Class Four:
Mid-60s: Civil Rights Legislation, Election, Vietnam (1964-65)
1964-65 marked the apex of the nonviolent civil rights movement and the beginning of the “American War” in Vietnam. As President, Lyndon Johnson will get Congress to pass two major pieces of civil rights legislation (the Civil Rights Act in 1964 and the Voting Rights Act the following year), attempt to create “The Great Society,” initiate a War on Poverty, and get Medicare approved, but then he will become preoccupied with winning the war in Vietnam and eventually leave the office a broken man. As a visual medium, television needs actions and images. It focused its cameras on civil rights demonstrations until this time; now it will turn its eye on Vietnam, the riots in the inner cities, and the anti-war protests.
You can’t look at the 60s and not appreciate the courage of all those who sought to bring about change. Whether it was at the lunch counters in North Carolina or on the buses heading into Alabama, in the streets of Birmingham or on the bridge at Selma, people risked their lives to call attention to racial injustice.
Volunteers who took part in “Freedom Summer” in Mississippi in 1964 exemplified this courage. They were white and Black and mostly college students sent to help Blacks register to vote. Three of them would be killed. The voter registration drive would result in an integrated delegation being sent to the 1964 Democratic National convention. It got a lot of national attention, but the delegation would not be seated because of Johnson’s fear of losing votes in the South. Ultimately, thanks to the violent police reaction to the initial Selma to Montgomery March on “Bloody Sunday” (March 7, 1965), a voting rights bill would be passed in August, 1965.
Background Programs and Videos
1964: Fight for the Right (to Vote) 1964 Mississippi Public Television (00:56:00)
American Experience “Freedom Summer” 1964: WATCH (complete program: 00:60:52)
PBS Fannie Lou Hamer’s America: WATCH (00:58:00)
The Bloody Sunday Events of 1965. Selma to Montgomery March: WATCH (00:04:41 This video may be inappropriate for some users.)
Documentary of the Selma to Montgomery March 1965: (00:17:00)
Activist Jimmy Webb reflections on 50th Anniversary of Selma March (00:02:26)
The Johnson Campaign’s Infamous “Daisy” (anti-Goldwater) Ad 1964 (00:60:00)
Ossie Davis Eulogy of Malcolm X 1965 (00:03:46)
50 years on, a look back at the Watts Riots (1965) (00:06:52)
Former Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara on Vietnam/Gulf of Tonkin Incident (00:13:11)
Naval History Magazine article about Gulf of Tonkin Incident 2008: READ
PBS clip of Draft Card Burning in NYC in 1965: WATCH
MSU Library clips of anti-war demonstrations, etc. (good overview of protest activity): WATCH
Speeches
Malcolm X “The Ballot or the Bullet” Speech, April 12, 1964 (00:52:00 audio only)
This speech was given one month after Malcolm X had severed his ties with the Nation of Islam and just before he leaves on a pilgrimage to Mecca and a visit to Africa to meet leaders of those newly-emerging countries.
This is Malcolm’s most famous speech. Its title comes from the phrase that he uses again and again in the speech which is actually part of a quote from Lincoln. (The full quote will be used by Bobby Kennedy in the speech he gives the day after Dr. King’s death.) If you only heard that phrase, you would certainly think that this was a speech promoting violence. But it isn’t. The emphasis really is on the ballot and the need for the Black audience to “wise up” and recognize that they have to take responsibility for themselves. They can’t depend on a government led by whites to give them the freedom they deserve. The solution, in Malcolm’s opinion, is Black Nationalism. While he talks a lot about revolution and says there is no such thing as a bloodless revolution, he never mentions taking up arms anywhere in the speech, despite its title.
I think what I am most impressed with is how smart the man is. Listen to his description of how Congress works and who is actually in control of the government—white segregationists. It’s hard to argue against when he can cite evidence to back him up that Democrats are really “Dixiecrats” in disguise as he says several times. Not only is he knowledgeable about government, but also about history and goes through the various revolutions and how they turned out. Finally, his whole Black Nationalism philosophy is based on sound economics and common sense. He wants Blacks to own the businesses that serve their community. He’s self-taught but very bright with a sense of humor and a very quick wit. It’s hard not to follow his logic or not be moved by his persuasiveness.
To white people in 1964, Malcolm X was a pretty scary person. Looking back some 60 years later you realize that what he said made sense. And that despite his angry tone, his remarks are full of self-effacing humor and wit. While we can’t see him give this speech, we can certainly sense that he is speaking off the cuff, but still gets his message across clearly and convincingly. Where King was the preacher and repeatedly recited words from the Bible and hymns and American songs, Malcolm is a student of history and government and enjoys sharing what he has learned.
Malcolm X was a superb speaker. His voice is strong and resonant. His pauses and changes in pace and volume and use of repetition and rhyme are as pleasing to the ear as they are memorable. Because he seems so genuine, knowledgeable, and approachable, he’s able to get away with calling his listeners “chumps” and criticizing such sainted individuals as Martin Luther King for “sitting in” and singing “We Shall Overcome” rather than standing up (to the white man). You can only say things like this if you are truly liked.
His debating prowess comes across in this 1963 interview with a white professor and a Black grad student in Berkeley.
Watch the interview and notice the careful and respectful way that he listens to each question, takes time to formulate a response, and pauses between sentences to gather his thoughts. His charisma and mannerisms remind me a lot of how JFK answered questions in interviews or in the challenging Q&A following his Houston Ministers’ speech.
Malcolm is also very well prepared. Look at the way that he consults his folder of articles and notes. Like Kennedy, he has a good handle on the facts and can marshal a convincing argument based on evidence. Also, like Kennedy, he maintains a calm and confident demeanor regardless of how sensitive the question might be. His humor can disarm the questioner. But he can also be assertive when assertion is called for. He is a man under control and in control of the interview. It would be ironic, wouldn’t it, if he took lessons from the man that he presumably disrespected so much that he is quoted as saying “the chickens have come home to roost” when he hears about Kennedy’s assassination. Here’s his explanation for that comment.
President Johnson’s Tonkin Gulf Speech August 1964: WATCH (Note: speech starts at 00:00:53)
The Tonkin Gulf Incident (an attack on US Navy ship(s) by North Vietnamese patrol boats) in August 1964 lit the fuse for America’s increased involvement in the Vietnam war. There were supposedly two attacks over a couple of days. Following the “second” one, President Johnson addressed the nation to explain that there has been “open aggression against the United States of America” and that he has ordered a “limited and fitting response” (sending planes to bomb North Vietnam) and that he will be asking Congress to pass a resolution permitting him to “take all necessary measures in support of freedom and in defense of peace in Southeast Asia.”
In this short, somber speech Johnson assures the country that he seeks no wider war. But with the resolution, Congress basically gives him a blank check to do what he sees fit to win the war in Vietnam. And we will see that escalation coming true the following year when he sends the first combat troops into the country. Until this time, the US effort in Vietnam had primarily been American advisors advising their Vietnamese counterparts with support provided by US aircraft and their crews. Soon, as the troop levels skyrocketed, the war became what the Vietnamese had been calling it for some time, “the American war”.
If you look at the excerpt from the McNamara interview conducted later in his life and read the Naval History article, you’ll see that there was a first Tonkin Gulf incident in which an American destroyer was fired upon by enemy patrol boats. However, previously classified documents confirm that the second attack—the one LBJ is responding to – did not occur. As they say, the first casualty in war is truth. But the incident gives the president the opportunity to launch air attacks against North Vietnam and look strong against Communism that he needed for the 1964 election against Barry Goldwater. After winning a landslide victory, he will escalate the war against the North Vietnamese and Viet Cong.
(It’s worth noting that LBJ biographers have written that three days into his presidency when given an update on the worsening situation in Vietnam, Lyndon Johnson is reported to have said that he would not be the first president to lose a war. So, Vietnam was on his mind as he took over the leadership of the country. The Gulf of Tonkin speech that he gave was probably the first major one on the subject. It would certainly not be the last, but most of his actions concerning America’s increased involvement in Vietnam were deliberately underplayed. He wanted the focus to be on his War on Poverty and the creation of the “Great Society”. And, like his predecessor, he made a number of public statements about civil rights.)
Fannie Lou Hamer speech to DNC credential committee 1964: LISTEN (00:08:12 audio only)
If you want your audience to listen to you, to hear and maybe even feel what you say, tell your story. And Fannie Lou Hamer’s story is one of the most moving I have heard. A plea from the heart to open the convention to all – Black and white – so that everyone is represented. Another benefit of telling your story is that you can just sit there, as she does, look your listeners in the eye and talk to them without notes.
In her strong, unlettered language, she puts that audience of white delegates in the cell with her where she is beaten mercilessly just because she wanted to help others register to vote. It is reported that the Committee was leaning toward seating the integrated delegation, but that Johnson, fearing loss of votes in the South, pressured them to keep the all-white delegation. While she did not accomplish what she set out to do, she certainly made a lasting impression on everyone who heard her. Even those of us who listen to it years later on a computer. I can’t get her final, haunting question, “Is this America…?” out of my mind. (Interesting that Democratic House Impeachment Manager, Rep. Jamie Raskin, asks that same question in Trump’s second impeachment trial in 2021.) Hamer puts her white listeners in the uncomfortable place of feeling what it must be like to be Black living in the South.
Ronald Reagan Paid Commercial for Goldwater-Miller ticket “A Time for Choosing” 1964 (00:29:32)
Before he became President and became known as the “Great Communicator”, Ronald Reagan was an actor, president of the Screen Actors Guild, a Democrat, and a pitchman for appliances. He calls on all these experiences to make a paid campaign “speech” to what purport to be Goldwater supporters. In this rapidly delivered, memorized, and polished speech, Reagan is basically outlining the Conservative political philosophy of the Republican party for years to come.
Personally, this speech puts my teeth on edge. In its certainty and sweeping generalizations, misleading statistics and selective examples, and Hollywood staging replete with costumed extras, it strikes me as not just a political speech, but a highly-crafted ad delivered by a very slick, handsome pitchman. And the product it’s selling isn’t just the 1964 candidate, or the party’s principles, but rather a crafty introduction and audition for a future candidate. It’s as much about Reagan as it is about Goldwater if not more. He would be elected Governor of California in 1966 in a landslide victory over his Democratic opponent. In 1980 he will be elected President and serve two terms.
The most quotable line in the speech, “You and I have a rendezvous with destiny” came not from a Republican, but the epitome of the Democrat he is castigating, FDR. He doesn’t attribute it.
Bobby Kennedy’s Paid Commercial for his Campaign for New York Senator 1964 (00:29:31)
Since politicians didn’t have 24/7 cable news or the internet to record their every move and word, the campaigns used regular television commercials and longer films (we’d call them “infomercials” today) to get their message across. JFK’s campaign took excerpts of his “Houston Ministers’” speech to air in important markets to discuss the religious issue. Reagan was hired to espouse the conservative point of view and pitch Goldwater for president. Bobby Kennedy went to Columbia University to promote his candidacy. While there’s no doubt that the campaign edited the “speech” and used the questions he had strong and compelling answers to, it is clearly a much more authentic presentation than Reagan’s highly-scripted speech. Moreover, Kennedy’s film is before an audience of real students; whereas, Reagan’s seems to be on a movie set, decked out to look like a political convention or campaign speech and he’s addressing an audience that looks like Young Republicans or Hollywood extras dressed up to look like them. It looks “staged.” Finally, what also sets these political ads apart is that Kennedy spends most of the time answering questions—many of them tough ones that are on voters’ minds—not on a memorized speech.
It’s interesting to note how thin and “small” Bobby looks in this film. He’s clearly suffering the grief of his brother’s assassination. He even quotes the Greek philosophers he’s been reading to cope with his grief. But there is humor and humanity in the man as he begins the difficult climb back up onto the national stage following his self-imposed exile from the public scene.
Mario Savio’s “Put Your Body on the Gears” Speech (Free Speech Movement) 1964 (00:07:41 audio only)
Mario Savio “Operation of the Machine” famous lines on video (00:00:27)
Mario Savio, the spokesperson of the Free Speech Movement (FSM) is pretty much the opposite of the slick, highly-scripted Reagan. In his New York accent and sheepskin coat, he sounds like a tough union organizer rousing his troops to “put their bodies on the gears and the wheels….” to bring the machinery of the university to a screeching halt because they were prohibiting demonstrations for civil rights. His movement would be the stimulus for campus demonstrations and occupations throughout the country—first for civil rights and soon against the escalating war in Vietnam.
In one sense, Savio’s “speech” is similar to JFK’s in Berlin. Both are short on content and long on passion. Both are “preaching to the choir.” Both are rallying the troops. In one instance, to stay strong in the presence of an existential threat from a powerful adversary; in the other, to encourage his fellow students to take on a bullying administration that is restricting their rights as citizens. And students. Both speeches do their job.
To get an appreciation for just how vocal (and in some cases, violent) the college demonstrations would become, watch the 1979 documentary “The War at Home.”
Malcolm X Speech at Audubon Ballroom Harlem February 15, 1965 (00:42:00)
This is probably his last major speech. Despite some disconcerting jumps (and missing parts) in the digitized recording, I’ve included this speech because you actually get to see as well as hear him. Also, it shows a very different Malcolm—at least at the beginning—the father who’s very concerned about his children and their close brush with death because his house had been bombed. Finally, he seems to be signing his own death warrant by blaming the Nation of Islam for the bombing and condemning its leader for immoral behavior and the movement for working against the interests of Black people and colluding with white supremacists. He would be assassinated on the same stage six days later.
This video recording is also worth watching because it includes the Q&A session after the speech. Just as we saw in the 1963 interview, Malcolm welcomes questions and is very open and honest in his answers. Notice how carefully and respectfully he listens to each question, even asking for one to be repeated to make sure he got it right. He also uses wit to avoid answering one question. The man is smart and quick on his feet. Finally, listen to his legitimate outrage when it is suggested (by the Nation of Islam) that he may have bombed his own house. He answers with conviction and also with a detailed description of how they went about bombing the house and leaves us with a vivid picture of him in his shorts on a freezing night with a rifle in his hands, waiting 45 minutes for help to arrive. This doesn’t sound like someone who would bomb his own house, but rather a father protecting his kids and his home. Interesting that for someone who generated such fear in the 60s, we look back and see a man only resorting to a gun after being attacked. And not using it when he was.
Malcolm X was assassinated on February 21, 1965, presumably at the hands of two Nation of Islam members. However, in November 2021, they were exonerated because the NYPD and FBI were found to have withheld evidence.
President Johnson’s “Voting Rights” Speech March 15, 1965: WATCH (00:48:00)
This, in my opinion, was LBJ’s most important speech. And the strongest plea for equal rights for Blacks by an American president. Kennedy labeled racial injustice a moral issue, but LBJ put the power of his office behind correcting this injustice. He had invoked JFK’s memory to pressure Congress to pass the 1964 Civil Rights Act, but the Southern senators had removed the heart of its voting rights section. After witnessing the brutal attack on the peaceful marchers on “Bloody Sunday” on their televisions, the American people were ready to support real voting reform.
Since he can’t take action alone to remedy the problem, he comes before all the members of Congress and in front of the nation, and their constituents, to persuade them to write and pass a bill that will once and for all give all Americans the right to vote. He comes, in vintage Johnson language, “to reason with my friends, give them my views, and visit with my former colleagues.” There is no question in anyone’s mind that behind those folksy words is the master “arm-twister” who will get what he wants…or else.
The president first defines the problem and then tries to reason with his audience—the nation as well as the congressmen and women who were sitting in front of him, by alluding to the Constitution and noting that the Fifteenth Amendment gives every American the right to vote and that they have taken an oath to defend and protect that Constitution. But he also knows that most of the South is dead-set against giving the Negroes the right to vote so he says they face a choice—either they change their restrictive registration laws and open their polling places to all or the federal government will step in to register everyone. That’s the last thing they want.
To help make his case, he states in no uncertain terms, “It is wrong…deadly wrong to deny any fellow American the right to vote.” And he delivers this line in such a way that you feel that he means what he says. He’s not just reading words from a page, but rather issuing a message from his heart. To shore up his moral and legal appeal for equal rights, he shares his story about teaching poor kids in rural Texas. He puts us in that classroom with him. And he enables us to see the scars of hunger and poverty on their faces and sense their hopelessness of never seeming “to know why people hated them.” What a line. It sets up his determination to use the power he now has to do something about it.
Speaking eight days after Bloody Sunday, the president acknowledged to the nation that “the real hero is the American Negro…who has awakened the conscience of this nation.” The president was interrupted 36 times for applause – some of it standing and lengthy. Clearly, he had hit a nerve and was taking advantage of the moment to push Congress to finally enact meaningful legislation.
In typical Johnson fashion, he praises as well as chides his former colleagues, especially for taking so long to pass the 1964 Civil Rights Act. But he’s the only president I know of who would get lengthy applause and even a standing ovation when he says that they won’t take that long this time around. He knows his audience.
The speech was written by Richard Goodwin, a presidential advisor and speechwriter. He got the assignment at 9:30 in the morning and handed the president the last page of the speech at 6 PM that night. It was too late to be put on a Teleprompter so the president delivered it from the written text on the lectern.
Despite the short preparation time, it’s beautifully written—with memorable phrases like the alliterative “the dignity of man and the destiny of democracy” and “as a man whose roots go deep into southern soil”. The combining of the rule of threes with alliteration in “this great, rich, restless country.” Or the balance in the line: “those who hold onto the past do so at the cost of their future”.
Goodwin felt this was his finest moment in the White House. He had served both Kennedy and Johnson, but this was the speech he felt proudest of because it was finally addressing a fundamental failure in our democracy. And he gave it his all, as did Johnson. The latter would still have to use his persuasive skills to get it passed. But he did, and the law would change politics in the South.
Excerpts of MLK Selma Speeches—incl. “A Man Dies…” 1965 (00:03:20)
These remarks were delivered over several days at Brown Chapel in Selma following Bloody Sunday.
MLK’s Complete Montgomery Speech March 25, 1965 (00:29:00 audio only)
Sometimes called “The Arc of Justice” speech, this King speech is full of celebration, but also a warning that things can’t go back to normal for Alabama or for the rest of the country for that matter.
The march that began in tragedy with Bloody Sunday would finally be completed two and half weeks later in triumph outside the State Capitol of Alabama. In the speech, King celebrates those who had the fortitude to march, despite the risks that they took. The audience is full of celebrities and other notables supportive of civil rights as well as those who actually made the 54-mile trek.
Unlike many of King’s speeches, this one seems a little disjointed and his delivery does not feel as confident and comfortable at least at the beginning of the speech. Perhaps he was just exhausted—not from the march (because he didn’t make the whole thing), but rather from all the effort he has put into civil rights over the years. It has been 10 years since he appeared on the national stage with his role in Montgomery Bus Boycott. Just one of the many civil rights accomplishments he talks about in the speech. He also uses the speech to give the history of the “Jim Crow South” to help explain the roots of segregation and highlights Alabama’s violent responses to peaceful efforts to end it.
At the same time, there’s some real beauty in the speech’s sounds and pictures that it creates. Not unlike other King speeches, he uses frequent Biblical allusions like Joshua fighting the battle of Jericho and even repeats some of his classic lines like his favorite quote from Amos, “When justice flows down like water, and righteousness like a mighty stream”.
He also makes repeated use of anaphora to embed his messages into the audience’s memories. Perhaps the most effective example is the question-and-answer refrain, “How long? Not long.” And also creates powerful images like the “the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.” –which is a paraphrase of a longer quote by 19th Century Unitarian Minister, Theodore Parker. You can also hear the “call and response” of the Black church with his “congregation” responding to his pronouncements. Just before concluding, King again resorts to his treasury of favorite quotes and borrows lines from Abolitionist James Russell Lowell’s poem, “The Present Crisis”…“Truth forever on the scaffold….”
Finally, as in other King speeches, he recites lines from a famous hymn—in this case, two verses of “The Battle Hymn of the Republic” to end the speech. Very similar to how he ended his “Dream” speech two years earlier.
In the speech, he commends President Johnson’s March 15 speech. He calls it “one of the most passionate pleas for civil rights ever made by a president of our nation.”
A friend, Nicole d’Entremont, who made the Selma to Montgomery March and heard King give his Montgomery speech says—”his cadence was so insistent that people followed him.” When you can recite from memory well-known Bible verses and much-loved hymns, patriotic songs, and poems, you can extemporize and use your voice to move people to march in time with your rhythm and words. These familiar words flow off his tongue like the water-justice image he so often alluded to.
The Selma to Montgomery March would be the last big, nonviolent demonstration for civil rights. While these demonstrations—and television’s broadcast of them into our living rooms, had clearly moved the federal government to enact major pieces of legislation, they could not erase racism and patience was running thin. More violent groups took over the fight and suffering citizens in the ghettos of the cities vented their frustration in riots coast to coast. Also, the focus of educated whites—especially the younger generation–turned from civil rights to opposing the war in Vietnam.
James Baldwin Debates William F. Buckley at Cambridge University February 18, 1965 (00:59:00)
Thanks to a student’s suggestion this is a recent addition to the course syllabus. And a good one. While a formal debate is a particular kind of speech—for and against a specific proposition, it is certainly worth examining, especially when the debaters are well-respected and articulate individuals like Baldwin and Buckley. Buckley seems to have the tougher challenge, especially given the timing of the debate—after years of violent reactions to peaceful civil rights demonstrations. He has to oppose the proposition that the American dream comes at the expense of the American Negro. He also follows Baldwin who does a magnificent job of telling what it’s like to live as a Negro in the United States and how a Black man’s reality is formed by 400 years of denigration and subjugation at the hands of whites in his country. But he also appreciates what this subjugation of the Negro does to the whites in the country—especially those in the South. He has credibility, but he also has the sympathy of the audience. He treats the audience with respect and is easy to like and believe; whereas, Buckley comes across as both pompous and abstract. He cites books and a few statistics, but nothing personal. Moreover, Baldwin who is following his notes keeps coming back to the proposition, Buckley seems unmindful of it. He also speaks for only about half the time as Baldwin. A reflection of the difficulty of his position or his conceding the match to the more powerful opponent? This is unclear to me. But there’s no doubt who’s the crowd favorite and the winner of the debate. As the commentator says after Baldwin’s speech, the lengthy standing ovation that Baldwin got was unprecedented in this famous debate forum’s long history.
Buck Benedict 