The 1960s: A Fair and Balanced Look

Jacob Oblak


Glenn Marvel

The US in the 1960s

5 May, 2010



The 1960s: A Fair and Balanced Look

DeGroot’s emphasis in his book “The Sixties Unplugged: A kaleidoscopic history of a disorderly decade” is unique (The Sixties Unplugged, p. 500). He argues that the Sixties “brought flowers, music, love, and good times. It also brought hatred, murder, greed, dangerous drugs, needless deaths, ethnic cleansing, neocolonialist exploitation, sound bite politics, sensationalism, a warped sense of equality, a bizarre notion of freedom, the decline of liberalism, and the end of innocence.” DeGroot is emphasizing the fact that although the Sixties have been idealized and romanticized, many negative attitudes and circumstances also occurred. And this is definitely true. No time period in history has ever been perfect or perfectly represented by historians. There has always been bias, always will be, and, to be fair, one must take the good with the bad.

One thing that was definite was this: war was a huge issue in the 1960s. Many were disillusioned with the government and its appeals to force, and many protested and rallied against the government. Dwight D. Eisenhower most likely played a large part in setting the stage for the 1960s. He had threatened China with nuclear weapons to gain a ceasefire in Korea and was a well-known five star general in World War II. His was an interesting presidency, which although peaceful, prepared the path for those to come. He enlarged social security, competed with the Soviet Union in space, and maintained pressure on them while engaging in the Cold War. His Eisenhower Doctrine, stating that America would “prepared to use armed force ... [to stop] aggression from any country controlled by international communism,” was an interesting spin off Roosevelt’s “walk softly and carry a big stick.”

Kennedy’s election was close, and showed that the ideals of the American people were shifting slowly but surely. More and more American’s were favoring civil rights legislation, welfare/social security, and generally more liberal candidates as evidenced by Congress’s democratic majority. Many promising factors were evident: more people than ever were making livable wage, unemployment had decreased, business was prospering, and the Cuban missile crisis had been averted.

There were notable and extreme exceptions to this change, however. Although the sixties began quite hopefully and economically promising, many Americans were completely opposed to the direction their country was taking. The Ku Klux Klan saw a resurgence in its membership and activities. Governors in southern states fought with the federal government on the issue of state’s rights concerning civil rights, from 1957’s “Little Rock Nine” incident to “The Stand in the Schoolhouse Door” in 1963. Unfortunately, much violence occurred, most of it directed towards the civil rights movement and its rallies. Many civil rights demonstrators and even workers were beaten by police and others, and much was caught on TV.

Kennedy, as did his predecessor Eisenhower, used federal influence and force to implement Congress’ and the Supreme Court’s decisions concerning civil rights. John F. Kennedy embodies DeGroot’s thesis. Kennedy is remembered by most for his support and galvanization of civil rights. He also distinguished himself in many ways. He is the first Roman Catholic president, the only to have won a Pulitzer Prize, and he dealt with an incredible amount of national and international crises during his three year presidency. Those included the Cuban Missile Crisis, the Bay of Pigs invasion, the building of the Berlin Wall, the Space Race, and as mentioned before, the Civil Rights Movement. Shortly before he was assassinated, he ordered the withdrawal of 1,000 troops from Vietnam.

Kennedy’s assassination rocked the nation. The youngest president to die in office, Kennedy’s motto “ask not what your country can do for you--ask what you can do for your country” came to life in Kennedy’s death. Controversy remains concerning Kennedy’s death. Martin Luther King’s and Robert F. Kennedy’s assassinations also rocked America, but to a lesser degree. Kennedy was and is beloved by much of America. But the image that persists of Kennedy is his likeability, national acclaim, and positive contributions.

While he did play a large part in these issues, as DeGroot argues, Kennedy’s legacy has been romanticized to the point that many do not understand his flaws as well. He bought many copies of his own autobiography to make it appear to be selling well, perhaps in an effort to appear more credible. He and his Federal Bureau of Investigation (headed by J. Edgar Hoover) severely overreacted to the threat of communism by phone taps on Martin Luther King Jr.’s home. This not-so-subtle violation of the Fourth Amendment brought King under the close scrutiny of the government. Interestingly, Kennedy was as much a womanizer as was King. While this surveillance unearthed King’s sexual infidelity, it failed to show any communist ties or any illegality whatsoever.

Lyndon B. Johnson, Kennedy’s successor, took office when Kennedy died. He won the next election and made many positive changes that affected our nation’s progress toward equality. Johnson’s legacy remains far less known than Kennedy’s even though Johnson perhaps contributed more and implemented many of Kennedy’s own ideas. Congress continued its liberal trend and Johnson enjoyed its support. More riots and racism erupted during Johnson’s presidency, and he dealt with it well. Johnson even nominated the first African American Supreme Court Justice, Thurgood Marshall.

Johnson’s perhaps highest and most lasting goals confronted poverty at all levels and in all races. He built upon the already strong civil rights base and faced poverty head-on. His accomplishments include (but are not limited to) the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the 24th amendment, Medicare, Medicaid, the 25th amendment, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the Higher Education Act, the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Before his presidency, his Congressional political clout helped secure the civil rights acts of 1957 and 1960. Johnson’s Great Society was an amazing dream that captured the hearts of the American people, and garnered the support of the largely Democratic Congress.

Helping us understand exactly where LBJ was coming from, his Public Papers included an outline of his incredible goal, which was “to shatter forever not only the barriers of law and public practice, but the walls which bound the condition of many by the color of his skin. To dissolve, as best we can, the antique enmities of the heart which diminish the holder, divide the great democracy, and do wrong — great wrong — to the children of God.” This goal is worthy of any support, and it promotes justice wholeheartedly.

Lyndon B. Johnson’s legacy could be characterized as the polar opposite of John F. Kennedy’s. While JFK is romanticized for his great accomplishments, LBJ is demonized for his worst choice: the Vietnam War. True, the Vietnam War was a black mark for his presidency and for America as a result. Unfortunately for America, Johnson decided, immediately after Kennedy’s death, to rescind Kennedy’s withdrawal from Vietnam order. Johnson’s pursuit of the Vietnam War fueled America’s deep animosity towards government, war, and federal power, and gave justification to much of the hatred.

However, we can remember Johnson also for his undying commitment to education, which he believed held the cure to ignorance, hatred, and poverty. Unfortunately for Johnson, his Vietnam War obsession led to his fading from political power and clout. This also led to a decline in support of his Great Society goals, dreams, and ideals. Johnson’s one big mistake is why the Great Society crashed and burned and why his legacy is tainted, misremembered, and vilified.

There was much that went wrong in the 1960s. Included in any list would be overuse and abuse of drugs, “free sex,” and rebellion from government and authority in general. A reaction to these problems was the start of a new conservative movement that attempted to bring state’s rights, anti big government, and Christian morals back into the public eye and that eventually but partially enshrined capitalism and the American Dream into the Christian message. This movement was spearheaded by William Buckley, Barry Goldwater, George Wallace, and eventually Ronald Reagan. In general, they opposed the Great Society and its enlargement of federal government, and advocated a return to small government, big business, and religion.

Nixon’s Watergate scandal played a huge part in galvanizing this growing conservative religious movement. The nation had had enough of scandal and lies and wanted honesty, truth, and morality. This enabled the leaders of the new conservative movement to claim morals as their main platform upon which to contend politically. Religion became a staple in political discussion, and the political pendulum swung back towards the conservative right.

The 1960s encompassed both positive change and negative reactions. To fairly represent this decade, both the historian and learner must understand and include both good and bad in any discussion of the 1960s. DeGroot’s emphasis was on how much has been overlooked. His work is impressive and intriguing. So we must focus on the facts and arrange our ideas accordingly. Fairness is essential to understanding history, because without it we are left with only opinions.