tv Politics Public Policy Today CSPAN August 26, 2014 3:00pm-5:01pm EDT
it's sort of hard to imagine thy story without frederickerican douglass it does specifically mention douglass role with the african-american troops. however, the rest of the booklet, the vast majority of y the booklet -- let's put it this way. it is astounding how many civiln war memorials there are in the state of maryland.land. i grew up near robert e. lee park, and i knew there were i plenty of civil war memorials, l but this is one civil war bu memorial after another.anothe including one to confederate o nurses, by the way.confeder there's even an entry for john brown's raid. brow now, that might strike you as s odd, but you need to remember that john brown planned his raid in maryland and stayed at a farm owned by a family named kennedy. before entering harper's ferry. but what's striking about the entry on the raid is it doesn'th tell you why john brown raided d harper's ferry.it it just says john brown raided n
the arsenal at harper's ferry. there is no mention of the there thought of freeing the slaves. t there's none of that. none of it does it imply. >> does it imply that it was a good thing? >> oh, no. it's almost encyclopedic. a it's one of those entries like e let me get the facts down and let's be done.done. in fairness, most were done like that. >> it's odd they would have fas commemorated that. the >> it, too, is part of -- john t brown is part of kind of a segregationist memory,ever white supremacist memory, as wa well, because everyone agreed that john brown was crazy, right? in my high school history rown d textbook, we had a picture of john brown and there was an aust article that studies pictures or john brown because there are fairly neutral pictures of john brown and then there are pictures that make him look crazy.
my textbook had the crazy picture. and my picture had the caption, john brown, possibly a monomaniac. nice neutral statement for your history textbook. so the booklet is fascinating. it's also fascinating to me as i someone who studied maryland history. use it's fascinating because as i said, i had no idea there was that much confederate memory.e if you were to go back, my civil war buffs in the class, right, r for every -- for every one soldier who serves for the union, right, how many served for the confederacy from maryland?what's what's the ratio of union to io confederate troops? >> 2 million versus -- >> just in maryland. in
>> 15,000 to 13,000 or something like that. >> well, it's obviously a trick question, right?right? i'm just setting you up, clearly.stup, right? in fairness, somewhere, some es, maryland historian at some point will correct me because it's p actually very, very difficult ts calculate the number of d marylanders who fight the confederacy because many flee the state.ry many f they don't necessarily get counted in maryland units.stauni they're off serving all a throughout units, especially units from virginia but the ballpark estimate that the state archive uses is 60,000 union troops and 20 some thousand confederate. right? it's overwhelmingly a union state in that sense. now, it is also under federal control and so you could argue u that those numbers are inflated that's not a realistic picture.c but i think no matter how you look at it, it's difficult to say that the monumentation in 9
maryland reflects what actually happened in the war. instead it reflects what people want to remember. okay? another way of looking at it isi something like this. maryland's public narrative in 1960s has more stake in segregation than maryland had in the confederacy itself. way i w this's the way i would look at that. now, connecticut also had centennial commission. itss produced lots of pamphlets i am, of course, grateful to rs doctorho warshaurer because he' researched the members.s. what's fascinating about the connecticut one is it says nothing about slavery, nothing t about emancipation.emancipa only if you read -- well, i have read one pamphlet. i shouldn't say none of them.ead the one i read about how to plan
actidééééé$é specifically a em manualan for observence is all about the were and not emancipation. how many of you are teachers again? let's get a poll.nch. whole bunch. okay. so this is the instructions, this the the rubrick. state this is the standard for teac teaching civil war to school kids.so so in the school program, the student can be led to see that e dissensions between people are a caused by ordinary human motivations and desires by selfishness, hate and pride, th that the divisions that led to this awful war were created by people in all parts of the country. all parts of the country.the please note. and that the diseaseses of mistrust, hatred and war can bee cured only by uniting behind a t bigger idea or a bigger goal than the ones that divide us.
what's that all about? rich, can i pick on you for a moment? >> sure. you can pick on me. sure.it's i think it's about -- as much u about kind of reflecting on whao you're purposely trying to if you're talking about the if things that divide you, those e are the issues like slavery. but we're not going to concern o ourselves with those.se ou we're going to concern ourselvea with things that are going to suck us back and bring us back together, you know. and that's the reconciliationisn thing, rather than the emancipationist thing.r th what divides us is no longer thi relevant topic of conversation.u it's the bigger things that bring us back together. >> yeah.at okay. and so -- jen? >> so >> so,je i think basically likeo one is to blame. o >> no one's to blame? to >> i guess everyone is to blame
and no one is to blame and we all came together and solved the problems. >> and everything was good. >> and by the way, it happened in all parts of the country. and like the civil war happening in california. >> california not a big player in this thing. ke >> they don't understand that r part.hing. it doesn't help. i h >> i still haven't looked to see what in 1961 the california civil war commemoration is much less hawaii and alaska. i have no ideais.ess but in theory, they had, you know, commemoration commissionso jamie, did you want to -- >> this is sort of a nice cold war narrative, too. sor >> oh, okay. >> black and white, good and w bad. you can use it for almost any end, if you want almost. >> i don't think you can extract it from the civil rights il rigt movement or the cold war. if you look at dwight eisenhower's speech at gettysburg for the centennial, kennedy was originally supposed to speak but did not.if you
eisenhower did.it, if you read eisenhower's speech, when you get to the end of it, it's a strong cold war message. even though he talks about equality for all. it's still a very strong cold war message. very, very strong. stron okay. now, the national civil war commemoration for the centennia was not quite as successful at h holding things together. in part because there was very much dissension over what the war meant.isseether there was a trickling of e understanding that the civil war dc(what in the '60s would have n called racial issues., a all right? you may recognize the gentlemanl on your left. this is alabama governor george wallace. wallace was perhaps one of the most fiery segregationist figures of the era. and wallace also went to gettysburg. but wallace, of course, was already famous for one particular line, the one we associate with him.alate wi
when told that the university ot alabama had to desegregate, he gave a speech, and i will quote it. in the name of the greatest peop people that have ever trod this earth. he can you hear the echoes of the american race there? r i draw the line in the dust, anf toss the gauntlet before the eg feet of tyranny and say segregation now, segregation of tomorrow, segregation forever. t of course, by the time that wallace went to gettysburg in f june of 1863, or actually slightly after, the federal government had already forced the university of alabama to desegregate.bama wallace had to sort of stand aside as the national guard ents admitted sort of two students into the school. but wallace went to gettysburg. he attended a re-dedication of the alabama monument, which hadn been placed in 1933 by the
united daughters of the confederacy. he gave a speech which i won't quote at length. but wallace's speech was very, very clear. was the country should, quote, look, to the south, end quote, as the, true defender, quote, of the rights of states and ndividuals. wallace also said that the vidu. country was on the brink of the civil warfare. the that also is a quote. and told his colleagues in the t senate that if they passed a ic public accommodations bill, mandating that public accommodations be open, regardless of color, this is wallace, quote, you should make preparations to withdraw all ous troops from berlin, vietnam, and the rest of the world because th they will be needed to police america. okay? of course, we talked about the backdrop.ck drop. right? the civil war centennial rop occurred with the backdrop of t the civil rights movement.m
and of the very violent repression that was sort of -- that was that african-american -- activists experienced in the south.tivist the freedom summer of 1964 when the three were murdered in in mississippi, that is sort of just in the offing. the civil war centennial. if we then ask ourselves where s does emancipationist memory go, if it's only the tiniest level visible, in the official ble, commemorations, where would we find it? david blight suggests, and i think he's quite brilliantly qe correct here, that we need to e look in the obvious place. so we have all heard martin luther king jr.'s "i have a dream" speech. we've all heard it.
but blight points out, the text that we remember is afterthought. it's a late addition to the speech.teate the speech was written for the s march on washington in 1963.outo a march about jobs and equalityf but if you listen to the oing narrative of the text, what do l you think you're going to hear? it's all about the 100th rsary f anniversary of emancipation. so unfortunately, i am not dr. king, so i will read it. but it will not sound like dr. l king because i am not that great a speaker. not that great a speaker. so let me just take one chunk of the text and you can hear it. of all right? five score years ago, nice echo of lincoln there, five score years ago, a great american in whose symbolic shadow we stand today signed the emancipation proclamation. this momentous decree is a light
this momentous decree is a greao beacon of hope to millions of negro slaves who had been seared in the flames of withering injustice. it came as a joyous day break to end the long night of their captivity.he next classic brilliant king. but then listen to the next passage. but 100 years later, the negro is still not free. 100 years later, the life of the negro is still badly crippled br the manacles of segregation and the chains of discrimination. 100 years later, the negro lies on an island of poverty in an ocean of prosperity. it's not part of that official civil war commemoration narrative. it stands sort of outside of it. questions? comments?co jamie?spee >> i know john lewis had to change his speech.
the one he changed, he talks ngo about how we are going to marchn through the south like sherman,e all right, and burn it to the ground.t of course, he had to change thai obviously.vi the civil war is everywhere. it's all over the place. >> right. and this is the reason we call e the civil rights movement the second reconstruction. what is -- jen? >> sorry. >> no, that's okay.ion. >> i think it wasn't like the monuments didn't exist. when i was in d.c., the professor was bringing us on a tour, brought us to the monumenr paid for by freed slaves that had lincoln and a slave he was freeing and even today isn't on -- >> hard to find. >> yeah. where you are going to go to look at the monuments and statutes and not on an official sort of tour unless you know it's there.ere. >> there are places to go, but they're dwarfed by the number of monuments that were put up in ty the throes of reconciliation. n austin? >> sorry. just going off jen, arlington
national cemetery, the graves of the united states colored troops, who died during the warr and how they're sort of back it towards the back and off the beaten path, sort to speak. >> we've talked about this so i before.farlingto so if you've been to arlington,o if you go into arlington, therer is a clear section for the also united states colored troops, yes, but there's also a significant section that is seco rarely visited that is for the grave of freed people because a arlington was also a freedman's bureau location. bureau there are a significant number t of graves that have -- that m. simply say, citizen, on them. right? my >> edgar medvers is buried there, as well, which i didn'tok know until my third tour of arlington, that i finally saw that.ab >> yeah. okay. i said i would talk about the civil war scholarship. before i get to that. civil war scholarship. so if we talk about the civil war scholarship in the era of
the centennial, what do we find? what we find is this. scholarship in the 1960s was a very different place. when we talked in our classroom, we've been talking about the ao cause of the civil war and our t battle has been sort of betweens the -- or at least the folks wel talked about, we talked about whether or not it's about state's rights or slavery.vel, i think we've come to see wheree the scholarship is today, nearly every scholar says that the civil war is at some level, and i stress the some level, caused by slavery. is its extension into the west anda the political reactions to that act. de it is certainly not a war that is caused by desire to free the slaves. moo although once in a blue moon i'll still hear that in new england. it w but in the 1960s, the battle wan very different. it was between scholars who argued over whether or not the civil war as clash of cultures between north and south, or was it bungling politicians.
now, at the point that we're t a looking at, the question was really the scholarship sort of focused on the acts of poli politicians., i were they responsible? there, too, i think you can see echoes of the time.gh and even though there are prominent historians who work on african-american history, there are prominent black historians. there's the legacy of w.b. dubois, but john franklin and benjamin quarrels, a bunch of people whose work is available. there are also white scholars writing about slavery. but the mainstream of the historical profession is not eam looking at that scholarship. the debate continues to be veryi much like the postage stamps be that we saw. it's about the battles. let it's about the politicians who let the battles happen. questions? jamie?
>> i think blight talks about an essay that had never been published. but he says how i think catten is his hero and talks about how the line is something like the lost cause has been a force of c good in the history of this country.ou he obviously had a hard time ad kind of reconciling that. how blight rationalized that is it was true at this point. that's how most americans saw it. it was a benevolent source of good to that point. >> and they still saw the lost t cause memory as a -- yes. heng r >> as a unifying force and -- of the question and then obliterate it. >> yeah.erated. matt? >> jamie i think mentioned earlier about the fact that the cold war has gone on at this ab point. is it possible that the historians are being affected b the fact that we don't want to
show that our country has got this fragmentation in it, mean,i because of this global face that we want to show the rest of the world? i mean, i never really was ablet to put this all together.sp and it is interesting that youe mentioned with king's speech. it's interesting that he mentions that, in his speech, sn but we're still sort of seemingly dominated by this idea that we have to maintain a national front. it's almost like if in contemporary times you look at t the patriot act and what it doe, to certain thought so that we don't appear weak to terroristse across the world. does the way that we handle thet centennial of the civil war he f memory sort of like a -- on stage for the whole world so wl they see we've come back we'v together, we're a very strong country, we've reconciled, and we have civil wars, but we don't have fragmentation in our
>> that is a really good frag question. i might have to mull that over.a it certainly does strike me thae any radical narrative of the civil war is not on the table. because it does -- radical narratives of the war very much look like other radical narratives from elsewhere.om there are certainly people who write them. h there are marxist, communist historians writing history of the period. but the kind of overall ative is narrative is as you say very much about unity, as you say. very much. john?>> not >> it's not really in answer per se to your question, but my ownt research and stuff for classes, i have found soviet propaganda, of like a crumbling statue of liberty, and the kkk being liker is this freedom? is this equality?
and so it was something that --p american politicians are going to see it, and i'm sure it an definitely is something they su thought about. you >> you could see where the fo soviets would use it as fodder for their own prop ga da. >> there's the cartoon that popt up where there's a white hand pointing at a little black child. a two months before gettysburg, before the centennial.fore the >> okay.so l so let me jump forward to the 150th because that's where we are now. you may have all noticed that eu there is a connecticut t sesquicentennial commemoration. it would be difficult not to. i'm not sure you see him, but d dr. warshower is in here somewhere.some he is there. is he in blue? yes, almost certainly. it is safe to say he's in blue.o you will notice that the t-shirts are all blue. there's no gray t-shirt in connecticut. there is one of the things i in
would say for the 150th, in some ways, this is an observation, ro there is no national commission. right?na there were efforts to create a national commission. they failed. and so what we have now is a bu whole bunchnc of state-level commissions doing their own t thing so that whatever we may of think about the kind of unification of the country with the civil war, at the moment wet essentially have a state's view of what the civil war means, one state after the other. that's not necessarily such a a bad thing. it may tell us the state level t view is not as different as it used to be. i'm mindful of the time.to does somebody have a watch that can tell me what time it is?th all right. that gives me a good sense of where i am. so let me talk a little bit about some things that i've observed. and i'd love to have your feedback. so i went with the connecticut civil war sesquicentennial commission trip to richmond several weeks ago.ng, be
it was fascinating. c it's fascinating because at the level of what i would call the official narrative, again, a narrative that is public that is put out by historical associations, by schools, at that level, the narrative has really changed since my childhood. all right? i'm not talking about people's private views in either upper ie new england or lower south. if you go ask somebody the lows meaning of the civil war in a uo diner, you'll get whatever you get. but if you go to the capital of the confederacy in richmond, a trip i highly recommend, if you are fortunate you will have a tour by a guy named mark greeno who did a fabulous job with a dd whole bunch of connecticut w yankees who appeared one day. if you go into the capital, of course, the capital is the placs where lee took the commission oo the virginia legislature to ok become the kind of commanding general of virginia troops.t it is filled with confederate memory.memory.
and yet, the public narrative n now is much more nuanced. a they have a fabulous exhibit fb looking at secession. and now, i'm quite confident an that 20 years ago that narrative would have been all about the th solid south.t the right? that would have been all about that. not now. those exhibits show all the thos complexity of virginia politicians that we saw in the ed ayers "presence of the mine enemies." a book we didn't read. so it has pro, it has con, it iy has vividly displayed a group op virginia politicians, who, of is course, seceded on their own from virginia to create west virginia.he so the narrative may actually be moving a little bit. although there is this statue, and i realize this is hard to e, see.o this is a statue that is called brothers. it was installed in the virginia capital in 2011.
it depicts this sort of mythic reunion of brothers, one fighting for the union, one for the confederacy. they're embracing. if you're close enough you coulu see the union soldier has real n shows, the southern soldier's shoes are falling apart. it is brand-new. and so it is literally next to or across the hall from the plaques that talk about secession in a complicated way.s but even though i think that this is very much all about h reconciliationist memory, i don't know how you could reconc possibly be more about th reconciliationist memory than this, i do think that the narratives are changing and mucm more complicated.. we had a candid conversation cv about slavery.we h we had a candid conversation about the ways in which the endn of slavery became part of the union mission during the war. we had a candid conversation ad
about reconstruction. and so, public narratives are shifting a little bit. but i was also kind of curious, and i only had a little bit of o time to do some research for this. some virginia, of course, is the re northern part of the south. i'm not sure virginians want to hear it that way.rt sure but virginia is almost border land country.irskui we see from ed ayers' book, it'e really right there on the cusp's until lincoln calls for troops e to put down the rebellion. a good chunk in virginia is nots interested in secession. but if you go to richmond, you can see other kinds of change. so this is monument avenue.numet who's been to richmond? not many of you? monument avenue is sort of the pantheon of confederate greatness. kind of one statue after another.one i can't even begin to show scale. begin this is huge.scal that's jeff davis up on top hug. there. top
there's one for robert e. lee. for arthur ashe. that as kind of the -- as richmond became a more diverseci city, people argued there should be something on monument avenuen that does not reflect that segregationist past.ue t the result was this arthur ashe statue, which is pretty big. not as big as jeff davis, but it's pretty big. it's pretty large. so moving away from virginia, t though, i'm sort of curious. yeah, matt -? >> in doing a paper, i actuallyi came across an article that was in the southern -- southeastern geographer, which is a weird place to find a history article and the article explored the symbolic meaning of lee to the city. this is about richmond. w it is now mostly as african-american. and the argument was that, i gu guess they had re-done the canal
area.th there's this big mural of robert e. lee there.al and it's like the there. african-american population lie demanded that it be taken down. and so, it does seem like there is a real expression of political power in that city isa now. i wonder if that came out when you were visiting. >> well, it's an interesting place. it does come up. if you go, i also highly ighly recommend the museum of the of confederacy. the museum of the confederacy it a fascinating place in its own right. - its bookstore is fascinating. it is not -- you might imagine being up here in new england, you might imagine it is it completely going to be committeo to the lost cause memory but it's not.but but it's very much the museum o the confederacy and when's interesting about it is jefferson davis' white house is what it's called and the museum of the confederacy are smack dac in the middle of a massive so i hospital complex.o so if you go to it, you have a largely african-american city. you have a very diverse la population. as you walk to it. and then when you get to the museum of the confederacy, thenw suddenly everyone around you is
white and older. so it's not -- i mean, it's a very clear demographic shift. >> but it's just interesting, again, for -- to equate it or to look at it from connecticut's point of view. look >> yes. >> i mean, and i forget where it was, but the piquaut, i thinkthe stonington had this big monument to the victory over the er piquauts. and now they're a very powerfult force in connecticut politics. and i believe they had -- they were able to muster enough beli political support to get that ey monument taken down.>> i >> i don't know that one. >> but a point of the fact as groups start to really exert cen certain political power, they're able to change the narrative ant change the memory of any particular given event. >> it's certainly about power. right?ogive sometimes it's raw political power. looked at across the board. ard.sometimes it's also the power of the changing narrativea which you sort of hope wh
that historians are part of.hisr i don't want to -- we don't want on the immodest because webehalo noticed, speaking on behalf of professional historians, we notice a lot of people pay no o attention to what we have to ttn say.we h we have noticed this.we have i think scholarship does move tly.gs ever so slightly. it is probably also the case that we are looking for narratives that fit better who we are today.re today and that may mean taking some monuments down. it may mean rethinking them.s i think i mentioned in this reth class, the classes start to i blur, that for many, many years new orleans had a series of a fabulous fortune to the city of new orleans in the 19th century. he gave the money to be used on -- to be used for schooling. quote, without regard for cast or color. new orleans got half the money, baltimore got the other half. i believe there are no longer
john mcdonough schools in new orleans, because the name was synonymous with segregation. there's a decent sized john mcdonough statue, though. so i went looking. i went looking for kind of more memory. and i have to say that it's actually very, very hard for civil war commemoration to memories in new england outside of connecticut. it's a little -- even as somebody from a border state, it's -- the civil war is less visible. it's less present. like i said, you grew up near i robert e. lee park, you can't not know something. right? ne but in new england, it's very, y very different. the narrative here is all about abolition. the whole notion of the civil oo war being a war to free the n. slaves, that's got a lot to do r with new england's abolitionist memory of itself. i went looking. it's nothing to do with reality. my first hit was fascinating to me and i will share.
there was in april 1864 a battle at poison springs in arkansas.ad and these two plaques are old plaques that commemorate a ques ju+hjuhu'ion troops. now, it is an interesting !ti battle because there was a reenactment two weeks ago, and i wish i was there because i havee a question. poison springs was a fairly i v minor skirmish in the grand scheme of things.ti but what happened after poison springs, the picture may not show this, but the battle was e between confederate troops and the first kansas colored afantry. okay?the first kansas colored infantry. and after the battle, both union and confederate accounts demonstrate that confedé)ate soldiers murdered surviving black soldiers. all right?s like ft. pillow, smaller scale. it fascinates me to no end that washington county, arkansas,
reenacted the battle. created a group of e. african-american -- created a reenactment of the first kansas colored to reenact the battle. of course, the question is, whay do they do at the end of the battle? the and i am curious. the -- one of the folks involved in the reenactment is a state official. i'm going to write him and ask.f but even without knowing that, even without knowing what they did with the massacre, it tells us something, i think, about the public narrative that you can ga to washatau county and have a reenactment of a battle betweens white troops and black troops y that is put on by the local historical society, and championed on the state's civil war commemoration commission. one or two more pictures of the battle. here's my last thing.ttle.
so i wanted to talk together about what we think will happen with the civil war bicentennialn we should keep it fairly brief because we're running out of time. sh here's what i think is going to happen.nning at least a start.. i think one of the big questions is going to be diversity. because i think we can see that th narrative has changed. at some level.arrati all right?ve we all generally accepted that at a scholarly level that slavery is tied to the civil at war. we all tend to see that emancipation and thedisint disintegration of slavery driven by african-americans themselves changes the nature of the war, changes the nature of the he conflict. at a professional level, i think those things are not going to change much. whether or not the public to narrative moves further whether or not private narrative moves i further is open to question.
what happens in the bicentennial?things. i don't know but i think it wilg be shaped by two things.the one is the changing diversity os the country. t because it is already the case that huge numbers of americans have no familial tie, even distantly, to the civil war. and the other is, i'm not sure that the political lessons of s the civil war will translate as well in 50 years. but i'm not sure. but let's open it up to you guys. what do you think it will look like in 50 years?s look i assure you, dr. warshower and i will have nothing to do with it. yeah, matt?will >> i don't want to make it all t political in a powerful thing that is not memory but as the as demographics of the country change i think the memory is going to shift. so will you now -- i forget whan year but it's will be long be before the 200th anniversary you will have where white is not going to be a clear majority in this country.ng to
i think that will probably in h affect how the memory of the wal is portrayed. >> john? >> to go on that, i think the reconciliation thing is going to be very much absent, or very much less stated because of the growing diversity. you see the changing demographics in areas where thes lost cause narrative is strongee in places like that and there's going to be less connection of that.ing to b there's going to be less of that divide between north and south h as you see immigration and other factors come into it. >> i'm going to be fascinated to see what happens in new england because i've talked a lot about the south but i'm actually not u sure what civil war memory is s going to look like in new england because i think it already is not that visible.visb if it weren't for a very active state level commemoration commission, i'm not sure what they would be doing in maryland right now. connecticut strikes me as being the new england state that's doing a lot. but will there be a bicentenniab commission? what will it do?
how many of the sites that we talk about will be gone? even now, we talk about the battlefields that are disappearing. it will be interesting if we have kind of more of an will emancipationist memory because n it will raise some interesting questions. we talk all about the c anniversaries of the civil war. but we never talk about the the anniversary of reconstruction. so i think there's still a i limit, right?there's and it may be the case that we e have crossed -- sort of crossed a rubicon with slavery. and understanding of its tie to the civil war.a that doesn't mean we've dealt with racism.bi it doesn't mean we've dealt with that part. if we were to commemorate alt reconstruction, i don't know where we would do it or how.trui but i know it would be a lot o t more uncomfortable than recreating the battle at poison springs overall. any questions? john?ç yeah. >> maybe look forward to an assessment of that. i
i think to approach reconstruction in the future you might have to look at the civil rights movement in the 1960s and say this is a long lesson learned by our country. >> if possible, that the civil t rights commemoration might be in more important of the 200th, it may be bigger than the 200th of the civil war. that would be interesting. jamie?esting >> you are beginning to see i fl think at the federal level, slow recognition of the -- i think he they put up a portrait of the hyram rebels in the capital, i want to say.is s there is sort of, as much as thg public understands reconstruction, it's very messy. that's going to be up there forever. and it's sort of -- it's 150 150 years late, but an attempt to ts say this happened and this is what it was. >> yeah.an right.s. austin? >> i'm going to take a shot in the dark and maybe in about 50 0 years' time, the country or, you know, the nation will be more
willing to talk about the negative side, like reconstruction, which is pretty a bleak period of history. c just a case in point, with my paper for your class, about the little bighorn, i learned more t about the western history as a whole. and it's changed the narrative to incorporate more of the he native american side. and the nasty aspects of westers expansion, i believe, they now have like -- the sites or a memorial to the sand creek massacre, or the washia, which was one of custer's battles bal against the indians, which was -- you can argue was a j slaughter or a massacre. more but it's just a more open -- it- was brought to the public lighto and not shunned away for the pi turner thesis, so to speak. that's the way i see it. >> i think i will be pushing up daisies, so i don't think i will know. but anyway, that's all for this evening.s,
i have one quick announcement.en that is, papers due one week anu from today, unless you're also l in dr. jones' class, where you're doing the double paper. in which case it's the following monday. >> the 12th? >> the 12th. you got it. thank you, everybody. >> thank you. >> thank you. the 19th amendment granting women the right to vote was ratified august 18th, 1920. a panel of historians and women leaders will commemorate the 94th anniversary today examining how women suffrage impacted the role of women in politics and society. hosted by the national archives in washington, d.c., we'll have that live at 7:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span3. now to oregon state university for a lecture on the civil rights movement in the 1960s and the anti-poverty efforts of president lyndon
johnson. the class is led by professor marisa chappell. that is hour and 45 minutes. >> so, today, we're talking about the war on poverty and the urban crisis in the late 1960s in the united states.g at and we are looking at the ways v in which the black freedom movement raised the issues of r, poverty and of racial disadvantage really to a level of national attention and attent national action that we haven'tt really seen at any time since. and so i want to start just -- by -- well, first, i should lead you through the outline quicklyt we'll talk about the ways in which americans at the time thought about black poverty. p how did they interpret it? what causes did they think about?, and then, what solutions, e, dit therefore, did they turn to? so we'll talk about designing a war on poverty. the choices that the federal er. government made when the johnson administration announced that it was going to wage a war on
poverty. and then, we'll talk a little bit about the so-called riots te that occurred each summer in the late 1960s in african-american communities, in cities, and the ways in which discussions aboute those really reflected differenu attitudes about racial disadvantage. r and then, finally, we'll discuss imagining alternatives. so some of the ways in which te activists offered their own wai ideas about what might help overcome racial disadvantage and poverty. and i have here a quote from a.e phillip randolph, freedom from h economic want and oppression is the necessary compliment to f freedom from political and civil oppression.r we've seen this throughout, right, that economic demands, demands for economic opportunitc and economic security have been really important to the black ck freedom struggle, and so, we're going to see them kind of so reappear here in significant form s.ee
so let me show you a couple of slides. these are statistics from the census. and here we have a comparison of white and black poverty in 1959 and 1968. not a hard graph to interpret. what do you see? cara?19 >> in 1968, poverty had declined a lot. but still black poverty is a lot higher than white poverty. and it's still probably like si that today.ll so there was change, but it wasn't -- they're not equal. so >> yes. for so we see progress for both ovr groups over this time. but as you say, we continue to see a disparity.ntin any other comments on this graph?grap all right. i want to show you a little mort detail here. and i want you to tell me what
you see in this graph.ore pedro? >> so, for -- you can tell withr gender, there's a disparity where the poverty is, even among races. but with black females, they're among the most highest.ong the well, actually -- yeah, among the most highest. they actually did decline ou slowly, but you can still see even within race, there's also intersections within sex. a slight look at gender and how it intersects. >> the combined effects of race and gender on shaping economic opportunity and economic outcome, right? and i don't know if this is startling to you, but 1968, you can see still over 50% -- these are household headed by.
so over 50% of households headed by african-american women were in poverty, or officially under the federal poverty line. pauline? >> why is it that black women are more in poverty than any other, like, race or gender? >> that's a really great question. let's talk about it. what do you think? >> i think that it's a combination of probably -- well, probably lack of being able to f find employment, being both a person of color and also a woman. and so as you can see, like the white female in 1968 is on par with the black male.wo it's like a double whammy of discrimination. it's >> discrimination in the labor market. right? lack of access to well-paying lk jobs, both by sex and by race. b >> child care. >> and access to child care, a really good point.ild in women's role in raising children and the time and resources that that takes. other thoughts?resour cara?
>> well, also, the time period is the same time that a lot of our articles we're talking about.erioof so if it was like a single black woman probably in poverty trying to raise a family, they were cut mily, -- they weren't allowed aid to help raise their families. that's what's talked about in a lot of the articles that we read about the struggle for theg to receive government aid and r the discrimination that they faced. >> yeah. t so access to the social safety net. a littl we'll talk a little bit more about that, review that in a few minutes. but remember, the social safety net was segmented, right, by race and by gender.d >> i think to touch on what they both said, i think it was also d like, it was cheaper for the access to child care for women of color.it was it was like, basically, you're not working -- you're working to pay for child care rather than g just having money to, you know, cover your household.
so it was like most of it was o going to child care and not enough was going to the actual household. >> for women who even had access to paid child care, right? black women were typically doina the paid child care for white women.the paid we didn't have a proliferation e of child care centers at the of child a lot of this had to be informal through kinship. difficult to arrange. absolutely. any other thoughts on this abso intersection of race and gender in terms of creating poverty? okay. so, i want you to keep these so graphs in mind as we talk today. let's turn to the ways in which americans in the 1960s framed h the problem of black poverty. right? americans were talking about poverty more broadly in the early 1960s.earl but because as we've seen, we we have this mass movement among e african-americans. a it's making black poverty it's m
particularly visible. and we also see isible african-americans in cities really challenging the economic manifestations of racism, right? so this is very much in the public eye. so let's look at daniel moynahan. so moynahan is a social scientist. d he is a racial liberal. think back to our discussion of racial liberalism. he is assistant secretary ofhns labor in the johnson maknistration. he's a key policymaker among the federal officials who are determining what the federal dee government's response would be to poverty. and you read a short excerpt t from a report he wrote called the negro family, a case for r national action.se this was a report meant for men internalized, to convince othert policy makers and president johnson of the problem. and except that it was leaked.
and it was made public.it was and so, let's talk about what moynahan has to say about black poverty in 1965. cara?bout >> well, it kind of talks about stuff we've learned about in other classes, about how black 8 males just throughout history had been oppressed and humiliated and kind of like not the traditional like -- yeah, the traditional role that males are supposed to have, as like big strong, like father figures. they talked about how that created a really unstable family environment and led to crime, higher rates of crime. i don't know how i personally felt about this article. i thought it was a little bit messed up and a little bit sexist. but it was interesting to look at. >> you are not the only one to notice that. thank you. other comments?
what sorts of language does moynahan use to describe the problem? >> deterioration of the family. >> deterioration of the family, yep. deterioration of the family, yeah. other phrases? scott? >> a quote that kind of stuck out, as jobs became more and more different, the stability oa the family became more and more different for the family to maintain.ame more as jobs for who became more and more difficult to find?ans. african-americans. which? >> males.gdcner fami right. >> a stable family here is a made breadwinner family, right?a so this causes a number of çifa problems.
if black men can't find jobs, what are the problems this causes, according to moynihan? >> the female has to become the money maker. >> yes. >> it says a fundamental familiar of negro american family life is the obvious reversed roles of husband and wife form so if the woman is doing the earnings, somehow the roles are reversed and the family is -- an unstable family. so that's deemed here a damaged family, right? he can't fulfill the role that f the men are supposed to fill, so he's psychologically damaged. the available also creates a he
problem and contributes to the i mailedry arcable family structure ofly how does that happen? we have the program aid to dependent children.>> ashley? >> i know it came up in the wek black power reading about how sometimes fathers would step oue of the picture so the family could qualify for that aid. so that would leave it to be a female headed household. >> both that the man is damage psychologically damaged, so the becomea and the man might actually leave, desert the family, so his children can be fed through access to welfare benefits.ez that becomes a key argument agn
against social welfare measures, right? it's a short trip to saying thet available of well fair for are f single mothers is creating damaged families, right? so moynihan says initially the s black men's inable to be bread winners, but this problem could become self-perpetuating. that's an important part of his analysis, too. moynaha we watched "arraysen in the sun" kyra is jumping ahead. >> i made some notes about isini "arraysen in the sun" how the grandma was this really strong s like woman in the family who controls everything, and you the could see the son, the dad trying to break out of control,
and be like the man of the family..film yeah. other comments? pedro? >> i think soming that she do? mentioned was, what would your father do?old, b right nowec it seemed like she and she wanted to sort of be head of the household like his father washe? and just leaving the picture -- especially when it was a littlei confused, i don't know if he was supposed to tell his wife not to have an abortion?
he's clearly struggling, right? >> i feel like the son and the d mother had just issues, because they saw it differently.to it's just the man that she . expects him to be. at the same time he wasn't his father.right? the mother and father had d migrated from the south, right? to chicago, so their expectations we are shaped by that migration. then their son was born in chicago, in the ghetto,ok right?
so hish> i think he stands up for him. he almost sees what his mother is saying. like i want you to be your father. i think she meant that morally, like he would have stood up for us, not let the white people push us around. i think he got that gist at the end where he acted on impulse and called that back over to sell the house. and then the more he was out there, he thought about, no, my son's right in front of me. i can't let him see me bow down to them. because i don't want him to be that way. i think he starts to understands why his mother wanted him to be up to those expectations, because he has a little boy looking up to him. him standing up for himself at
the end, i think that made his mom proud. that's why she kind of corn snc at the end, what do you have to say? he's the head of the family, it's him now. it showed that he did end up being like his father like she wanted him to, but then again, he took his own stance. >> the way that he sort of came into his manhood, he was chasing this dream of a liquor store and business ownership, right? but the way he comes into his manhood is by challenging racism. right? challenging discrimination, and saying, no, we're not going to take it. we're going to move into that suburb. so similar themes here from lorraine hansberry, where she's an african-american activist. she's on the left. moynahan's a racial liberal. and here what we see is what the historian darrell michael scott has called the politics of pathology.
i want you to think about that for a minute. what was the argument that swayed earl warren and the supreme court in the brown versus board of education case? cara? >> wasn't it the dolls? >> the dolls? which proved what? >> which proved that black children preferred the white dolls over the ones that looked more like them. so it showed some kind of deep-seeded, like self-hating kind of thing and moved the court. that is interesting. because that's not -- i don't know what else to say. >> i think maybe what's going on there is, is there a problem with this kind of an argument. we'll definitely get there, right? but you see the politics, the pathology playing out in brown versus board of education. what's wrong with racism and discrimination and deg segregation is it has a damaging psychological effect on african-americans. >> i remember what i was going to say. it doesn't show the -- like what
caused the racism, and the bigger problem of like institutions that are keeping it in place. it's just showing racism is bad, they don't like themselves, we need to fix this, schools should be integrated. but it doesn't open the blight on the real issues, that needed massive government change and stuff like that. >> for some racial liberals, the hope was that by emphasizing this damage that racism and segregation did to african-americans, that would mobilize government action. so in other words, they're using this politics of pathology to try to get liberal measures in place, right? to try to push for equal opportunity, to try to push for jobs programs, et cetera. as we see, it's a problematic kind of an argument. so moynahan's drawing on this
framework then, as i said. remember that the post-war period is also a period where psychology is really popular. people think in psychological terms, and so it makes sense that this kind of argument is being made. we see this across the spectrum. charles silverman, crisis in black and white, he's a journalist, the disorganization of the family is reflected in the disorganization of negro life as well. absence of the inner strength and self-discipline necessary, if one is to be the master rather than the servant of his environment, in a competitive society. so the damage imagery, very, very often relies on a certain gender and family structure, right? the damage to the family, the damage to the man that creates damage to the family. so you see racial liberals, social scientists, black and white, writing about this,
making these arguments about family structure, and about pathology. many of them, again, we're hoping that this would convince the government to institute fixes to economic discrimination, that would enable african-americans to reestablish a patriarchal family structure, which would then have their children not become criminals, right, and damaged and perpetuate this cycle. so racial liberals then are using damage imagery to promote government intervention to address african-american economic disadvantage. one other framework for thinking about black poverty in the 1960s, and it's related to this politics of pathology, is the idea of culture of poverty. this idea of a culture of poverty comes most explicitly from anthropologist oscar lewis.
and lewis wrote a book, initially he was writing about a mexican family in a small village in mexico. and what he argued in this book is that the poverty that this family had lived in for generations had created a pathological culture. or a culture of poverty. so that these poor people had different values, a different way living nonpoor people did. he had a list of 50 different characteristics. they were things like tendency toward violence and inability to defer gratification and all of these sort of negative values that got past on generation to generation, right? so again, even if you argue as lewis did that the origination of the problem was being kept out of opportunity, he's arguing again that this culture becomes self perpetuatinperpetuating.
so what causes children to be poor, it's the culture of their families and communities that causes them to be poor. he wrote then a book about a port ee reuerto rican family in in new york about a culture of pourty. this was challenged by a lot of social scientists who did a lot of research to see if there was really a culture of poverty. even though it was challenged quite robustly, the idea was really write spread. it became important to the ways in which federal policy makers designed programs to overcome poverty. so it's cultural characteristics rather than what karra is pointing to what hamilton would call institutional racisms, the structures we've discussed creating these economic problems. amidst the debate in the 1950s and 60s when americans thought about poverty and thought about
a lower class, they increasingly envisioned african-americans. nathan glazer put it this way in 1963, he said terms such as cultural deprived and disadvantaged, quote, are only you' o eufamims for the negro child. very quickly, right, black poverty became a central element ñwuqnñok makers' approaches. let me ask you this, if you were a federal anti-poverty planner, an aid to president johnson and he comes to you and said what should we do to fix poverty and black poverty in particular,
>> having representatives from the actual poor populations say what they need for their specific communities rather than massive government things that don't exactly know the specific problems for certain areas so having the voice of the poor. that's is what was talked about in one of the articles -- actually the bigger articles how the big programs by johnson didn't -- the voices of the actual people who the programs are going to affect weren't even heard at all so i think that would be a really good strategy to go about fixing these issues. see what they actually need themselv themselves. >> let them design their own approaches. >> with help. with the aid like the money and the funding to come with that so -- >> okay. other ideas. how can we stop poverty -- fix poverty? scott.
>> equal education. >> okay. setting the bar for other people so they can get a good education and possibly turning into jobs and providing opportunities. >> okay. yeah. >> for the future. >> so there's not equal education at this time, right? what are the inekwaurlooequalii education in the mid-60s? >> there's a lack of quality in education like the schools are run down, don't have enough staff. some of them -- i think i read somewhere that they don't even have a mhigh school for some african-americans. that's a key part in education so i think -- yeah. >> yeah. so it's clear there's plenty of evidence, right, that separate was not equal. separate was very unequal. not only in the south which had
had legislative is heisegregati also because of the metropolitan said regularation outside of the south. >> so giving communities the necessary money and giving it to the direct community and them deciding what they need to do and then going with the education for some students if they -- i guess they don't have the necessary food they are not actually -- you know if they are not healthy or -- if they don't even have a morning -- like a breakfast how are they supposed to function throughout the day? so having access to nutritious food. >> uh-huh. okay. so some kind of program of food assistance. >> i would also say finding
representatives who would work with them. even if you give them everything they need they are not going to know what -- i guess to correctly do with their funds and stuff. so they need like -- they still need that leadership just so that someone is like there to help them through it all. they are not like just on their own. >> okay. rose. >> one important thing i think would be like the continuation of helping the programs and kind of like going back and evaluating like what can we do better? and what should we change with the program instead of giving up on it completely and seeing what they are doing right. seeing what they could improve instead of just like letting them kind of planning all of this -- putting so much work into it and then like, oh, it didn't work and just not even doing anything about it. gentleman okay. yeah. cara and then ashley and then
pauline. >> i think what was discussed in the black power article about an emergence of a new middle class so in skilled positions like working with corporations, i think a way to help poverty to expand those corporations have more job training to help actually like entrance level positions for people to come out of poverty and start working in these massive corporations that are in the cities where they live. so i think it makes sense to do that kind of thing. >> ashley. mine was about job training too. one of the articles that we got for our paper was they were talking about how job training was one of the most successful ways to -- for upward mobility in their communities like teaching them valuable job skills instead of just like, you know, pushing them out of a conveyer belt of high school where they are not even fully
literate and so the job training seemed to be -- >> so good education and job training combined there. yeah. okay. pedro. pauline and then pedro. >> so i was thinking -- so i remember the slcc and the -- i forgot the other one. the one that was student -- >> snick. >> i feel like all the programs should be on one page versus separate pages because isn't that kind of like -- >> you mean all of the movement activists so some kind of unified -- that's less of a government issue though. united movement. okay. >> pedro. >> i just like when you wrote all of these down tying them all together so the expect assistance, the job training, the lack of funding, you can create programs and employ people within a certain community so they can have
employment and also run a program that's sort of for them so sort of tying all of these things together so that, you know, if they have a program in their community it's run by the community members not somebody from the outside so again, stressing on the job training and making sure that they are, you know, trained to the highest level so that they can run their program to the highest level. >> okay. scott. >> isn't that what the cdgm was doing or -- >> the community development group of mississippi. >> yeah. okay. that's -- >> yeah. >> yeah. that was a really interesting thing to read. that was pretty cool. >> yeah. it sort of embodies -- i'm guessing influenced some of your answers, right? that notion of maximum feasible participation and that sort of thing. yes, cara. >> so kind of going along with like equal education and job training would be like equal job
opportunity because like we talked about before even like black people who have the highest education all they can do is be a teacher basically. so if they could have like more job opportunities then they would have better jobs that they could actually have instead of being a teacher. >> a particular issue for racial minorities, right? 64 we got a prohibition on racial discrimination and employment but it takes a long time for enforcement, right? so opening up access. >> i think a lot of these things have to be kind of implemented by the law so kind of put in that law system because in the mlk article he talks about how the prime minister of india and in the similar problem they have with the untouchables and how most of the things it is like -- the indian constitution
specified that discrimination against untouchables is a crime punishable by imprisonment. through that, they develop housing and job opportunities in villages heavily inhabited by untouchables so this system isn't just something they create but it's also implement in a reinforced through law. >> yeah. yeah. i mean king has very particular ideas about what kind of law but definitely enforcement of anti-discrimination but also more government assistance, right, in terms of building communities. yeah. any other thoughts on how you would solve poverty. rose. >> one i think we missed is housing and some equal chances with that and not having such segregated neighborhoods because then they would call those slums with the crime rate and everything and just equal chances for the housing.
>> yeah. so let's briefly -- this is a really good point. let's briefly recall some of the processes that he told us about in american babylon about met metropolitan development and how it was that african-americans in oakland sort of got stuck in poor inner city neighborhoods. latrice. >> well, i remember from those readings that they started making policies. as they expanded and took jobs out of certain areas and put them in others, along with that came more expensive housing and they kind of went through loopholes to skplud exclude african-americans so they would destroy an african majority house setting and put something more expensive there so they were all forced to move because they couldn't afford it and that kind of kept them in their own pockets and that had a lot to deal with it. the housing policies that they
made that wouldn't allow black people to live in their homes and the things put in the deeds contributed a lot too. keeping them in the slums they were kept into it. >> so raciprograms that targetee slums minority neighborhoods and destroying affordable housing there. cara, rose, cara. >> like what she was talking about, we read before in one of the articles if they had white tenants that they had to pay like they would make them -- they would make the rent way too high for them to pay for so i guess just like fixing that somehow, i guess. >> yeah. african-americans ended up paying more for housing. they did not have access because of red lining because of fha policies and riefate lendprivat policies did not have access to the capital, to the credit that allowed a whole swath of white
working class americans to access single-family housing in the suburbs which allowed them to have wealth accumulation, et cetera. rose. >> i was actually going to say something similar to that but i think another big thing was like how white people were afraid of black people moving into their neighborhoods. also, how they would bring in black families to scare the neighborhood. >> block busting. >> yeah. it's ridiculous. i think fear controlled a lot of that, too. people just like were afraid of what they didn't understand and weren't accepting at all of that. >> the fear that property values are going to go down. a self-fulfilling prophecy here that property values will go down if african-americans move into your neighborhood. >> the other side of that fear from the black perspective. there was a lot of violence against african-americans when they wanted to move out of their neighborhoods that they were
forced into from violence historically when there was the massive waves of nimigration wh they were freed from slavery. first of all the factories were in the cities. so first that moved them into inner cities and then when blacks -- when that became very populated when people wanted to expand there was riots and bombings and so many incentives to stay with your tight knit community rather than move out. so that kept -- i forgot what the original question we were answering but it kept people in the cities. that's what we were talking about, right? >> yes. >> okay. >> so many people were talking. latrice. >> kind of based off of what fear thing on a different topic. fear had a big play in larger organizations. like in amy jordan's thing, the oeo, they were providing all of these funds and they got scared
by the politics of it that they started giving the money that they were giving to other more federally funded programs so they could be on the good side of the politics and i think fear played a big role in the types of assistance they got because the people ahead of those programs were scared to give them the money because they were afraid they were going to get the black lash of it. i think that played a huge role in keeping blacks in poverty. >> so politics. we'll talk about those articles a little more later. so let's now we've talked about some of the reasons that african-americans had higher rates of poverty. you've offered some suggestions for how you might approach the problem. let's think about what the johnson administration did and if they took your advice. so designing a war on poverty. linden johnson in 1964 in his state of the union address
declares this war on poverty. he says many americans live on the outskirts of hope some because of their poverty and some because of their color and all too many because of both. so he's drawing the things together for us. our task is to replace their despair with opportunity. the administration today and now declares an unconditional war on poverty today in america. expectations right. wow. you're going to eliminate poverty. this martial rhetoric. it sounds like you're really going to go atl@4ú] it. so job training. what if there aren't jobs there? >> create them. >> job creation. this was one answer. yes. many african-americans and those on the left argued for.
within the johnson administration secretary of labor willard werts. he said the poverty program must immediately start out on the emphasis of employment to provide the head of the house with a decent paid job. during the great depression, the federal government had public works and built all of this wonderful infrastructure and employed people. a lot of people were calling for a renewal of public job creation. when he proposed this idea in a meeting with the president he rr recall recalled, i have never seen a colder reception from the president. job creation is very expensive. it's politically difficult because then you're seen as competing with private industry
and so private industry doesn't like it. it's -- johnson wants to get rid of poverty but he's not going to go that far. another solution to poverty which nobody offered is if somebody is poor, what do they need? money. they need money, right? some people work and are poor even if they have a job, right? so a lot of activists and many liberals, many racial liberals by the late 60s were calling for a guaranteed income, right? is that the government should make sure nobody falls below a certain level of poverty. so a guaranteed income. robert lanmon of the council of economic advisors said probably an acceptable program must completely avoid inequality and redistribution of wealth and a
guaranteed income did not have popular support, right? the idea -- what would be arguments against a guaranteed income? >> the redistribution of income or wealth that seems very communist. >> yeah. >> so i think the idea of being called a communist when you're trying to fight it it's like -- >> absolutely, right? we're still in a cold war at this point, definitely. yeah. >> it kind of takes away their incentives to work for it if they don't have to work for it and they just get money from the government. >> long-standing worry that you will erode the work ethic. people are naturally lazy. if you just give them an income they are not going to have any incentive to work for it. yeah. did you have a response? >> yeah. i was going to say something. they are going to be really dependent on the guaranteed
income and not feel likely to work. >> this idea of dependence and then you'll have the taxpayers working so hard to pay lazy people not to work. how is that fair? cara and then l tarks ratrice. >> that's what i was going to say. the government gets most of its money from taxes so wealthy people or hard working people may be less willing to give up their hard earned money in taxes for people. it's still an issue today whenever there's -- when people -- but it's still an issue today. that's all i know. >> absolutely. we saw about the kind of homeowner politics of taxpayers, the property tax issue became huge. yeah, latrice. >> mine is more a question. if we just gave everybody money wouldn't that lower the value of the u.s. dollar? >> if you just gave everybody
money. >> do we have an economics major in here. >> that's a serious question. you can't just give everybody money. then they'll go buy everything and then -- >> it's not one of the -- i've looked in my own research at this campaign to get a guaranteed income in the late 60s, early 70s. that's in fact not one of the arguments that i saw against it. there wear lre a lot of argumen against it and i never saw that one. that's an interesting question. cara. wait. >> i'm not really an expert on this but i just learned about it in another class but it might be because of the economics at that time in america under brentonwoods, it was a different system so the u.s. dollar was really strong at that time anyways and was pegged directly to gold. i think that the economic issue probably didn't even cross their mind because it wasn't -- like america was so strong at that particular time in history so -- >> i sort of can't think off the
top of my head -- remember that the social safety net was put in place not just because roosevelt and the new dealers didn't want people to starve. it was put into place because they have a canzian idea of how to maintain economic growth. get money into people's hands so they can spend it. ashley. >> during this time was there an establishment of minimum wage? >> there was. the federal minimum wage was established in the 1930s with the fair labor standards act. remember when we talked about the social safety net we talked about some groups who were left out. >> the farm and domestic workers. >> yeah. >> so to fight poverty they could increase people's pay so maybe one person in the household is working they
wouldn't be -- fall below poverty. that's an issue now. even if you work full time for minimum wage you're still below poverty level. >> yeah so raise the minimum wage. more government regulation of the labor market. make employers pay a certain wage. you know from contemporary politics there's all sorts of argument against it. it reduces employment but that's certainly one approach, too. all right. so if the johnson administration did not tinstitute a guaranteed income, it did not create jobs. what did it do? it actually did some of the things you're talking about here. so the federal war on poverty included sort of three themes. one was there was some expansion of the social safety net. so two important health programs established in the 1960s, what are they? does anybody know?
medicare and medicaid, right? remember national universal h d health insurance. health care did not happen. it's falling victim to charges of socialized medicine, et cetera. it has too many enemies but we do get programs to provide federal aid for health care for two particular populations medicaid targets the very poor and medicare targets the aged. we also get food assistance, food stamps. it's not a big program. it becomes bigger later. that's part of the expanding social safety net. we also get an expansion of social insurance so remember that under old age insurance and under unemployment insurance, a lot of groups were left out. slowly gradually, right, more groups are incorporated and the
level of funding increases. that's not the heart of the war on poverty. when we talk about the federal war on poverty, we usually mean the programs under the economic opportunity act of 1964 that the opposite economic opportunity somebody said oeo, opposite of economic opportunity, operated. those were focused on human capital development. it's not about fixing our economy, it's about fixing poor people, right? educate them. job training. get them the skills so they will be able to earn their way out of poverty. a hand up, not a hand out, right? that's the motto of the oeo. then community action which is its own sort of interesting -- you've read about this. it's an interesting thing. so i want to talk about the human capital development aspect for you here first for just a minute. well, hold on a minute.
so we get job corp which was a residential job training program for young men disadvantaged young men. we get head start, education, right? get poor children before they enter the school system so they'll have the skills before they get into the school system. upward bound work study for high school and college students. so programs focused on education and job skills for the poor. now, given the interpretation of black poverty in particular, who do you think these programs, particularly the job training targeted? black males, right? targeted black men so just to give you a sense of that, the women's bureau of the federal government was pushing really hard for a women's job karcorp,
they are like women need to earn a living too. they finally got one but it was tiny compared to the men's job corp. it also promised to teach poor girls family responsibilities like how to be homemakers and how to be good wives and mothers. the job training offered by the war on poverty paralleled the sex segregated labor market so as one brochure offered job training for men as automecha c automechanic, heavy equipment operator, women were offered training for secretary, hospital serviced, food services and coul it's not surprising it's built around black poverty in particular. they rejected child care. that was not part of this
either. in fact head start was not at all about child care, right? it was about this remedial education. so the new york times editorialized while mothers compose the bulk of the well fair population, it is the deserting father and social and economic conditions that influence him to desert so even as afdc roles increased and people were hysterical about a well fair crisis then shouldn't you target women's poverty? no, the idea was if we train black men so they can be breadwinners, that will take care of black women's poverty and black children's poverty because the families won't break up and they'll be supported. okay. king. let's go back to king for a m t moment and why we can't wait, 1963. he talked a little bit about
this already. what does king offer as a solution to poverty. cara and latrice. >> i really liked this excerpt from his book because not only did he talk about african-americans and -- because, you know, you think of poor blacks and we're thinking about the civil rights movement and poverty but he touches on poor whites, just like a whole range of poverty in the united states and he suggests a pibillf rights for the disadvantaged so this whole process of helping everybody it's not just like -- i just really liked reading this. he also mentions the urban league in his article. what did he suggest though? i'll let someone else talk about it but it's really interesting. >> latrice.
>> so i know what i thought was most interesting because kind of touching on what she said, he didn't just want an uprising of african-americans, he wants disadvantage people as a whole to be able to uprise. so i think he touched on the fact that you can't just make it equal and expect us to be okay with that. well, what about what happened before we were equal and like he used the really good example of, two men starting at a race if one was 300 years of a head start you can't expect them to finish anywhere near the same. i think that was a really good analogy and he talked about how you can't just give them the opportunity but also the equipment to seize the opportunity you can't just -- oh, here you go but you have to training. you're not able to do this so it didn't just come with opportunity. it came with preparing for the opportunity and giving them all of everything they need to do
the opportunities or giving them education or better job training. i think that was cool that he didn't just want to tackle african-americans. he wants to tackle everyone who was disadvantaged. i think that probably got a lot of white people on his side because you're not just speaking for your kind, you're speaking for everyone. i think that was really cool. >> it was a politically, smart thing to do there. patrick and rose. >> i like that he actually was trying to come up to a solution to it by coming up to the bill of rights for the disadvantaged kind of like the gi bill to help people get to a trade school orh university and also have the government backing to help them so they wouldn't have to try to do it on their own because they didn't have the means to do it on their own. to have government help to help them. he said somewhere it wouldn't be that big of a burden on federal government or state governments
because it gets paid into by everybody so everybody can benefit from it. >> right. yeah. rose and then cara. >> i really liked how he kind of related it also to the indian structure and how he was talking to the prime minister and someone who he was with was asking about discrimination because i guess they said they let -- if it was a tie between an untouchable and another person that they would accept the untouchable and he was wondering if that was discrimination. he said well, it may be buttoni centuries of injustice we've inflicted on these people so he realizes that yeah, we screwed up and we're trying to fix it but he's saying in the united states it's so different. they are kind of like, oh, it already happened. it's over and we should just forget that part and now we
should like try and be equal but it's like you can't put someone in a box and then just like let them go and have them on their own. they don't know what to do. >> okay. cara. >> i think what's interesting about this also is, you know, first he's kind of has a racial liberal perspective when he's talking about how he says certainly the negro has been deprived in addition to being enslaved for two centuries he brings up the moral argument like obviously this is wrong how they've been treated but he also has more not militant but more rampant activism when he's talking about what we can actually do like to fix the whole system as a whole in general with his programs and it's just interesting because he's using a combination of both of the stuff we've been talk being in all of our classes in this writing. >> yeah. it may be a king that you don't recognize so much from our
popular narrative of king, right? >> i like his relations to the handicapped and to the veterans and how they were so quick to give them opportunity and them programs you don't discriminate against someone because they can't walk. you don't discriminate against someone because of what happened to them at war so why would you do it because of the color of their skin? so i think he did a good job of showing that relation and then i thought it was kind of funny he talked about how the same people who fought for unions is fighting against exactly what we're trying to do which is essentially the same thing so i thought that was kind of funny. >> yeah. so what specifically does he call for? what is in the bill of rights for the disadvantaged? cara. >> first there's an economic section which i have highlighted but i really liked his social work section of it. specifically like with job training how to write a job
application, how to go through an interview process of the just basic social skills that have been kind of neglected in the past. i'm sure lots of people had them but in general stuff that you might not know because you've never had a job interview. your parents have never gone to a job interview before or written a job application before so just basic social things. >> so a massive social services program, right? serious money into social services. yes, that's one piece of it. >> ashley. >> he seems to emphasize pretty heavily the job opportunities for people and he says that the african-americans don't want to live on wellfair that there's no honor in that and that even when things are desegregated that they still don't have access to many of these institutions or
even to go out to dinner because they don't make enough money. so in order for them to truly be equal, they need to open up a lot of these opportunities to them. >> uh-huh. so enforcement of civil rights policies right? but beyond that not only this massive social work apparatus but full employment, job creation for all so nobody is poor. this is a pretty robust plan of federal investment in overcoming poverty. the mention of the untouchables and the mention of the gi bill are ways for him to justify, yes it's for whites too but special treatment, right? compensatory treatment. he says we can't -- at the very beginning, he says it is impossible to create a formula for the future which does not
take into account that our society has been doing something special against the negro for hundreds of years. how then can he be absorbed into the mainstream of live if we do not do something for him now? so this is suggesting various forms of affirmative action to ensure even if it's special treatment and he uses the gi bill to say, you know, we compensated these veterans with education and training, right, and loans for homes and businesses, et cetera, because they were deprived for a few years as they went to fight for our country. well, african-americans have been deprived for way longer than that, right, so why don't we do that for them. scott. >> so i also found that he mentioned the wagner act and compared that you were allowed to organize as a labor group. >> uh-huh. >> he said law designed to
operate in the fashion of the wagner act may well be the answer to some of the problems of civil rights enforcements during the next decade. >> yeah. so this is 1963, you've seen some of the images of what's happening in 1963 in the south. so the federal government basically needs to be more proactive and say these folks have a right to organize and for the federal government to be on their side, right. >> yeah. >> king proposes the kill of rights tore the disadvantaged. so we've got the gi bill referred to now. now we've got the martial plan. the united states spent billions of dollars to rebuild europe after world war ii. why not spend billions of dollars to rebuild our cities which are crumbling. all of these plans wanted the
federal government to spend billions of dollars, redeveloping the cities, ensuring that everybody had a job at living wages, ensuring that everybody had an income and nobody lived in poverty. you can imagine too, that they participated in the same kind of rhetoric about racial poverty. racial discrimination has imm k imaskulated the negro man. >> the negro family can be reconstructed only when the negro male is permitted to be the economic and psychological head of the family. i want to stress that this is wide spread, right. very few people are saying isn't that sexist? a few people are but you can see how even civil rights leaders are sharing in that kind of discourse.
okay. so we obviously don't get this kind of approach to poverty. we get a much narrower one. we get some education and job training. >> i want one more comment. i think one reason why these really big government plans don't work or are hard to implement is because people are really akprooe hepprehensive ab government. our country was founded on a smaller central government. so i think when the federal government tries to implement these massive reaching changes plans it messes up the status quo and also worries people about massive big governments. >> there's definitely a way in which opponents of these kinds of programs tap into that ideal of small government, right? if you look practically, right, they weren't complaining about the fha and all of the loans that were going to build the
suburbs. so it becomes visible in some debates and it remains invisible in others. >> i think you made a good point when you said the fha because they have privileges and when there's a power struggle within different groups and one's privileges aren't necessarily seen as privileges for one group but when it's a wider privilege they are like hey, that's mine. >> it's my right. >> well it's my right and it's not for you. it's for us. so it's sort of that struggle. oh, we don't want this. we don't want the government to make it available for everybody. they want to make it really exclusive. >> yeah. it's also the way these programs are framed, right? social security or old age insurance isn't seen as part of the well fair state. i npaid into it.
the vast majority get way more than they paid into it. it's part of the well fair system but it's not framed that way. it's not viewed that way. so much more modest war on poverty we get. programs under the office of economic opportunity never made more than 1.5% of the federal budget. is that really a war on poverty. i want to turn now to community action which is this very interesting program of offering federal funds to local organizations, nonprofits, and governments to develop programs to fight poverty on a local level. they were supposed to be implemented with maximum feasible participation of the people to be served. now, initially what they thought that meant, the policy makers meant by that is that they didn't want blacks for excluded, right? but people on the ground give it a much more militant meaning in
saying in that poor people had to be represented in designing and implementing these programs. so community action funds all over the country, you read about two of these programs and sort of their political fate. you've read about the child development group of mississippi which amy jordan writes about and the self-help housing group in baltimore which ronda williams writes about. let's talk about those for a few minutes. amy jordan. what is the child development group of mississippi and how does it reflect community action? >> it was probably my favorite article to read. amy jordan's article. i think there's so much emphasis on the negro mail. we see the grafts and quotes and everything removes from the negro mail. i think everything in this program give african-american women their voices because these
little centers were run locally by locals for locals. you didn't have a lot of outside influence. i thought that was really cool they were able to come in and they don't have to be qualified for a teacher. they don't have to have extensive education that's in these segregated schools. i think they made a point to be essentially the opposite because they wanted to show them they are doing it wrong and here is how it's supposed to work. so i think it really made people want to be involved in it. so there was a ton of involvement in creating and building and being apart of it. it give women their own way to express themselves and at the same time they were able to bring in money for their families. i think it really changed a lot in their communities. i think it was almost more beneficial for the african-american women because you can tell the difference it made in the women in their ability to express themselves in
the way they wanted to. they felt a sense of pride that they were able to contribute and do all of this but i thought it was really cool. >> yeah. it's a head start program so it's in this kind of human capital development but it unexpectedly on the ground through community action ends up empowering local people to see we can design an education system that's different from the segregated mississippi system and we can run it and we don't to have to be these experts, right, we are experts essentially. >> another thing i thought was really cool about the head start was that there was an emphasis on parent involvement and like if the parents had any concerns they are like well, come in and teach with us and i think it was a good way for them to feel like they are really investing in their children and it was like empowering for them. they felt like they were giving their kids really good start in life. i think that was a struggle for
a lot of people because being poor and everything it's like you don't have a lot to offer your children especially when they are that young and aren't in public school yet so like, yeah. >> yeah. any other necomments or thought on amy jordon? why did the white power structure in mississippi target the child development group of mississippi, right. the clan didn't like it. the building was vandalized. people were threatened. if you send your kid to this program as opposed to the public preschool, bad things will happen. latrice. >> i know in the article it talks about how a lot of the parents and people who were0l÷ì% the opportunity to expand their own education and with that came the knowledge of the programs and the things that were being ran in mississippi that maybe they weren't so aware of beforehand so it also gave them incentive to take action against it and so i think the uprising of that, the fact that they wanted to be involved in higher than just
this head start thing is like their hold up -- you know, no, no, no. that's where the back lash came from was the fact that they didn't want these african-american women and people who were once, you know, uneducated now they are becoming more educated. they didn't want them to partake in it. i think a lot of the lack lash came from that. i think that's why the oeo took money away from them because they came under a lot of pressure. i think that had a lot to do with t with the lack bash of that. >> a lot of these federal programs were optional for states. so a state would say we're not going to do food stamps and activists on the ground would push really hard and say yes, you are. we feed food stamps. so absolutely more access to a
social net. what's the connection between cdgm and segregation? latrice again. >> i was just reading on it. i know that they started like a petition that demanded the desegregation of it and right after that, they sued them and then that is ultimately how they desegregated schools. other communities around them started going okay, we'll desegregate. it kind of was like that little spark that made everything go around and that kind of was the jump start to desegregation around them. >> i love that stat where all of the kids who were the first desegregators were kids who had been at cdgm, right? so those families. it could be self selection but also something about that involvement in the group. so this is an example of absolutely unintended consequences. the federal government thought -- the johnson administration thought well, we'll give some funds to kind of local people and they'll have a
service center, right, where they can tell people where they can get benefits or whatever. they'll do a little job training program. here we have federal money going in to a group that not only empowers poor african-americans in mississippi but empowers them to begin challenging local officials so you can imagine state and local officials calling democrats calling the johnson administration, hey, wait a minute. there's the political pressure, right? all right, let's turn to ronda williams and the case in baltimore. cara and patrick. >> i thought this article was interesting because baltimore is a northern city. >> border state but did. >> it's in maryland. i guess. anyways so basically the gist of this article is you have johnson's community action program going into baltimore and setting up social -- all of the stuff that it's setting up and you have the activists in the
city saying like hey, we have our own thing that's we want to add to this plan that the poor actually want from their communities and they didn't just let johnson's program come in and take over. this group formed in 1965, i don't know if it formed in 1965 but baltimore's union for jobs or income now so it's called u join. that kind of brought the poor people together in their neighborhood look a grass root's movement to actually fight tore wh what they really wanted in this program to do instead of what we were talking about before. money coming in to do some basic good. they actually wanted full rounded changes. >> great. political representation, right? this little federal money coming into the community provides a focus. it provides the resources
necessary for organizing that really ramps up some of the economic conflict that's going on in these cities, patrick. >> i always thought that when they finally started trying to get that representation more for the poor for their own communities and the city wide thing that they started to have self help housing programs. it seemed like it was almost immediately taken up by the city council and they tried to put restrictions on them and it went from a community based organization that was going to help their own neighborhoods and community within the city to get into the bigger city council where they started telling them that they can't -- i can't remember the specifics but there were a lot of restrictions where they couldn't do what they wanted to do within their community so just on the a bigger scale within a little city you have this community control being taken over by a bigger government controlled group. >> yeah.
rose. >> also it says the baltimore chapter of the naacp they kind of stepped in and they were like, oh, why didn't you consult -- the city's plan for action had not consulted black leaders, social workers or civil rights or neighborhood organizations and that is including the poor people. so they weren't even really going to the root of the problem essentially. i feel like they could have done a lot better with talking to people and kind of getting more of the fuller picture. >> uh-huh. okay. >> i feel like johnson's government program that he set almost started a snow ball affect in all of these cities and towns that was being implemented in with the self help housing program what patrick was talking about how it went to the higher city councils you have the formation of neighborhood housing action
committee and once they see it is affective in some areas. other groups are getting together and they are actually standing up for their own rights -- they are allowed to asenl and say what they want to say so they are actually doing it. so it's a snow ball affect so a little bit of money is giving them hope oh, we can actually do what we want with this now. when it's taken away from them again they will actually stand up because they feel like they have government backing this time even though they actually don't. it's kind of like a hope. >> it's empowering for them, right? and the charges that are used to limit their political representation, limit their ability to run these programs, fraud, mismanagement, how can people who can't even earn a living run a federal program, right? when these programs were quite successful. this will be repeated over and over throughout ever since.
charges of fraud, charge mismanagement to undermine democratic participation here of poor people. yeah. >> all right so any other comments on ronda williams or amy jordon? so i want to talk for a minute -- heading back to amy jordan for african-americans in the south, i think amy jordan really makes the point that the war on poverty was part of the civil rights movement for them, right? economic empowerment, the ability to run their communities. it was also part of a stand that we're going to stay here and we have a right to live in our communities and to the starve because with civil rights activism, you get this movement among white elites in the south who were trying to encourage outmigration. they wanted african-americans -- we don't need them anymore on the plantations. we want them to leave.
an example here is is this man, a lawyer whose last name was luckett who was on an anti-poverty board in mississippi and the resigned. the federal report is that he believes the solution to the race problem in the south is the outmigration of niegros. he thinks the real purpose of oeo is to interfere with the normal laws of supply and demand and to negate the outmigration of negros from the delta. mississippi senator john stenas and georgia senator richard russell actually proposed the creation of a voluntary racial relocation commission. this would be a federal body that would encourage what they called equitable distribution ever black residence throughout the nation, right? so we're tired of being challenged on race just get them out of here.
one application to the oeo from an african-american poor person in the south i think expresses the counter to that. some people who were evicted have left the county she said and have gone to other areas of the state. yet others have elected to stay in the county and help solve the problems of their native land. these people deserve the right to be given a chance to be productive citizens of their choosing. it's almost a right to be here and not have to go somewhere else. so that's one facet in the south of the war on poverty. the challenges that community action face though made it particularly vulnerable as we've seen. democratic mayors and governors and congress people very angry that federal funds are being used to challenge state and local governments. johnson agreed with them. community action was very often implicated with civil rights
activism. johnson said the rat browns dh. rat brown, we haven't talked about him be the martin luther king s and all of them are products of community action. that's where he get tthey get t. we finance all of them. notice here linking black power folks with martin luther king to community action. so johnson is to fan. he wants to get rid of community action. in 1967 there are all kinds of restrictions placed on it that it allow local governments to take more control of it. another thing that's linked to community action is the so called riots that occurred beginning in harlem in 1964,