integration of the school. Orville went back on that agreement. Eisenhower became extremely upset. And he decided that now the federal government has to step in. Not only that, the federal government has to in effect enforce the orders or the decisions of a federal court. And as a result, as steve says, eisenhower sends an this is eisenhowers press conference in 1957, where he announces that hes sending in 1100 federal troops from the 101st airborne division. If you guys know anything about the military, the 101st airborne was the toughest unit in the u. S. Army. Those troops were going to be sent to protect those kids in little rock. And not only did they protect them in september of 1957, federal troops remained at little rock until may of 1958. They remained for the entire calendar year. And it made for a very bizarre situation. Ill give you an example. I wont go into this in detail, but ill give you an example. When a young lady, or a young man, but mostly young lady, had to go to the bathroom, one of the students had to go to the bathroom, she was required to be escorted by a member of the 101st airborne. When these kids left home every day, they were escorted. And you can see this. You can see the army theyre riding to school in the army car. When they left home every day, they were escorted by troops. When they returned home, they were escorted by troops. They didnt go anywhere on School Grounds without the 101st airborne. Now, you know, by our standards today, that seems like hyperbole , my god, eisenhower is exaggerating the situation. If you can imagine the anger in little rock at the time, you know this is no exaggeration at all. One of the things i learned later on when i was interviewing a man who had served with the 101st, he was an africanamerican, rose to the rank of colonel, he was angry about what happened in little rock, not for the reasons you might imagine. He was angry, because when eisenhower sent the 101st to little rock, he also issued an order to say that only white troops would be sent there. Because if africanamerican troops of the 101st went there, that might provoke the mob even more so. And my friend that i interviewed ill give you his name, dr. Sam kelly, an administrator here for a number of years, he was angry about that for years. He was angry about that for years, because he felt that as a member of the u. S. Military as an officer in the 101st airborne, he should go along with his troops to essentially enforce the desegregation decision. It didnt happen. Who knows, maybe eisenhower was right. Maybe sending blacks as part of the 101st airborne would have increased the tension and that would have led to even more violence. But the very fact that eisenhower would make a decision like that is reflective of the kinds of situations that happened, that emerged in little rock at that particular time. Little rock was a crisis, no question about it. It was a crisis that was going to be followed, not just on national tv. In other words, every single day you could go home and you could see on the 6 00 news, those soldiers guarding those students at little rock. But it was going to be a crisis of international proportion, as well. Indeed, one of the reasons that eisenhower actually ordered the 101st was because he knew that if he didnt, that this would be a propaganda coup for the soviets. The soviets were following this, people in germany, people in france, people in great britain. People around the world were very much interested in and some would say invested in the little rock crisis. They wanted to know what the u. S. Government was going to do to ensure justice in the south, and particularly in Central High School. And i bring this up for a very important reason. Ive hinted at it before in this class, but i think its something that we ought to understand. That by certainly by world war ii, i would say this started probably with scottsboro, but certainly by world war ii, issues surrounding civil rights were no longer the exclusive purview of the u. S. That the world became involved. The world became interested, and the world commented on it. The stories of little rock were going to be headline stories in london papers and paris papers and other papers around the world. As eisenhower said, im not using my words here, eisenhower said that weve got to deal with little rock, because its giving us a black eye abroad. Weve got to deal with little rock, because its giving us a black eye abroad. Eisenhower wasnt necessarily in favor of School Integration. Ok . He was a product of his times. And he actually expressed a lot of concerns about black kids and white kids sitting in the same classroom. But he was also the president of the United States, and he felt that he had a responsibility, and he did have a responsibility to enforce the u. S. Supreme Court Decision and other federal decisions. And so the die was cast, as steve said, that eisenhower committed troops, and those troops were going to be sent to defend the rights of these black kids in the south. Little rock is significant for a couple reasons. Maybe three reasons. Let me list them very quickly. And then were going to take a break. First, little rock is significant because it proves that the 1954 brown decision is, in fact, the law of the land. It proves that that decision means means that those who oppose desegregation are now on the wrong side of the law. In other words, before 1954, segregation was legal. Let me repeat that. Before 1954, segregation was legal. It was legal in some 20 states, and not all of them were in the deep south. After 1954, after the brown decision, segregation is no longer legal, segregation in effect, those who promoted or embraced segregation were now violating the law. This was a very Important Message that was sent to the people on both sides of this issue. For the first time in u. S. History, the law favored integrationists, rather than segregationists. Secondly, eisenhower set a precedent in little rock with the use of federal troops. This would happen again and again and again, maybe it had to happen, because of the potential for violence in the south. But the very fact that it did happen meant that the federal government was now committing its resources, including its most militant, if you will, resources, in order to defend black rights. This was a lesson that wasnt lost, either on africanamericans in the south or on the segregationists in the south, as well. Thirdly, the 1954 decision and the little rock crisis itself, left gaping holes in the wall of segregation. As you know, weve been talking about chips chipping away at that wall since the beginning of the class. Im not going to suggest to you that that wall fell in 1954 or 1957 or the 1960s. But i am going to say that its foundation was for the first time significantly weakened. Its foundation was significantly weakened. But it also led, especially the little rock crisis, it led to the realization that the battle for civil rights could go only so far in the courts. Now it would have to take place in the streets. Now it would also have to take place in the streets. I think thats a good point for us to break. And well take five minutes. Then well regroup, and ill talk about the battle in the streets. Well talk about the sitins that began in the early 1960s. Ok. Lets see. Ok, were going to get started. When i say were going to get started, am i being filmed . [laughter] ok. Were getting started. I hope you understand the argument. What were suggesting to you is that as i said at the very beginning, ordinary people were going to be crucial in the rise of the Civil Rights Movement. And you see this in a whole host of ways. I think youve seen it in terms of the civil rights cases that sort of bubble up from the bottom to the top, cases that challenge the conventions of race in American Society. And i think you also see it in terms of crises like little rock. These are kids. These are high school kids. And, you know, some can argue that these were kids who were pulled into a vortex of politics, and they really werent, you know, significant instruments in control of their own destiny. On the other hand, one could argue that these kids understood that they were making history. They understood that they were part of a challenge, part of a much larger challenge of racial segregation. So, yes, its about going to a particular high school. Its about integrating a particular high school in little rock, arkansas, but its much more than that. Its about seeing to it that there is Racial Justice all over the country. As i said just before the break, the little rock crisis was the last major crisis in the 1950s, certainly the last major crisis that were going to address. It was also significant because it was a crisis that grew out of the legal attempt to try to ban segregation. The legal attempt to try to challenge segregation. By the early 1960s, there will be new forms of protests, new forms of challenge of segregation. And what im speaking about here essentially are the sitins and all of the demonstrations that accompany those sitins. And here the idea of ordinary people becomes unequivocal. In other words, the folks that are going to engage, literally, in these thousands of demonstrations all across the south strike that. Not just all across the south. All over the country. Because theres going to be a Civil Rights Movement right here in seattle, as some of you already know. And its those ordinary people who were going to say, we want justice. We demand justice, and were willing to take to the streets in order to bring about that justice. So let me talk about the sitins. Let me talk about why the sitins would take place in the early 1960s and how that would lead to this nationwide campaign for to challenge segregation and Racial Discrimination. By 1960, the overall civil rights gains of the last six years were clearly recognized by a number of people, but especially by black students and black students in the south. Black students, black color black College Students in the colleges and universities in the south. They had seen segregation outlawed in Public Schools. They had seen, of course, the little rock situation, where federal troops came in to defend the rights of black children. But they also saw in 1957, and this in some ways came out of little rock, they saw in 1957, the passage of a civil rights bill. Now, as we look back on it now, that civil rights bill was very weak. As we look back on it now, the probably the major thing that came out of the civil rights bill was the u. S. Civil rights commission, which is still in existence, still limping along. But on the other hand, in 1957, that civil rights bill was the first bill of its kind to be passed by the u. S. Congress since 1875. Which think about that. In other words, finally congress was beginning to act on the rights of blacks and other people of color throughout the country. Also, by 1960, those students in the south saw the success had witnessed the success of Martin Luther king. Now, we wont we dont have time to talk about the montgomery bus boycott, but i think youre all familiar with it. I will say this. The montgomery bus boycott was a prime example of ordinary people. You know the story of rosa parks, okay . And you know that shes a brave woman, and you know there are monuments to her all over the country. What you probably dont know is the rest of the story. Rosa parks, her symbolic act could not have been successful had it not been sustained by literally thousands of black folks in montgomery, alabama who chose to walk rather than ride. And they did so for well over a year. Despite the fact that these were the people who depended upon Public Transportation, they decided that they were not going to use that transportation, because it was segregated, and they were essentially marginalized by this Public Transportation system. And to make it very, very plain, they wanted dignity. Very, very plain. They wanted dignity, and they decided that they wouldnt ride in order to gain that dignity. So students had seen the victories. They had seen the changes that were taking place in the south at the time. They had seen ordinary people again involved in these victories. Ordinary people challenging the status quo. But what the students also saw in 1960, was essentially a wall of segregation thats even though it had gaping holes in it, was still standing. And some would say still proudly standing. Let me give you some examples. This is Public School segregation by state in 1954. Theres the 19 theres the 1954 Supreme Court decision that makes all of this illegal. All of this is now outlawed, okay . Except that heres the reality. By 1960, by 1960, 92 of the black children in the south still remained in segregated schools. In other words, despite despite the Supreme Court decision that outlawed de jure segregation, 92 of the kids in the south or kids in these states still went to segregated schools. Well to put it more bluntly, more directly, what you see in this room today what you see in this room today would have been illegal, or at least would not have been allowed in a whole host of schools and a whole host of states, even as late as 1960, despite the Supreme Court decision. So these students, these colored students recognized there is a contradiction. There is something wrong. On one hand, there is a Supreme Court decision, on the other hand, there is a reality that segregation is still very much alive. Secondly, by 1960, these students also recognized that 65 of the souths eligible black voters were not allowed to vote. 65 of the souths eligible black voters were not allowed to vote. Folks, that included my parents. In 1960, my parents were in their 40s. They had never voted. And some assumed they never would. That would change for them. And it would change for a lot of black folks in the south. But i want you to see the figures. In georgia, the figure is 76 . In alabama, its 89 . In mississippi, 99 . In other words, 99 of the black folks eligible to vote were not allowed to vote in the state of mississippi in 1960. This was the reality. This was the reality that these students saw in 1960. Thirdly, there were thousands thousands of private businesses and public accommodations across the south that either barred blacks all together or segregated them. Again, the reality. This is yeah, i keep becoming personal here. I remember these signs. I remember growing up with these signs. They were on businesses throughout brownsville, tennessee where i grew up, and i suspect that they were on businesses throughout the south at that time, and maybe even in some places outside of the south. Restaurants, hotels, theatres, drugstores, Department Stores, public parks, all segregated. All segregated. Let me give you a sign that i do remember seeing. Im going to get personal here. Overton park zoo. I grew up in brownsville. And memphis was the big city. Sort of like olympia and seattle. So you go to the big city for various recreation. So i would say every three months, the kids from my school would be put on a bus, and we would go to memphis to the zoo. Thats a great experience for kids. You know, you go to see the animals. But the zoo was segregated. Thursday every thursday at the overton park zoo, this sign was put out. No whites were allowed in the overton park zoo, because this was negro day. This was negro day. In other words, this was the day this was the only day, but this was the day that africanamericans were allowed to go to the zoo. Negro day carried in a whole host of ways. There was a negro day for swimming pools, there was a negro day for Department Stores. In other words, we can only go to Department Stores and try on clothes on thursday, which was negro day. Negro shopping day. Sometimes its called negro shopping day. That was the way of the world at that time. That was the nature of segregation. And thats the situation that those africanamerican students realized at that particular time. Let me pull this image up, because i think its a very poignant description of segregation in 1960. Ill give you a minute, so you can read it. The question has always been raised, why 1960 . Why this date . Why would things begin to change, or more specifically, why would students in the south begin to challenge segregation at that particular moment . First of all, that question is based upon an incorrect premise. It didnt simply start in 1960. There had been situations or developments taking place earlier that were going to lead up to this. Actually, you can argue the entire africanAmerican History class that ive been telling you about would lead up to this. But there were certain episodes, certain specific episodes, that would lead up to this. And i want to mention a couple of them. One of the ones im going to mention is an episode at the university of new mexico in 1948. Now, this is not in your history book. Its not in its not in either of the books that youre reading. Essentially, the university of new mexico itself wasnt segregated and had a handful of black students, including a guy named george long. George long started out as an undergraduate student, he eventually becomes a law student and eventually practices in oakland. Thats a different story. Thats a side story. But george long was a 19yearold at the university of new mexico in 1948. And he could not go to the favorite watering hole for the students, which was across the street from the campus. That watering hole was oklahoma joes. It was kind of a combination bar and restaurant. And it was considered the best place in albuquerque for the College Students at that point. I dont know if you have watering holes anymore. I dont know if you have places that you go to. But this was a great place for College Students to hang out. Except if you were black. And so george long decided to challenge this. And not only did he challenge this, but he got the i guess it would be the associated students at the university of new mexico to join in the challenge. In other words, he persuaded them to vote to pass a resolution calling for all university of new mexico students to boycott oklahoma joes. This was remarkable. This was remarkable. These were mostly white students, overwhelming majority of white students who said this kind of racial practice is wrong. And that boycott was so successful, that not only was oklahoma joes integrated, but indeed, long became the architect of a campaign to get a civil rights ordinance passed for albuquerque, new mexico. He did this while he was still in undergraduate school, and then while he was in law school, he helped to draft the legislation that would become the new mexico Civil Rights Act. Okay . The new mexico Civil Rights Act was passed in 1955. What makes this story interesting, is that some of the legal language of the new mexico act would eventually be integrated into the 1964 Civil Rights Act, that would govern the entire country. My point here is that george long, an ordinary College Student, would begin a protest that would have ramifications far beyond far, far beyond new mexico. Far beyond albuquerque. Far beyond the campus of the university of new mexico at that time. But long is not the only one who was involved. Let me give you another example. Civil rights demonstrations in Oklahoma City, oklahoma in 1958. Very few people are familiar with this. Those demonstrations were going to be led actually, there were two sets of demonstrations. I dont have a picture for wichita. But there were civil rights demonstrations in wichita, kansas and in Oklahoma City, oklahoma. The civil rights demonstrations in wichita, kansas were led by a 21yearold College Student named ron walters. The civil rights demonstrations in Oklahoma City in 1958 were led by a 16yearold High School Student named barbara posely. Barbara posely. Ordinary people. Maybe Extraordinary People who just up until that point led ordinary lives and then became involved in the Civil Rights Movement. Yet i think we have to understand that the protests in new mexico, the protests in oklahoma, the protests in wichita, didnt sort of catch on. They didnt catch far. They didnt grow as would be the case at the greensboro in 1960. After greensboro in 1960. And, of course, for that reason, we dont know very much about them. For that reason, they dont make the history books, or they dont stand out in history books, as much. By 1960, the situation would be different. By 1960, the protests would begin, and this time, they would continue. They would grow and they would spread and they would continue. And eventually, they would transform america. Let me talk about the reasons or the background for those protests that began in 1960. First of all, there are a whole host of College Students, white College Students, but even more importantly, young black College Students who were going to school, partly because their parents had made money during world war ii. Remember we talked about the rising tide of prosperity for africanamericans in the second world war. Well, that rising tide of prosperity means that a lot more kids, a lot more young black kids, will go to college. In other words, an emerging black middle class will send a wave, a huge wave of students to college. And, unlike the earlier black College Students, and there had always been some black College Students, but unlike the earlier black College Students that had mostly come from dire poverty, that is a background of dire poverty, these kids were upward ly mobile. These kids believed that they had a future, and they believed that if they could get rid of segregation, that future would be even brighter. In other words, for them, segregation for them, Racial Injustice stood in the way of both their own economic progress and growth and their full participation in American Society. So for them, it was very important to challenge the system. Im going to Say Something here, and im going to get myself in trouble again on national tv. But i think a lot of africanamericans, and particularly young africanamericans, have lost that. That a lot of young africanamericans have come to the conclusion, i think its a false conclusion, but they come to the conclusion that the situation is so bad, that its just as bad as it was before, and that theres no hope. Theres no way out. And thats a shame. Because one of the things that was very important for the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s was this sense that one could change the world. As a matter of fact, its almost an arrogance on the part of these people in terms of believing that they could change the world. Ill come back to that in a minute. But that optimism is very important. These were kids who felt that they really could these were College Students who felt they really could change the world. Secondly, these students did not understand, and they were often impatient with the legalistic approach of the naacp. And the naacp for them, essentially was their elders. They wanted to do something. They wanted to do something dramatic, and they wanted to do something now in order to challenge segregation. You guys do you know where that is . Anybody know . [inaudible] yeah, the university of washington, its 15th. This is theoretically, this is a sympathy demonstration. In other words, these are College Students at the university, black and white College Students at the university of washington, supporting whats going on in nashville. And ill pull up another one here. Heres another one. This is another demonstration in seattle in 1960. A support demonstration. But i can tell you, although this is not part of the main lecture tonight, by 1961, these students will be in the streets, not protesting or not supporting whats going on in nashville in terms of those protests. They will be in the streets protesting Racial Discrimination in seattle. Okay . [laughter] but in 1960, theyre still at the lets see if i can go back. In 1960, theyre still at the sympathy demonstration stage. That will change. That will change, and it will change dramatically. But the point here is that these young people, whether theyre in seattle or whether theyre in selma, they understand that something is wrong. They understand that Racial Injustice is rampant. And they want to do something. They want to employ the direct action approach of Martin Luther king and others in order to challenge racial segregation. Again, i dont want to put people on the spot here. I mean, often when i talk about how these students these ordinary students were going to engage in Civil Rights Activity, theres kind of a the unspoken word that somehow or another im castigating or criticizing Young Students for the lack of activism now. Im not, okay . Im not. But what i am saying is that there is a particular moment there is a particular moment in history when, if you will, the stars line up, its an overworked cliche, but the stars line up, and those students were in the middle of the constellation. Those Young Students, students who were no older than those of you in this room, were in the middle of those stars lining up at that moment. But there are other factors. And let me talk about those other factors. Theres a president ial Campaign Going on in 1960. And actually, in early 1960, in february of 1960, there are president ial primaries, and there is an intense guess what, there is an intense battle going on in the Democratic Party to see who is going to get the nomination. The two leading candidates at that time on the democratic side were the senator from minnesota, hubert humphrey, who had a long civil rights record, and young senator from massachusetts, named john kennedy, who hadnt had as much of a civil rights record. But they were going to do battle, and they were going to engage in rhetoric. As john kennedy does here with Adam Clayton Powell and Eleanor Roosevelt in harlem. They were going to talk about what they would do to promote civil rights. Now, as we look back on their words now, as we look back at the transcript of their speeches, they really werent making much of a commitment. But the students saw an identification with their cause. The students saw these president ial candidates as saying, we are with you. We want to try to change america. We want to challenge Racial Injustice in American Society, just like you do. And this was heartening to the students. Or at least students took this as heartening. And they said, this is another reason why we should go forward with our Civil Rights Activity. In other words, there is something out there. There is this sense, this tangible sense, that this atmosphere, as it were, that says that political leaders or at least the political leaders in the Democratic Party, are in favor of civil rights. And as a result, they the students should move forward. But there is Something Else. In the late 1950s and through the early 1960s, country after country after country was becoming independent. These countries were sometimes involved in violent struggle. More often, they were involved in nonviolent struggle, the kind of nonviolent struggle that africanamerican students would be engaged in. And the political leaders like kwame emkruma in ghana or benjamin azeke way were heroes, because these men almost all men, very few women involved but these were men leading their nations to independence. And the assumption was before african corruption rose, the assumption was that once these nations become independent, they will be democratic, they will show the way. They will show that black people can participate in the political process. They will change the world dynamic. That was the hope. And i can say this, because i was one of those people who naively had that hope. I was okay, ill just go on record here. I was proud of every new africanamerican nation. I was excited every time a new flag went up showing that there was a new african nation, because i identified with that. And i said that this was going to be part of the freedom struggle. Because they are engaged in a struggle for freedom. And they are successful. And others ought to be. Others in the United States ought to be and will be engaged in that same struggle. There is one other thing i should mention, because i dont want to take too much time on this. But there is what i call the arrogance of youth. The very beginning of the baby boom generation. Now, they the people who took place excuse me. The people who took part in civil rights demonstrations in 1960 were really unless they were you know, 14 or 15, they really werent technically part of the baby boom generation. But just wait for a couple of years. As more and more of these young people came of age, those people would become participants in civil rights struggles. And you know, its hard to sort of explain now, but there was a particular arrogance, and im speaking of myself and my own generation now, so im indicting myself, guys. But there was a particular arrogance on the part of that generation, of my generation. We really did believe we were going to change the world. We really did believe that we could do anything. And we really were impatient with the Political Leadership that had come before us. We knew that we would do better. We were wrong. [laughter] as everybody has figured out at this point. But at that moment, we really believed that we would do better. I am going to go so far as to suggest that i believe that some of you may feel the same way. Okay. Dont answer that. [laughter] dont answer that at all. But the point here is that in the 1960s, there were a lot of young people there were just a lot of young people, okay, more young people than there had been in the past because of the baby boom generation. And its the very numbers, the sheer numbers of the people that created this sense, important factor in terms of Civil Rights Activity. There were young and eager and energetic and this dynamism would change america for the better. We all got older and we got cynical. But that is the way we looked at the world in the 1960s. And that becomes a very important factor in terms of Civil Rights Activity and in terms of those young people coming into those demonstrations. Let me shift here to the demonstrations themselves. And let me go back to the very first one, the father of them all, which was the greensboro sitin, in 1960. The sitin at woolworths at greensboro, North Carolina in 1960. How many of you have heard of this sitin before this class, honestly . Okay. Most of you. Most of you. This is considered the red letter date, one of the red letter dates in the Civil Rights Movement. Ill list those men, because im going to list their names in a minute. But i want to again again, i want to provide a context for you to understand what happened. Ordinary people. Very ordinary people. These are four College Students. They were College Students at North Carolina agricultural and Technical University in greensboro, North Carolina. They werent the brightest students, they werent the best students. They shared a couple dormitory rooms. And they would get together for these okay. Im trying to look for a better word than well, okay, ill just say it on national tv. They got together for bull sessions. Have you guys ever heard of a bull session . Okay. Some of us are old enough to remember this. Essentially, student dont students get together in their dormitory no, you guys go on facebook now. But before there was facebook, people actually got together, and they sat down, and they talked about life and issues and what they were going to do, what their futures were going to be. In this instance, these students talked about racial segregation. They talked about all those other things, but they also said, you know, we dont like the fact that woolworths and other schools excuse me, other stores, in downtown greensboro, are segregated. A lot of people said before, we dont like theyre segregateded. Segregated. This time, they decided to do something about it. There is no grand strategy, okay . These guys arent a member of some kind of organization, okay . These are just plain College Students who decide were going to do something, were going to engage in a protest that will challenge racial segregation. Just a side note. At the time i dont know if this is a major factor. But at the time, the student body president was jesse jackson. Okay . [laughter] but they were they were all kids who said, we want to do something. They were freshmen. They were freshmen. So they were just barely in the school. But they knew they wanted to do something about the situation. So on february 1st, 1960, these four college freshmen, ezel blair, joseph mcneil, David Richmond and Franklin Mccain decided after a conversation in the dormitory room the night before that they not only did not like the fact that woolworths was segregated, but they were going to do something about it. And is so they walked they didnt even march, they walked down to woolworths the next day, and they decided to stage a sitin. And i dont know where they got the idea of the sitin. There had been sitins before, but they decided, this is a way of nonviolently protesting the segregation of the woolworths store. They walked in, and they had no idea what they were going to expect. They had no idea what greeting was going to meet them. They sat at the stools, and, of course, heres the problem. According to the segregationist ordinances, black folks are not supposed to come in and sit at the lunch counter. Theyre supposed to come and give an order and then get whatever they get and leave. Usually at a back door. But these kids decided they were going to come and they were going to sit at the lunch counter. They did. And at first and ill show you how ironic this is. At first, the black counter person yes, there were black people working at woolworths. The black counter person said, look, you guys get out of here. If you dont get out of here, youre going to cost me my job, because the counterperson, his responsibility was to serve whites. He understood if they were being served and if he was seen as somehow being involved in this, then he would lose his position. So they said, were not here to harm you, were not here to challenge you. We are here for justice, whatever the term was at that time that they used. And they just sat. And they werent served. And they continued to sit. And they werent served. And an hour turned into two hours. And finally, one of the people, mccain, said maybe they cant do anything to us. Im going to use his direct quote. Maybe they cant do anything to us. Maybe we can keep this up. And they just sat there until woolworths closed until 5 00 that evening. Thats the beginning of the movement. Its as simple as that. They thought they were going to be arrested. The manager thought contemplated having them arrested. There were cops that came outside. But nobody moved against them. Nobody attempted to arrest them. Nobody attempted to attack them at that particular point. At that point, they went back to their dormitory rooms, confident they had actually won a victory. That they had actually gone in, they had protested, they hadnt been served, but they had managed to protest without getting arrested. And so what happens the next day . They bring friends. [laughter] they bring a lot of friends. Okay . And these friends sit. And then for the next couple of days, other friends come. And the protest continues. And after a fashion, the manager says, serve them, im losing money. This you know, i dont want to sound sort of trite about this, but this is this is how ordinary the situation was. A group of people who got together and said, were going to challenge racial segregation. They didnt have any grand scheme or plan or strategy. They just decided to do it. And it resonated. It caught on. And essentially, once it was declared successful in greensboro, then, of course, other College Students began to join in. The movement spread to raleigh, it spread to durham. Im particularly aware of raleigh, because one of the schools that was the earliest participant in these demonstrations was saint august college. Gustens thats my old college. I wasnt there. I was still in brownsville at the time. I was young. But essentially, students were my campus from that campus participated in protests. Students at Shaw University participated in protests. And then much to the surprise of a lot of folks, students from Duke University joined in the protest. Now all of a sudden there are integrated groups who are sitting in. And they are breaking down this wall of segregation in the cities across North Carolina. The protest spread across almost every town, every city in North Carolina. They had colleges, they had black colleges, at least, and by the end of february remember, the first demonstration was february 1st. By the end of february february 28th that was a leap year. February 29th. By february 29th, every major city in North Carolina had seen its public facilities desegregated. This was a major victory. An un a surprising victory. An unexpected victory. Now, thats not to mean that Racial Discrimination ended in North Carolina. Im not suggesting that at all. What i am suggesting, is that the sitins had initially at least been successful. The sitins had done what they had intended to do, and that was the focused attention on segregated public facilities. Once the success came to North Carolina, it began to spread across the south. It spread to atlanta, it spread to richmond, it spread to nashville. Atlanta the atlanta sitins were led by a 20yearold College Student named julian bond. How many of you heard of julian bond . Okay. Julia bond is still an activist thats not julian bond. Those are some other folks. But essentially, College Students College Students would decide to get involved in this. Ill explain this photograph. These are the kids from nashville i shouldnt call them kids. These are the College Students from nashville. And they were led by a remarkable woman named diane nash. And i wish we had more time to talk about her. She was, again, one of those ordinary students, an ordinary College Student, who becomes extraordinary. She is one of the leaders. This is not in the script, so she becomes one of the leaders of the freedom rides. She becomes so important that she literally defies the federal government and continues the freedom rides when the Kennedy Administration wants to shut them down. And Robert Kennedy asks famously, who the hell is diane nash . Because she has because she has effectively defied the federal government and continues to lead the demonstrations. [laughter] and eventually, there will be the integration of the buses. Thats another story. I dont have time for that. But thats another story. But thats an idea thats an example, i should say, of whats going on at this particular time. Let me give you the stats. By march 14th, 1960 by march 14th, there were 17 separate demonstrations or sitins in atlanta alone involving over 1,000 students. Yes, this is a movement. Yes, these are students. These are ordinary people who are getting engaged in these kinds of protests. I love this photograph on the left. You guys should never complain again about taking an exam or studying for an exam. These are kids who are studying for their midterm while theyre in jail, okay . And what theyre saying is that our freedom is as important as our education. Our freedom is as important as our education. The man on the right, reverend james lawson, is one of the leaders, hes one of the older leaders of the sitins spreading out across nashville. By june, 1960 now, remember, were talking february to june. By june, 1960, sitins and other demonstrations had occurred in 112 cities across the south. That is, from virginia to the texas border. From virginia to the texas border. The first demonstrations came in houston in the summer, later in june, 1960. And ill tell you how they came about. Sort of humorous. Lyndon johnson, the Vice President well, yeah hes just recently inaugurated as the Vice President , lyndon johnson, when asked about the civil rights demonstration sweeping across the south, says that, yeah, i dont understand whats going on, but what i do know is that our students or our kids in texas are not stupid enough to get wrapped up in these kinds of civil rights demonstrations. The next day, the first demonstration was in houston. Okay . Rep. Lofgren [laughter] in other words, over and over and over again, students are going to take to the streets. Theyre going to challenge racial segregation. Ill give you another footnote here, too. The person who covered the first civil rights demonstration in houston, texas, the first sitin, in houston, texas, was a young reporter from east texas who would eventually come to identify with the movement. That reporters name was dan rather. Dan rather. This is a like i said before, this is a movement that is sweeping fast. Indeed, its sweeping across the south so fast, so very fast, that the elder civil rights leaders, the people in the naacp especially, are becoming concerned, or maybe i should use the term alarmed. In other words and its not simply the fact that the elders dont like the fact that all these young people are doing this stuff. Its the fact that the elders also understand that when these kids go to jail, naacp funds are used to bail them out. So there is a draw or a drain on naacp resources. As a consequence of this, the naacp, along with scoc, the other Civil Rights Organization of Martin Luther king, decided they had better try to get control over these students. They had better try to organize these students and orchestrate these students and lead these students, rather than have these civil rights demonstrations take place, you know, sort of ad hoc all across the south. So a conference was called in raleigh, North Carolina. At Shaw University. In 1960. In april of 1960. And the consequence of this threeday conference was a new organization, an organization of these young people, an organization thats supposed to represent these young people. And that organization was going to be called the student nonviolent coordinating committee, or sncc. The student nonviolent coordinating committee. Let me explain these two people. You may know them. Ella baker was the naacp leader, the elder who was given the responsibility for organizing sncc. She was one of the few elders that the students trusted. And marion berry was the first chair of sncc. [laughter] how many of you know who marion berry is . Ooh. You probably know him in a different context, dont you . I didnt say civil rights leaders were infallible. They were brave. And marion berry in 1960 was brave. He, like a lot of student leaders, and im not recommending this, im not suggesting this, he dropped out of school in order to become a fulltime participant in the movement. But he would lead sncc in his early days. And i think he would be a very vibrant and dynamic leader. Let me talk about sncc for a minute. This is how sncc differed from the other organizations. First of all, sncc was committed to the tactics, but not the philosophy of nonviolence. Sncc was committed to the tactics, but not the philosophy of nonviolence. This was a reference to Martin Luther king. Remember, king had always talked about how nonviolence was going to transform america, that it was not just a tactic for him, it was a way of life. The sncc people said, no to that. Eventually the sncc people would have great disdain for Martin Luther king for a whole host of reasons i wont go into now. But the sncc people always said that nonviolence is a tactic to be used in the struggle. Its not a philosophy that we embrace. Secondly, the sncc people argued that confrontation brings more results than closeddoor negotiations. Again, this was a slap at the naacp and scoc. One of the things that would happen often is that scoc and maybe i should talk about scoc. Southern christian Leadership Conference. This essentially was the organization of Martin Luther king. After Martin Luther king led the successful boycott in montgomery, some people suggested that he ought to have an organization, that there ought to be an organization that forms around him. And essentially, this is a southern christian Leadership Conference became his organization. He was the head of it for most of the well, all of his life. And people gravitated toward it. Mostly minsteres gravitated toward it because of their respect for king. But scoc had a particular idea about the Civil Rights Movement. As i said before, they had this idea they were going to completely transform American Society, and sncc didnt buy it. Sncc didnt buy into that, and one of the things that sncc was critical of, was sclc would come scoc would come in, organize public demonstrations and then almost immediately after the public demonstrations would begin, they would go behind closed doors and negotiate a settlement. Sncc said no to that. Sncc said, we are going to confront racism where it is, we are not going to negotiate with anybody. Were going to fight until we win this particular campaign. Thirdly, sncc saw its role, or the sncc leadership saw their role as assisting local leaders rather than dominating a local campaign. Again, a contrast for Martin Luther king. With marlin Martin Luther king, there is a local Campaign Going on and local leaders would ask him to come in. He and sncc will fly in, and they will take over the movement. They will make all of the decisions. The sncc people were just the opposite. They were very, very quiet. They didnt put themselves in front of the tv cameras. They said that our job is to help local leadership develop and to help local leadership achieve its goals. Im going to give you one example of this. And its actually its a local example. Tent city in Fayette County, tennessee. You know, i told you i grew up in brownsville. Fayette county, tennessee is the next county over. Both Haywood County and Fayette County experienced rampant voter intimidation. Remember, i said earlier that my parents hadnt voted in 1960 . They had never voted . The reason they had never voted was because the last person who attempted to organize black voters in Haywood County, tennessee in 1940 was lynched. Its that simple. The last person was lynched. And his body was dismembered, and it was thrown into the Tallahatchie River and , eventually it was discovered and it was horrific. What was fished up was horrific. And it was designed to well, it was designed to make a statement. Is and that statement was if you attempt to vote, you will lose your life. And so it seemed then that that was going to hold except by 1960, theres a new generation of people coming along, and theyre going to try again. Theyre going to try to vote. And most of these folks were sharecroppers. Again, ordinary people. But these were sharecroppers who said, we want the right to vote. And unfortunately, if youre a sharecropper and you try to vote in Haywood County or Fayette County, tennessee, the landowner can come in and say, you know, get off my land. If you want to try to vote, youre not going to work here. Youre not going to be a sharecropper any longer. And at that point, about three black landowners, two in Haywood County, one in Fayette County, at considerable risk to themselves, allowed these sharecroppers who had been kicked off the various properties to come and build or establish tent cities on their properties. The leaders of this effort i shouldnt say the leaders, the people who assisted the folks in Fayette County and Haywood County, were sncc people. Including a guy named haroyd brown, who eventually in the late 1960s became known to the world as h. Rap brown. By the late 1960s, he was a guy who wanted to kill everybody. In 1961, haroyd brown was a guy who dropped out of college and came to brownsville, tennessee or came to the area surrounding brownsville, tennessee and risked his life to help develop the leadership that would help get my parents and other people the right to vote. So this is this is sncc. This is what they do. This is what theyre about. And they want, and they will, challenge the system. And not just the system of racial segregation. They will also challenge the elite status, if you will, of the other Civil Rights Organization. Or what they call the timidity of the other Civil Rights Organizations. Fourthly, finally, sncc seriously commits itself to voter registration. And we see what reflected in what happens in brownsville and also reflected in what happens in mississippi. They be the organization that goes into the heart of mississippi, and they will they will help blacks register to vote. As a matter of fact, let me pull up bob moses. I dont know how many of you guys are familiar with bob moses. Steve is shaking his head in affirmation. Bob moses is legendary among self rights leaders. Among civil rights figures. He was the leader of the sncc registration efforts in mississippi. First of all, hes extremely brave to do that. Extremely brave to do that, given what happens in mississippi. Given the Mississippi Sovereignty Commission and all of the rest that we talked about. Moses was a kind and gentle and almost angelic figure. Ive only heard him speak once. And even now, even years later, he barely speaks above a whisper. And that was the way in which he was he was able to organize a whole host of people or help local people organize, like you see here. Hes working with cleve jordan, civil rights leader. Bob moses is there to assist cleve jordan. Bob moses is also at 25, the old man of sncc. At 25, he is the oldest person involved in sncc at that time. Again, ordinary people. And young. Very, very young ordinary people at that. Okay. Lets talk about whats going on here. In the larger context. Sncc is founded, the civil rights demonstrations are sweeping across the south. One would imagine that there is a great deal of progress. Unfortunately and there is. There is. No question that there are some places that are being successfully challenged. Some segregationist institutions that are being successfully challenged. But there is also there are also places like albany, georgia, where the local sheriff outsmarted Martin Luther king in the civil rights demonstrations, or demonstrators, and as a result, they didnt get what they wanted. In other words, we talk about the successes, like birmingham. We also need to remember that there were failures. There were places where civil rights demonstrations simply didnt work. But i think there was Something Else going on. Its not just that sometimes they failed. Its the very ubiquity of the demonstrations themselves. Let me give you some figures to reflect on this. And i think youll see both the prospect and the problem. By 1963, there had been over 2,000 civil rights demonstrations across the south. By 1963, by early 1963, there had been over 2,000 civil rights demonstrations across the south. Let me pull up this image. By 1963, an estimated 150,000 people had been involved in civil rights demonstrations. Talk about a grass roots movement. 150,000 people had been involved. By 1963, 10,000 people had been arrested. 10,000 people had been arrested. By 1963, hundreds of people were injured or beaten by mobs and the police. In other words, its hard to know. And by the best guesstimate of the civil rights leadership, the various Civil Rights Organizations, at least 17 people had been killed because of their activity in civil rights demonstrations between 1960 and 1962. In other words, this was slow progress. This was very, very slow progress. And as you can imagine, a number of people were becoming upset with this. A number of people were becoming increasingly impatient. As a matter of fact, and ill pull this these are the freedom rides. I dont know how much i want to say about that. Ill come back and Say Something about it. But the point of this assessment by all of these Civil Rights Activists is that as one said, if we continue at this rate if we continue at this rate, it will take them until 1980 before all of the south is desegregated. If it we continue at this rate, it will take until 1980, before all of the south is integrated. And as a result, some people began to talk about doing something. Doing Something Big to try to focus National Attention on the civil rights campaigns. Let me im going to sort of move away from the script for a minute. And let me show you some images that reflect on the civil rights campaigns. I mean, theyre very poignant images, and well, this one is, certainly. The freedom rides of 1961. Here again, there are young people, although in this instance, young people and old people with the congress of racial equality who decide to test what is already a law. What would already be a law, the law of interstate travel that says that anybody who travels across the south or anywhere can use the bus facilities. Thats supposed to be the law. When they attempt a freedom ride that begins in washington, d. C. And is supposed to end in washington, d. C. Supposed to end in new orleans. As they get far and far south, you can see the line as they get farther and farther into the south, more and more violence takes place and finally, the bus is burned outside aniston, alabama. At this point, at this point, the freedom rides become a national crisis. I think what i will do here is put on reserve a document on the freedom rides. I dont have enough time to talk about them now. It is a very, very powerful story. In fact, there were people from up here, people from the Pacific Northwest that went down to participate in the freedom rides, whites that went down to join blacks on the buses. It was a scary situation, it was a scary situation, because there was a tremendous amount of violence that was going to be meted out. The freedom riders were supposed to go from washington, d. C. To new orleans. They never made it. They got as far as jackson, mississippi, where they were all thrown, not in jail but in the parchment penitentiary. Thats hard time, really, really hard time. At any rate, my point here is that all of these activities are going on. It was tent city, the freedom rides, the voter campaign. It is the efforts, the sitins, to try to open up the lunch facilities and the other facilities. All this is going on. It is all heroic but is it enough . Is it enough . As we get farther and farther into the 1960s and we realize that there is no national change. There is no action at the national level. Again, im just going to go through a group of slides here. I am going to share with you some slides at the very end of this hour. So then this is jackson, mississippi, 1963. This is toward the end of the sitin movement. You can see the violence. You can see the violence thats involved here. Birmingham, alabama, everybody in this room has probably heard of birmingham. You know about the violence in birmingham. You know what happened in 1963. Thousands, not hundreds, thousands of people would be arrested. Many of them would be children. The fire hoses, the famous fire hoses would be turned on people and, of course, the worst of this was, if you want to call it that, the worst of this was the four little girls that were killed, who were bombed in a sunday school in september of 1963. This is birmingham and the man who orchestrated much of this is beau oconnor, the same guy that went after Eleanor Roosevelt in 1937. He is still the head of the police. They do not have a chief of police position. He is called the commissioner of public safety. Interesting phrase. [laughter] commissioner of public safety. He is also the person who is responsible for orchestrating violence throughout northern alabama, not just in birmingham but throughout northern alabama in the early 1960s. Of course, there is medgar evers who was assassinated on june 12th, 19636789 you can see his funeral procession. Medgar evars was the most important leader in the naacp throughout the country. It sent shockwaves throughout the country. I want to end the discussion tonight by pulling up what i think is a very poignant letter from mississippi in 1964 written by a young lady who i believe, im not certain on this but i believe is from seattle. In other words, a number of white College Students and black College Students went from the Pacific Northwest down to mississippi and other areas of the south to try to challenge racial segregation. This is the letter from bonnie, wherever she is from. These are the words that explain why she gets involved and why others should get involved in the civil rights campaign. I will wrap up the class, guys, by allowing you to read that letter. Because i think that letter says volumes about why people would no longer accept the status quo, why they would decide to get involved. Again bonnie, like the four , students at greensboro and all the other people we have been talking about, are ordinary people. Otherwise, ordinary people who decide to challenge the racial status quo. Thats the genius. Thats literally the genius of the Civil Rights Movement at that particular time. Okay, guys, we will stop it at this point here. I dont know if i am supposed to Say Something official or more official than that. Ok. [laughter] you have you can watch lectures in history every weekend on American History tv. Take you inside College Classrooms to learn about topics ranging from the American Revolution to 9 11. That is saturday to 8 00 p. M. And midnight eastern on cspan three. This sunday, the National Constitution center in philadelphia host a discussion on congress, Political Parties and polarization from americas founding until today. Here is a preview. One important theme you raised in the civil war era, and is now relevant today to technology, and some attribute our current polarization to a world where, as an author argues, people are more eager to play to their base on twitter then to serve the institutional interests of the white house or the presidency or even the media. Talk about the role of technology and polarization throughout history, especially beginning in the civil war . And what can we learn from it . Sure. The moment that i find myself thinking about often these days is, the telegraph. The rise of the telegraph is a form of technology. Before the telegraph, there was a certain amount of wiggle room in congress, that if you said something you are sorry you said or you did something you are sorry you did, you could rush over to the Newspaper Office or go to our reporter, and change what you said little bit. Itre was wiggle room, and was easier to keep things away from the public eye because there was a more limited number of reporters in washington. The telegraph fundamentally changes everything. It takes away the wiggle room. 45 minutes and Everybody Knows about something. All of a sudden there are all of these reporters in washington from all over the nation who can travel that far distance, stay there, and telegraph back home, what it is they are seeing. So congress, congressmen, lose control of the spin. Congress,nk about ideally speaking, it is supposed to be an ongoing conversation between the public and the representatives, in one way or another. The publics us with a want and representatives respond in some way. Theres an election and it gets readjusted. Technology changes the conversation. And there are moments i think, and right now we are in a social media equivalent of the technology age, when no one quite understands the absolute give and take of that form of technology, and everyone is trying to master it and manipulate it and take advantage of it. That every now and again something happens and you can tell that no one expected that to happen. Removede telegraph wiggle room, imagine now, someone says something goofy at a private dinner and someone has their phone, and it takes it and then tweet it or puts it on facebook, the entire world hears it. That is, again, a generation of politicians who lose control of the conversation to a certain degree. Now they are doing that at hyperspeed. So we are at this moment where thegress station conversation has changed fundamentally at a time when it is highly polarized, and everyone is other ringeveryone you, or people others, who cannot be dealt with. That is a dangerous time to be in this moment of hyperspeed. And then it is made worse by the fact that we have the first president who is a tweeting president , and he think back to a couple of years ago, people trying to figure out what that meant, and if something is on a tweet, how do you take it . And is it formal or not formal . It is kind of mindboggling and i think we take it for granted, the degree to which a technology can fundamentally scramble the workings of democracy. And i think that is some of what we are feeling our way through now. Learn more about congress, put ago parties and polarization, this sunday at 7 00 p. M. Eastern, 4 00 p. M. Pacific, here on American History tv. [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] [crowd conversations] off cast off. You are watching American History tv, covering history cspan style, with event coverage, eyewitness accounts, archival films and lectures in College Classrooms and visits to museums and historic places, all weekend every weekend, on cspan three. Paddling] if you like American History tv, keep up with us during the week on facebook, twitter and youtube. What happened on this day in history, and see prek learn what happened on this day in history, and see preview clips. Follow us on cspan history. On september 2, 1963, nbc news broadcasting threehour program on the status of the Civil Rights Movement. Reporting on locations from up that from throughout the United States, it includes historic activists, stark civil rights events and comments from immigration opponents. Theext on reel america, first 70 minutes of the report which covers protests in albany, georgia, birmingham, alabama, and in the northern cities of englewood, new jersey, chicago and brooklyn