The Johnson Treatment: Lyndon (right) lobbies Republican leader in the senate, Everett Dirksen (left).
Source C
Excerpt from Debating the Civil Right Movement, 1945-1968 by S. Lawson and C. Payne, published by Rowman & Littlefield, Maryland, USA, 1998, p108
Inspired by the Court, courageous Americans, black and white, took protest to the street, in form of bus boycotts, sit-ins and freedom rides. The protest movement, led by brilliant and eloquent Dr.Martin Luther King, aided by a sympathetic federal government, mostly notably the Kennedy brothers and Lyndon Johnson, was able to make America understand racial discrimination as a moral issue… [and to] to remove racial prejudice and discrimination from American life, as evidenced by the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and 1965.
Source B
Excerpt from Johnson’s commencement address at Howard University ‘To Fulfill these rights’, 4 June 1965, located at: www.lbjlibrary.org/.
Freedom is not enough. You do not wipe away the scars of centuries by saying: Now you are free to go where you want, and do as you desire, and choose the leaders you please.
You do not take a person who, for years, has been nobbled by chains and liberate him, bring him up to the starting line of a race and then say, ‘you are free to compete with all the others,’ and still justly believe that you have been completely fair.
Thus it is not enough just to open the gates of opportunity. All our citizens must have the ability to walk through those gates.
This is the nest and more profound stage of the battle for civil rights. We seek not just freedom but opportunity.
Source D
Excerpt from an essay by Steven Lawson in Debating the Civil Rights Movement, 1945-1968 by S. Lawson and C. Payne, published by Rowman & Littlefield, Maryland, USA, 1998, p42. Lawson was professor of history at Columbia University, New York, USA, and an expert on the History of the civil rights campaign.
The federal government made racial reform possible, but Blacks in the South made it necessary. Had they not mobilized their neighbors, opened their churches to stage protests and sustain the spirits of the demonstrators, and rallied the faithful to provoke a response from the federal government, far less progress would have been made. Thus, real heroes of the civil rights struggle were the Black foot soldiers and their white allies who directly put their lives on the line in the face of often overwhelming odds against them. Federal officials were not heroes yet they proved essential for allowing the truly courageous to succeed.
Question
Using the sources and your own knowledge, evaluate the part President Johnson played in ending segregation in the USA.
Answer/Explanation
Ans
Thesis…
The role of President L.B Johnson in ending segregation is largely disputed with some historians believing his impact was paramount whilst others place a larger importance on the role of protests and activists, particularly Martin Luther King Jr. Although Johnson was important in moving towards an America without segregation, it is unlikely that such action would have been taken without the effort from the those involved in the civil rights protests across the country, and as such, they arguably played a larger part in achieving the end goal.
Paragraph 1: President Johnson’s role
President Johnson played a quite important role in ending the segregation. For example, Source A shows that Johnson’s persuasion skills manipulated other Republicans, into supporting the Civil Rights Act in 1964. This was supported by the fact that he provided federal funding to Alaska, to compensate the damage done by the earthquake. Furthermore, he promised federal help to Arizona for its water projects. Both states were Republican, therefore, as well as using Johnson’s Treatment, he made deals with other senators in order to gain the support in passing the Civil RIghts Act, which provided equality and ended segregation. According to Source D, federal officials were not heroes, yet they provided essential for allowing the truly courageous to succeed. This can be seen throughout the Little Rock Incident in Arkansas in 1957, when Eisenhower sent federal troops to ensure the protection of the black students to end the segregation in this school.
Paragraph 2: Activists / Protest movement
There is no question that the legal actions President Johnson took were paramount in the end to segregation, however, without the push received as a result of the vast media attention from civil rights protests and activists across the country, it is questionable whether the government would have reached the decision to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964 on their own accords. As stated in source D, ‘the federal government ,ade racial reform possible, but Blacks in the South made it necessary’ due to their relentless attitude and sheer determination to improve the quality of life for Black Americans. The media attention and consequences of protests such as project confrontation in Birmingham, the March to Washington and countless other sit-ins and boycotts succeeded in their aim to ‘provoke a response from the federal government’. Without the necessity to solve the problems of such protests, the government would have not been as pressured to take action and resultantly ‘far less progress would have been made’ as source D continues to indicate. The law passed was simply a necessity to confirm the rights that activists had fought for, therefore, although ‘federal officials…proved essential’, the protest movement played a more significant role in ending segregation than that of President Johnson.
Paragraph 3: Martin Luther King Jr.
Moreover, it could be said that Martin Luther King Jr. played a more important role in ending segregation than President Johnson. For example, the Source D states that “had they(Black people) not mobilized their neighbours, opened their churches to stage pro to passing the Civil Rights Act in 1964. Moreover, Source C states that “The protest movement, led by brilliant and eloquent Dr.Martin Luther King, aided by a sympathetic federal government, mostly notably the Kennedy brothers and Lyndon Johnson, was able to make America understand racial discrimination as a moral issue…” Thus, this shows that it was mostly King’s leadership that helped to end the segregation as the Americans realized that racial discrimination is morally wrong.
Paragraph 1
A bar chart showing the estimated percentage of registrations, by race, in March 1965 in southern states that were to be affected by the Voting Rights Act.
Paragraph 2
[This Act] is a sham, and a hoax [trick]. This law will live in infamy [shame] … Never before in the history of this nation have so many human rights been destroyed by a single Act of Congress. It is an act of tyranny. It is the assassin’s knife stuck in the back of liberty.
Today this tyranny is imposed by the central federal government which claims the right to rule over our lives … Every person in every aspect of our daily lives becomes subject to the criminal provisions [clauses] of this bill. It makes the exercise of our freedoms a federal crime … I am having nothing to do with this so-called Civil Rights Bill.
We will not stand idly by while the [US] Supreme Court continues to invade the prerogatives [powers] left [granted] rightly to the states by the American constitution.
A left wing monster has risen up in this nation. It has invaded the government … and it intends to destroy the freedom and liberty of you and me … Red China and Soviet Russia are prime examples of what will happen.
Paragraph 3
Every device [method] of which human ingenuity is capable has been used to deny the negro the right to vote. The negro citizen may go to register [for the vote] only to be told that the day is wrong, or the hour is late, or the official in charge is absent. And if he persists, he may be disqualified because he did not spell out his middle name or because he abbreviated a word on the application … The fact is that the only way to pass these barriers is to show a white skin …
The real hero of this struggle is the American negro. His actions and protests, his courage to risk safety and even to risk his life, have awakened the conscience of this nation … And who among us can say that we would have made the same progress were it not for his persistent bravery, and his faith in American democracy.
Paragraph 3
Every device [method] of which human ingenuity is capable has been used to deny the negro the right to vote. The negro citizen may go to register [for the vote] only to be told that the day is wrong, or the hour is late, or the official in charge is absent. And if he persists, he may be disqualified because he did not spell out his middle name or because he abbreviated a word on the application … The fact is that the only way to pass these barriers is to show a white skin …
The real hero of this struggle is the American negro. His actions and protests, his courage to risk safety and even to risk his life, have awakened the conscience of this nation … And who among us can say that we would have made the same progress were it not for his persistent bravery, and his faith in American democracy.
Question
(a) What does Paragraph 1 suggest about voter registration before the Voting Rights Act of 1965? [2]
Answer/Explanation
Ans
(a)
• Voter registration rates amongst both whites and blacks varied from state to state.
• In all states shown, the percentage of registered black voters was lower than that of white voters.
• Black disenfranchisement was especially acute in Mississippi and/or black voter registration was highest in North Carolina.
Question
With reference to its origin, purpose and content, analyse the value and limitations of Paragraph 2 for an historian studying the struggle for voting rights for African-Americans during the 1960s. [4]
Answer/Explanation
Ans
Value:
• The speech is by George Wallace, Governor of Alabama on 4 July 1964. He was an important political figure and he would have to implement the Civil Rights Act.
• It provides a contemporary insight into views on civil rights reform by its opponents.
• The emotional language of the speech demonstrates the strength of feeling regarding civil rights issues. Limitations:
• It is a speech aimed at whipping up opposition to this Act and the strident tone adopted by Wallace in his speech shows how emotive such opposition could be.
• One cannot tell how representative Wallace’s views were—it is just one man’s speech.
• Since this speech was made in 1964, it cannot tell us the extent to which opposition to the implementation of the Voting Rights Act 1965 would be significant in blocking African-Americans’ access to the vote.
Question
Compare and contrast what Paragraph 2 and Paragraph 3 reveal about the attitudes of political leaders towards civil rights reform. [6]
Answer/Explanation
Ans
Comparisons:
• Both sources claim to advance the cause of freedom.
• Both sources show political leaders are highly emotive in their analysis of civil rights.
• Both sources express discontent with the current situation.
Contrasts:
• Paragraph 1 Wallace expresses total opposition to Lyndon Johnson’s legislation because it represents a tyrannical attack on freedom whereas in Paragraph 2 Lyndon Johnson sees his legislation as advancing freedom.
• Paragraph 1’s argument is mainly based upon constitutional matters (the power of federal government relative to states’ rights) whereas Paragraph 2’s argument focuses upon the question of racial discrimination and the obstacles placed in the way of voting rights for African-Americans.
• Paragraph 2 claims that the purpose of the civil rights legislation is to deal with an internal American problem whereas Paragraph 1 asserts that this legislation is part of a left-wing attempt to destroy human rights, and that it will lead to circumstances akin to the situation in Red China and the Soviet Union.
Question
Using the sources and your own knowledge, discuss the reasons why legislation, including the Civil Rights Act of 1964, had not been effective in helping African-Americans to gain full voting rights. [9]
Answer/Explanation
Ans
Indicative content
Paragraph 1 The source demonstrates that despite legislation, the percentage of African-American voters in the southern states (particularly in Mississippi and Alabama) was low and further progress was necessary.
Paragraph 2 Wallace’s speech in July 1964 shows how federal intervention in favour of African-Americans’ civil rights was opposed on the grounds of states’ rights and “democracy”. It reveals the strong opposition against the Act posed by state government authorities such as Governor Wallace. This speech makes it clear that the Civil Rights Act 1964 would not be effective in ensuring voting rights for African-Americans.
Paragraph 3 This speech by Lyndon Johnson in 1965 was in reaction to the violent racist opposition to the Selma Marchers’ demand for African-American voting rights. The source describes the various stratagems still being applied in 1965 (one year after the passage of the 1964 Act) in order to deny the vote to African-Americans. It shows there were racial barriers preventing the effective application of the legislation.
Own knowledge Candidates may argue that civil rights legislation was largely ineffective because of the unwillingness of state authorities to enforce any legislation. It was also a fact that most African-Americans did not have the political and economic influence to assert their rights. Candidates may refer to the Civil Rights Act 1957, which intended to ensure voting rights for African-Americans but was, in practice, ineffective because the sanctions against those opposing such rights were too feeble. The Civil Rights Act 1960 required local authorities to keep records of voter registration. However, these two Acts had minimal effect—by 1963 only 200 000 of the South’s 20 million African-American citizens were registered to vote. Also, both the 1957 and the 1960 Acts encountered filibuster tactics in the US Senate, for example, in 1957 Senator James Thurmond opposed the Act in a speech which lasted 24 hours and 18 minutes. The Mississippi Freedom Riders’ campaign to secure voter registration for African-Americans in the summer of 1964 had limited success due to violence it encountered from the state police and the Ku Klux Klan (for example, three civil rights workers were murdered in Mississippi). The focus of the Civil Rights Act was upon the desegregation of any facility or public place and upon fair access to employment, rather than upon voting rights.