Were going Movement Origin our discussion of the Civil Rights Movement tonight. For those of you, those of you in this room know who i am but for others im Quintard Taylor and im a professor of history, American History at the university of washington. Ok, well get started. Last time last week we talked about world war ii and one of the things that i tried to 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. Ok. 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 incident at little rock. Everyone heard of little rock. Youre generally familiar with what went on. What ill talk about tonight is the fact that all three of these episode, 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 vote 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. First of all, technically its u. S. Forces, u. S. Army forces defending the freedom riders bus near the mississippi alabama border in 1961 and 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 virtually all of these young men 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 baits. A Norman Rockwell painting of ruby baits. She was a young africanamerican girl whose parents sudden 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 baits, 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 baits. 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 the wall of segregation. Ill 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 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. 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 suggested 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 talk about scotsboro. 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 kib them but 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 the 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 angeles 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 im sorry i 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 again. 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. 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 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. So there were 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 inat the graded 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 quote 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 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 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 youll 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 represent about 40 , depending on the state, some states are even 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. And then if you get into the individual states, look at the differences. Look at georgia. Whats worse, look at mississippi. In other words, there is, as i said before, there is no separate but equal here. Clearly, the facilities that the africanamericans had were going to be less because the allocations 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, im going to 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 will all eventually 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. Now, lets 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 thats 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. So whats interesting about the campaign in topeka is not just that topeka is involved in a lawsuit against segregation or the black parents are involved are in favor of desegregation. Whats interesting is this is not the first lawsuit. 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 sort of know the rest of the story. The Supreme Court will eventually come to make its decision, and that decision is handed down on may 17, 1954. And that decision is going to be monumental. Indeed, legal scholars consider it one of the three or four most significant decisions by the Supreme Court. Im only providing a 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 souths 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 essentially 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. In some ways, theyre almost humorous except for the consequences that they bring about. Several states gave their governors the power to close schools that were 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. Shall i repeat that . 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. The 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, but 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, is that 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. Im going to 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 erics heard how many of you have heard of the White Citizens Council . Ok. Some people call them the uptown klan. 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. But perhaps the most sinister of these organizations, im sorry, i shouldve 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. And that opposition was palpable, guys. 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 at least our knowledge of it came to the fore recently because of a woman who has a seattle connection, rita bender. You know rita. [inaudible] 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. [inaudible] no, i didnt know david duke lived in seattle. Thats news to me. But rita bend here rita bender lives here now. 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. She was also a civil rights worker on her own in mississippi. And she always believed, at least this is what i interpret interpreted 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 is a person who 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 on your exams, how the communists got involved in africanamerican civil rights activity in the 1960s question mark this is the shadow of this. 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, were 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 of tension and ill show you where that tension leads. Indeed, you can almost see it happening. These are black students turned away from North Little Rock high school in 1957 and, of course, the famous 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 where most of the senators and congressmen from a 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, inevitably leads us to the governor in little rock. I dont know if we can do this while the cameras are rolling but im going to 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 federal troops for intervention of force for the first time. Direct intervention of force. Thats key. Im going to talk about that in a minute. What about the background . What prompted this . Actually, an 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 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 preventing these 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. And 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 of, 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 that i wont get into and a lot of into in 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 in this is eisenhowers press conference in 1957, where he announces that he is 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. The 101st airborne was, at that time, 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, 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, youll know this is no exaggeration at all. One of the things i learned a little bit 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 that might provoke the mob even more so. And my friend that i interviewed ill give you his name, sam kelly, 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 . I mean maybe eisenhower was right. Maybe sending blacks as part of the 101st airborne wouldve increased the tension and that wouldve 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 in 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 in 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 says, 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 of reasons. Well, 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. 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 theres 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 who are going to engage, literally, in these thousands of demonstrations all across the south no, 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