Review for Final Examination
History 419: American Social and
Intellectual History
Examination Date: December 11, 2008
The Presidential Election of 1928.
New York Governor Alfred E. Smith
(1873 - 1944)
Herbert Hoover 1929-33
Herbert Hoover, Financing Relief Efforts (1931)
Main Points:
1. The best way to help people during times of national difficulty is
through mutual self-help and voluntary giving.
My own conviction is strongly that if we break down this sense of
responsibility of individual generosity to individual and mutual selfhelp in the country in time of national difficulty and if we start
appropriations of this character we have not only impaired
something infinitely valuable in the life of the American people but
have struck at the roots of self-government. (p. 109)
Herbert Hoover, Financing Relief Efforts (1931)
2. Federal aid to the hungry and poor encourages expectations of future
paternal care and weakens Americans’ self-reliant character. It also
weakens Americans’ willingness to help each other and give to each
other, and thus enfeebles the bonds of common brotherhood.
Quotation of President Grover Cleveland by President Herbert Hoover: The
friendliness and charity of our countrymen can always be relied upon to
relieve their fellow citizens in misfortune. This has been repeatedly and
quite lately demonstrated. Federal aid in such cases encouraged the
expectation of paternal care on the part of the Government and weakens
the sturdiness of our national character, while it prevents the indulgence
among our people of that kindly sentiment and conduct which
strengthens the bonds of a common brotherhood. (p. 110)
President Herbert Hoover: The help being daily extended by neighbors, by
local and national agencies, by municipalities, by industry and a great
multitude of organizations throughout the country today is many times
any appropriation yet proposed. The opening of the doors of the Federal
Treasury is likely to stifle this giving and thus destroy far more resources
than the proposed charity from the Federal Government. (p. 110)
Roosevelt consciously abandoned the term
“progressive” and chose instead to employ
“liberal” to define himself and his
administration. In so doing, he transformed
“liberalism” from a shorthand for weak
government and laissez-faire economics into
belief in an activist, socially conscious
state, an alternative both to socialism and to
unregulated capitalism. (Foner, The Story of
American Freedom, pp. 201-204.)
Redefining Liberalism
Freedom, Hoover insisted, meant unfettered
economic opportunity for the enterprising
individual. Far from being an element of liberty,
the quest for economic security was turning
Americans into “lazy parasites” dependent on the
state. For the remainder of his life, Hoover
continued to call himself a “liberal,” even though,
he charged, the word had been “polluted and
raped of all its real meanings.” (Foner, The Story
of American Freedom, p. 205.)
Socialist Party Platform (1932)
Norman Mattoon Thomas
Socialist Party Platform (1932)
Norman Mattoon Thomas (1884-1968)
• Took over leadership of the Socialist Party after the death of
Eugene Debs in 1926.
• Was the party’s presidential candidate six times.
• Polled his highest vote in 1932 with 880,000 votes.
• Some members of the socialist party were: W.E.B. DuBois,
Margaret Sanger, and Helen Keller.
“Democratic Socialism," is defined by the Socialist Party as “a
political and economic system with freedom and equality for
all, so that people may develop to their fullest potential in
harmony with others.” The party further states that it is
“committed to full freedom of speech, assembly, press, and
religion and to a multi-party system” and that the ownership
and control of the production and distribution of goods “should
be democratically controlled public agencies, cooperatives, or
other collective groups.”
(source: http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1669.html)
Socialist Party Platform (1932)
Main Points
1. Socialists feel there are many flaws with the capitalist system,
which is now in the process of breaking down, resulting in
human suffering.
“We are facing a breakdown of the capitalist
system…Unemployment and poverty are inevitable products of
the present system.”
2. The Socialist Party believes that workers are exploited by a
capitalist economy.
“Under capitalism the few own our industries. The many do the
work. The wage earners and farmers are compelled to give a
large part of the product of their labor to the few. The many in
the factories, mines, shops, offices and on the farms obtain but a
scanty income and are able to buy back only a part of the goods
that can be produced in such abundance by our mass
industries.” (http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1669.html)
Socialist Party Platform (1932)
3. By voting for the Socialist Party you can help remove the
struggles that the capitalist system has created.
“The Socialist Party is to-day the one democratic party of the
worker whose program would remove the causes of class
struggles, class antagonisms, and social evils inherent in the
capitalist system.”
“[The Socialist Party] proposes to transfer the principal
industries of the country from private ownership and
autocratic, cruelly inefficient management to social
ownership and democratic control…It proposes the following
measures…”
The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism; but under
the name of liberalism, they will adopt every fragment of the
Socialist program until America will one day be a Socialist nation
without knowing how it happened.
The Socialist Party Platform of 1932
Programs Adopted by the Roosevelt Administration
A federal appropriation of $5,000,000,000 for immediate relief for those in need
to supplement state and local appropriations.
Federal Emergency Relief Act (FERA), May 12, 1933
A federal appropriation of $5,000,000,000 for public works and roads,
reforestation, slum clearance, and decent homes for the workers by the federal
government, states, and cities.
Public Works Administration (PWA), established by the National Industrial Recovery
Act (NIRA), May 17, 1933
Civilian Conservation Corps (Reforestation) Act (CCC), March 31, 1933
Home Owners Loan Corp. (HOLC), established by the Home Owners Refinancing Act,
April 13, 1933
Other agencies
Legislation providing for the acquisition of land, buildings, and equipment
necessary to put the unemployed to work producing food, fuel, and clothing, and
for the erection of housing for their own use.
Various experimental communities were established toward these ends.
The six-hour day and the five-day work-week without a reduction in wages.
The Black bill for the establishment of a thirty-hour week was not passed by Congress.
A comprehensive and efficient system of free public employment agencies.
Each state now maintains such offices throughout its jurisdiction.
A compulsory system of unemployment compensation with adequate benefits,
based upon contributions by the government and by employers.
Provided by the Social Security Act, 1936, with additional contributions by employees.
Old age pensions for men and women sixty years of age and over.
Provided by the Social Security Act, 1936, for those sixty-five years of age and over.
Health and maternity insurance.
Provided by the Social Security Act, 1936.
Improved systems of workmen's compensation and accident insurance.
Senate bill 2793, introduced May 9, 1935, by Senator Wagner, culminated in passage by
Congress of the Wagner Act, a comprehensive labor-management act.
The abolition of child labor.
Statutory education requirements and minimum work age laws.
Government aid to farmers and small homeowners to protect them against
mortgage foreclosure and a moratorium on sales for nonpayment of taxes by
destitute farmers and unemployed workers.
Agricultural Adjustment Act (AAA), March 16, 1933
Farm Credit Administration (FCA), March 27, 1933
Federal National Mortgage Association (FNMA), 1938
Federal Housing Administration (FHA)
HOLC
Adequate minimum wage laws
Established by the National Recovery Administration (NRA), created by NIRA, May 17,
1933. In 1935, the NRA was found to be unconstitutional by the untied States Supreme
Court. Nonetheless, minimum wage limits still exist.
Source: http://www.drfurfero.com/books/231book/ch03f1.html
Four Freedoms
Franklin D. Roosevelt
(1941)
Franklin D. Roosevelt
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Born: Jan 30, 1882 in Hyde Park, New York
Education: Attended Harvard University and Columbia Law School
Married Eleanor Roosevelt in 1905
Elected into New York Senate in 1910
Served under President Wilson as Assistant Secretary of the Navy
In the summer of 1921 he was stricken with polio and lost most of the use of his legs
1928 he became Governor of New York
Took Presidency at the depth of the Great Depression and served as the 32nd President from
1933-1945
He was elected President in November of 1932 and in March of 1933 there were 13,000,000
unemployed.
New Deal-carious social programs including Social Security, and new control on banks and
public utilities
Died: at the age of 63 on April 12, 1945 in Warm Springs, Georgia
1. The American way of life is being
threatened!
•
“Every realist knows that the democratic way of life is at this moment
being' directly assailed in every part of the world--assailed either by arms,
or by secret spreading of poisonous propaganda by those who seek to
destroy unity and promote discord in nations that are still at peace.”
• “During sixteen long months this assault has blotted out the whole pattern
of democratic life in an appalling number of independent nations, great
and small. The assailants are still on the march, threatening other nations,
great and small. “
• “No realistic American can expect from a dictator’s peace international
generosity, or return of true independence, or world disarmament, or
freedom of expression, or freedom of religion-or even good business.”
2. The future and safety of our
country lies outside our own borders
• “I find it necessary to report that the future and the safety of our country
and of our democracy are overwhelmingly involved in events far beyond
our borders.”
• “Armed defense of democratic existence is now being gallantly waged in
four continents. If that defense fails, all the population and all the
resources of Europe, Asia, Africa and Australasia will be dominated by the
conquerors. Let us remember that the total of those populations and their
resources in those four continents greatly exceeds the sum total of the
population and the resources of the whole of the Western Hemispheremany times over.”
3. America is unprepared for war and must
increase production of munitions and war
supplies.
•
•
•
•
“When the dictators, if the dictators, are ready to make war upon us, they will not
wait for an act of war on our part.”
“In times like these it is immature--and incidentally, untrue--for anybody to brag
that an unprepared America, single-handed, and with one hand tied behind its
back, can hold off the whole world.”
“The immediate need is a swift and driving increase in our armament
production…I also ask this Congress for authority and for funds sufficient to
manufacture additional munitions and war supplies of many kinds, to be turned
over to those nations which are now in actual war with aggressor nations.”
“I recommend that we make it possible for those nations to continue to obtain war
materials in the United States.”
4. We cannot expect
freedom from a
dictator.
"Those, who would give up
essential liberty to
purchase a little temporary
safety, deserve neither
liberty nor safety."
“Their only interest is in a
new one-way international
law, which lacks mutuality
in its observance, and,
therefore, becomes an
instrument of oppression.”
5. We will not be intimidated by
dictators
• “We will not be intimidated by the threats of
dictators that they will regard as a breach of
international law and as an act of war our aid
to the democracies which dare to resist their
aggression. Such aid is not an act of war, even
if a dictator should unilaterally proclaim it so
to be.”
6. We seek a world based upon four
human freedoms.
• “In the future days, which we seek to make secure, we look forward
to a world founded upon four essential human freedoms.”
• “The first is freedom of speech and expression--everywhere in the
world.”
• “The second is freedom of every person to worship God in his own
way--everywhere in the world.”
• “The third is freedom from want--which, translated into world
terms, means economic understandings which will secure to every
nation a healthy peacetime life for its inhabitants-everywhere in the
world.”
• “The fourth is freedom from fear--which, translated into world
terms, means a world-wide reduction of armaments to such a point
and in such a thorough fashion that no nation will be in a position
to commit an act of physical aggression against any neighbor-anywhere in the world.”
Questions to consider
• Were Roosevelt’s critics fair in charging him with
sneaking the United States into WWII?
• Why should the United States be “the arsenal of
democracy,” as Roosevelt called it in an earlier
speech?
• Entry into the war helped pull our country out of
the depression. Do you think it was worth it?
• If Roosevelt were President today, how do you
think he would handle our present situation with
terrorists?
Harry S. Truman, The Truman Doctrine (1947)
Background
• Harry S. Truman was born in Lamar, Missouri on May 8, 1884, the son of
John Anderson Truman and Martha Ellen (Young) Truman.
• From 1905 to 1911, Truman served in the Missouri National Guard.
• When the United States entered World War I in 1917, he helped organize
the 2nd Regiment of Missouri Field Artillery, which was quickly called into
Federal service as the 129th Field Artillery and sent to France. Truman was
promoted to Captain and given command of the regiment's Battery D.
• On June 28, 1919, Truman married Bess Wallace, whom he had known
since childhood. Their only child, Mary Margaret, was born on February
17, 1924.
• Truman was elected in 1922, to be one of three judges of the Jackson
County Court.
• In 1934, Truman was elected to the United States Senate.
Harry S. Truman, The Truman Doctrine (1947)
More Background
• In July 1944, Truman was nominated to run for Vice President with
President Franklin D. Roosevelt. On January 20, 1945, he took the vicepresidential oath, and after President Roosevelt's unexpected death only
eighty-two days later on April 12, 1945, he was sworn in as the nations'
thirty-third President.
• Truman's presidency was marked throughout by important foreign policy
initiatives. Central to almost everything Truman undertook in his foreign
policy was the desire to prevent the expansion of the influence of the
Soviet Union.
• He meet with Joseph Stalin in Potsdam Germany, to discuss postwar
occupation of Germany, the Japanese forces, and use of the atomic bomb.
Harry S. Truman, The Truman Doctrine (1947)
• In 1948, Truman won reelection. His defeat had been widely expected and
often predicted, but Truman's energy in undertaking his campaign and his
willingness to confront issues won a plurality of the electorate for him. His
famous "Whistlestop" campaign tour through the country has passed into
political folklore, as has the photograph of the beaming Truman holding
up the newspaper whose headline proclaimed, "Dewey Defeats Truman."
• Truman left the presidency and retired to
Independence in January 1953
• Harry S. Truman died on December 26, 1972.
Bess Truman died on October 18, 1982.
They are buried side by side in the Library's courtyard.
Harry S. Truman, The Truman Doctrine (1947)
Main Point #1
• The situation is dire.
“The gravity of the situation which confronts the
world today necessitates my appearance before a
joint session of the Congress.”
Harry S. Truman, The Truman Doctrine (1947)
Main Point #2
• The U.S. must be involve in world affairs.
“The foreign policy and the national security of this
country are involved.”
“We shall not realize our objectives, however, unless we
are willing to help free peoples to maintain their free
institutions and their national integrity against
aggressive movements that seek to impose upon
them totalitarian regimes.”
“I believe that it must be the policy of the United States
to support free peoples who are resisting attempted
subjugation by armed minorities or by outside
pressures.”
Harry S. Truman, The Truman Doctrine (1947)
Main Point #3
• There are only two sides
“One way of life is based upon the will of the majority, and is
distinguished by free institutions, representative
government, free elections, guarantees of individual
liberty, freedom of speech and religion, and freedom from
political oppression.”
“The second way of life is based upon the will of a minority
forcibly imposed upon the majority. It relies upon terror
and oppression, a controlled press and radio, fixed
elections, and the suppression of personal freedoms.”
Us v. Them (Wagy)
Harry S. Truman, The Truman Doctrine (1947)
Main Point #4
• It is up to us.
“We must take immediate and resolute action.”
“The free peoples of the world look to us for
support in maintaining their freedoms.”
“The seeds of totalitarian regimes are nurtured by
misery and want. They spread and grow in the evil
soil of poverty and strife. They reach their full
growth when the hope of a people for a better life
has died.”
“We must keep that hope alive. “
Harry S. Truman, The Truman Doctrine (1947)
References
• "Harry S. Truman- "The Truman Doctrine""
American Rhetoric: Harry S. Truman- "The
Truman Doctrine" American Rhetoric. 12 Nov.
2008
<http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches
/harrystrumantrumandoctrine.html>.
• Truman: HST Biography. Harry S. Truman
Library and Museum. 12 Nov. 2008
<http://www.trumanlibrary.org/hst-bio.htm>.
J. Edgar Hoover
1895-1972
Background
• Born January 1, 1895 in Washington, D. C.
• Parents: Dickerson and Anna Hoover
• Hoover did not obtain a birth certificate until he was
43, which fueled suspicions, in and out of the
bureau, that he was of African-American descent – a
family out of Mississippi tried to prove these
allegations, but failed.
• He kept detailed records on himself, teachers, and
family members starting at a young age.
• At age 11, started his own newspaper, The Weekly
Review, that he sold to family and friends for 1 cent.
Background continued…
• His school nickname was “Speed” because he
thought fast and talked fast.
• Hoover’s father, Dickerson, spent the last eight
years of his life in an asylum. His cause of
death was listed as “melancholia” – clinical
depression.
• 1916 – graduated with a law degree from
George Washington University Law School.
• Hoover became a Freemason in 1920.
Background continued…
• Hoover’s failure to marry
and his constant
companionship with Clyde
Tolson, led to many rumors
about his sexuality.
• Clyde Tolson was the sole
heir to Hoover’s estate and
was also buried next to
Hoover.
• Hoover was also an avid dog
lover.
Head of the FBI
• Hoover joined the Bureau of Investigation, later known
as the FBI, in 1921.
• In 1924 at the age of 29, Hoover was appointed acting
Director of the BOI and by the end of the year he was
officially named Director.
• Hoover remained the Director of the FBI until his
death on May 2, 1972 at the age of 77.
• The FBI Headquarters in Washington, D.C. is named
after Hoover. Because of the controversial nature of
Hoover's legacy, there have been periodic proposals to
rename it.
Head of the FBI
• During his reign over the FBI, Hoover built an
efficient crime-detection agency, established a
centralized fingerprint file, a crime laboratory and a
training institution for police.
• He dictated every aspect of his agents’ lives from
who their friends should or should not be, who they
should or should not marry, what organizations they
could or could not join; decided where they would
live; monitored their morals; even told them what to
wear and what they could weigh; and bestowed
praise and awards, blame and punishments, when he
decided they were due.
Head of the FBI
• The FBI, under Hoover, collected information on all
America's leading politicians. Known as Hoover's secret files,
this material was used to influence their actions. It was later
claimed that Hoover used this incriminating material to
make sure that the eight presidents that he served under,
would be too frightened to sack him as director of the FBI..“
• Presidents Harry Truman, John F. Kennedy and Lyndon
Johnson each considered firing Hoover but concluded that
the political cost of doing so would be too great. Richard
Nixon twice called in Hoover with the intent of firing him,
but both times he changed his mind when meeting with
Hoover.
Head of the FBI
• Hoover ignored the existence of organized crime in the U.S.
until famed muckraker Jack Anderson exposed the
immense scope of the Mafia's organized crime network. It
has been suggested that Hoover did not pursue the Mafia
because they had incriminating evidence (photos) against
him in respect to his sexual orientation.
• Despite all of these allegations, during his long career of
public service, Director Hoover received three presidential
awards, sundry citations by Congress, and following his
death was the first civil servant in U.S. history to lie in state
in the Rotunda of the U.S. Capitol.
•
•
•
•
Political Views
Conservative
Anti-communist
Against suffrage for women
Opposed the Civil Rights movement
Intended Audience
• Hoover delivered “The Communist Menace”
before the House Committee on Un-American
Activities on March 26, 1947.
Major Issues of the Time
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
1st Red Scare (1917-1920)
Espionage Act of 1917
Sedition Act of 1918
The Palmer Raids
House Committee on Un-American Activities
WW II
Iron Curtain in Europe
"Uncle Sam bids good riddance
to the deportees"
(from J. Edgar Hoover's
memorabilia and scrapbook
in the National Archives).
• The more famous of the
Palmer raids was
December 21, in which
249 people were
dragged from their
homes, forcibly put on
board a ship and
deported.
The Communist Menace
Main Points
1. The Communist Party of the United States
intends to destroy the American
businessman, take over our government,
and throw the whole world into revolution.
 “The Communist movement in the United
States…stands for the destruction of free
enterprise, and it stands for the creation of a
“Soviet of the United States” and ultimate world
revolution.”
The Communist Menace
Main Points continued…
2. The American programs to help society such as,
social security, veterans’ benefits, and welfare
are all communist ideas used to lure the support
of unsuspecting citizens.
“The American progress which all good citizens seek,
such as old-age security, houses for veterans, child
assistance and a host of others is being adopted as
window dressing by the Communists to conceal their
true aims and entrap gullible followers.”
The Communist Menace
Main Points continued…
3. The greatest threat of communism is not how many Communists are in this
country, but their ability to insert themselves into positions of power
and their ability to persuade through lies and deception. Americans
should FEAR the communist infiltration of their government and
society.

“What is important is the claim of the Communists themselves that
for every party member there are 10 others ready, willing, and able
to do the party’s work. Herein lies the greatest menace of
communism. For these people who infiltrate and corrupt various
spheres of American life. So rather than the size of the Communist
Party the way to weigh its true importance is by testing its
influence, its ability to infiltrate.”

“…When the Communists overthrew the Russian government there
was one Communist for every 2,277 persons in Russia. In the
United States today there is one Communist for every 1,814 persons
in the country…”
Historical Significance
• 2nd Red Scare (1947-1957)
• 1947 - Ronald Reagan and wife Jane Wyman provide to the FBI
names of SAG members believed to be communist sympathizers.
• 1947 - Top Hollywood executives decide not to employ individuals
who refused to answer questions about communist infiltration of
the film industry
• McCarthyism starts(1950): Sen. Joseph P. McCarthy says he has a
list of 205 communists in the State Department.
• 1950 - California Legislature passes a bill requiring state employees
to sign a loyalty oath.
• 1953 - Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, convicted of conspiring to
commit espionage on behalf of the Soviet Union, are executed.
Dwight D. Eisenhower
• Born in Denison, Texas on Oct 14, 1890
• Went through the Military Academy at West Point in
1911
• Served as Supreme Allied Commander in the European
Theatre in World War II; promoted to General of the
Army
• Served as the Chief of Staff of the Army from 1945 to
1948
• In 1948, became president of Columbia University
• In 1950, became Supreme Commander of NATO
• Elected 34th President in 1953; served until 1961
Farewell Address (Eisenhower)
Main Points
• America must act as the peace keepers and safeguarders of the free world.
– “America’s leadership and prestige depend, not
merely upon our unmatched material progress, riches
and military strength, but on how we use our power in
the interests of world peace and human betterment.”
– “Any failure traceable to arrogance, or our lack of
comprehension or readiness to sacrifice would inflict
upon us grievous hurt both at home and abroad.”
Farewell Address (Eisenhower)
Main Points
• We must guard against the hostile ideology.
– “We face a hostile ideology- global in scope, atheistic
in character, ruthless in purpose, and insidious in
method. Unhappily the danger it poses promises to be
of indefinite duration.”
– “To meet it successfully, there is called for, not so
much the emotional and transitory sacrifices of crises,
but rather those which enable us to carry forward
steadily, surely, and without complaint the burdens of
a prolonged struggle- with liberty at stake.”
Farewell Address (Eisenhower)
Main Points
• We must guard against imbalance in our economic and
military spending.
– “But each proposal must be weighed in the light of
broader consideration: the need to maintain balance in
and among national programs…Good judgment seeks
balance and progress, lack of it eventually finds imbalance
and frustration.”
– “A vital element in keeping our peace is our military
establishment.”
– “Our military organization today bears little relation to that
known of any of my predecessors in peacetime, or indeed
by the fighting men of World War II or Korea.”
Farewell Address (Eisenhower)
Main Points:
We must guard against the military-industrial complex in our democratic government.
• “The total influence- economic, political, even spiritual- is felt in every city, every
State house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative
need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave
implications.”
• “In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of
unwarranted influence…by the military-industrial complex.
• “The potential for disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.”
• “We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or
democratic processes.”
• “In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized,
complex, and costly.”
• “Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop has been overshadowed by task
forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields.”
• “Partly because of the huge cost involved, a government contract becomes virtually
a substitute for intellectual curiosity.”
• “We must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could
itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.”
Farewell Address (Eisenhower)
Main Points
• We must safe-guard the resources of
democracy for future generations.
– “we- you and I, and our government- must avoid
the impulse to live only for today, plundering, for
our own ease and convenience, the precious
resources of tomorrow.”
– “We want democracy to survive for all generations
to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of
tomorrow.”
Farewell Address (Eisenhower)
Main Points
• We must guard against only resolving
differences with military conflict.
– “this world of ours, ever growing smaller, must
avoid becoming a community of dreadful fear and
hate, and be, instead, a proud confederation of
mutual trust and respect.”
– “Together we must learn how to compose
differences, not with arms, but with intellect and
decent purpose.”
Farewell Address (Eisenhower)
Questions
• What factions does Eisenhower fear will
attempt to influence and control government?
• How did Eisenhower resolve bring the
countries of the world together?
Brown v. Board of Education
1954
Thurgood Marshall
• Born on July 2, 1908 in Baltimore, Maryland
• He attended Frederick Douglass High School. Later he
graduated from Lincoln University and Howard University Law
School in Washington, D. C..
• In 1934, Marshall was appointed an assistant to special
counsel Charles Hamilton Houston, who worked for the
Baltimore branch of the NAACP.
• He won thirty-two out of thirty-five cases taken to the
Supreme Court
• In June of 1967, President Lyndon B. Johnson nominated
Judge Marshall to become an Associate Justice of the
Supreme Court. With this nomination, Marshall became the
first African-American to serve as a Justice of the Supreme
Court.
Main Point #1
• Segregated public schools do not uphold the
fourteenth amendment.
-”segregated public schools are not equal and
cannot be made equal.”
-”Their opponents, just as certainly, were
antagonistic to both the letter and the spirit of
the amendments and wished them to have
the most limited effect.”
Main point #2
• Segregated schools hinder African Americans from
proper education.
-”To separate them from others of similar age and
qualifications solely because of their race generates a
feeling of inferiority as to their status in the
community that may affect their hearts and minds in
a way unlikely ever to be undone.
-” it is doubtful that any child may reasonably be
expected to succeed in life is he is denied the
opportunity of an education”
Main Point #3
• Separate but equal has no place in public
schools.
-”Separate educational facilities are inherently
unequal.”
-”Education of white children was largely in the
hands of private groups, whereas education of
negros was almost non-existent, and
practically all of the race was illiterate.”
Questions to Consider….
• Why could separate not be equal?
• How does the court propose to desegregate
the nation’s schools?
Martin Luther King, Jr.
Letter from a Birmingham Jail
Background
•
•
•
Martin Luther King, Jr., was born on January 15, 1929 in Atlanta, Georgia. He was the son of Reverend
Martin Luther King Sr. and Alberta Williams King.
Dr. King married Coretta Scott on June 18, 1953. Together they had four children.
In 1957 he was elected president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, an organization formed
to provide new leadership for the now burgeoning civil rights movement. The ideals for this organization he
took from Christianity; its operational techniques from Gandhi. In the eleven-year period between 1957
and 1968, King traveled over six million miles and spoke over twenty-five hundred times, appearing
wherever there was injustice, protest, and action; and meanwhile he wrote five books as well as numerous
articles. In these years, he led a massive protest in Birmingham, Alabama, that caught the attention of
the entire world, providing what he called a coalition of conscience. and inspiring his "Letter from a
Birmingham Jail", a manifesto of the Negro revolution; he planned the drives in Alabama for the
registration of Negroes as voters; he directed the peaceful march on Washington, D.C., of 250,000 people
to whom he delivered his address, "l Have a Dream", he conferred with President John F. Kennedy and
campaigned for President Lyndon B. Johnson; he was arrested upwards of twenty times and assaulted at
least four times; he was awarded five honorary degrees; was named Man of the Year by Time magazine in
1963; and became not only the symbolic leader of American blacks but also a world figure.
At the age of thirty-five, Martin Luther King, Jr., was the youngest man to have received the Nobel Peace
Prize. When notified of his selection, he announced that he would turn over the prize money of $54,123 to
the furtherance of the civil rights movement.
-nobleprize.org
"Martin Luther King Jr. was photographed by Alabama cops following his February
1956 arrest during the Montgomery bus boycott. The historic mug shot, taken when
King was 27, was discovered in July 2004 by a deputy cleaning out a Montgomery
County Sheriff's Department storage room. It is unclear when the notations 'DEAD'
and '4-4-68' were written on the picture."
In late March 1968, King went to Memphis, Tennessee in support of the black sanitary
public works employees, who had been on strike since March 12 for higher wages and
better treatment. On April 3, King returned to Memphis and addressed a rally, delivering
his “I’ve been to the Mountaintop” address at Mason Temple (Church of God in Christ,
Inc. - World Headquarters). King’s flight to Memphis had been delayed by a bomb threat
against his plane. In the close his last speech, in reference to the bomb threat, King said
the following:
“And then I got to Memphis. And some began to say the threats, or talk about the threats
that were out. What would happen to me from some of our sick white brothers? Well, I
don’t know what will happen now. We’ve got some difficult days ahead. But it doesn’t
matter with me now. Because I’ve been to the mountaintop. And I don’t mind. Like
anybody, I would like to live a long life. Longevity has its place. But I’m not concerned
about that now. I just want to do God’s will. And He’s allowed me to go up to the
mountain. And I’ve looked over. And I’ve seen the promised land. I may not get there with
you. But I want you to know tonight, that we, as a people, will get to the promised land.
And I’m happy, tonight. I’m not worried about anything. I’m not fearing any man. Mine
eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord.”
Memphis Hotel 1968
On April 4, 1968, while standing on the 2nd floor balcony of the Lorraine Motel in Memphis, Dr.
King was assassinated. The assassination led to a nationwide wave of riots in more than 60
cities. Escaped convict James Earl Ray was captured two months later and charged with King’s
death.
The White Minister’s Good Friday
Statement, April 12, 1963
• However, we are now confronted by a series of demonstrations by
some of our Negro citizens, directed and led in part by outsiders.
We recognize the natural impatience of people who feel that their
hopes are slow in being realized. But we are convinced that these
demonstrations are unwise and untimely.
• Just as we formerly pointed out that "hatred and violence have no
sanction in our religious and political traditions," we also point out
that such actions as incite to hatred and violence, however
technically peaceful those actions may be, have not contributed to
the resolution of our local problems. We do not believe that these
days of new hope are days when extreme measures are justified in
Birmingham.
• When rights are consistently denied, a cause should be pressed in
the courts and in negotiations among local leaders, and not in the
streets. We appeal to both our white and Negro citizenry to observe
the principles of law and order and common sense.
1. Why am I here? I am here because
injustice is here.
• I think I should indicate why I am here In Birmingham, since you have been
influenced by the view which argues against "outsiders coming in." I have
the honor of serving as president of the Southern Christian Leadership
Conference, an organization operating in every southern state, with
headquarters in Atlanta, Georgia…So I, along with several members of my
staff, am here because I was invited here I am here because I have
organizational ties here.
• But more basically, I am in Birmingham because injustice is here.
• Moreover, I am cognizant of the interrelatedness of all communities and
states. I cannot sit idly by in Atlanta and not be concerned about what
happens in Birmingham. Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice
everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in
a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all
indirectly. Never again can we afford to live with the narrow, provincial
"outside agitator" idea. Anyone who lives inside the United States can
never be considered an outsider anywhere within its bounds.
2. You condemn demonstrations, yet refuse to see the failure in
your own proposed solutions. These demonstrations are
justified.
•
You deplore the demonstrations taking place In Birmingham. But your statement, I am sorry to say,
fails to express a similar concern for the conditions that brought about the demonstrations.
•
It is unfortunate that demonstrations are taking place in Birmingham, but it is even more
unfortunate that the city’s white power structure left the Negro community with no alternative.
•
In any nonviolent campaign there are four basic steps: collection of the facts to determine whether
injustices exist; negotiation; self-purification; and direct action. We have gone through an these
steps in Birmingham. There can be no gainsaying the fact that racial injustice engulfs this
community. Birmingham is probably the most thoroughly segregated city in the United States. Its
ugly record of brutality is widely known. Negroes have experienced grossly unjust treatment in the
courts. There have been more unsolved bombings of Negro homes and churches in Birmingham
than in any other city in the nation. These are the hard, brutal facts of the case. On the basis of
these conditions, Negro leaders sought to negotiate with the city fathers. But the latter consistently
refused to engage in good-faith negotiation.
•
Then, last September, came the opportunity to talk with leaders of Birmingham’s economic
community. In the course of the negotiations, certain promises were made by the merchants - for
example, to remove the stores humiliating racial signs. On the basis of these promises, the
Reverend Fred Shuttlesworth and the leaders of the Alabama Christian Movement for Human
Rights agreed to a moratorium on all demonstrations. As the weeks and months went by, we
realized that we were the victims of a broken promise. A few signs, briefly removed, returned; the
others remained.
3. We are left with no other alternative. Direct non violent
protests are the only way to seek immediate action.
•
•
•
•
You may well ask: "Why direct action? Why sit-ins, marches and so forth? Isn’t negotiation a better path?"
You are quite right in calling, for negotiation. Indeed, this is the very purpose of direct action. Nonviolent
direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly
refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer
be ignored. My citing the creation of tension as part of the work of the nonviolent-resister may sound
rather shocking. But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word "tension." I have earnestly opposed
violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth. Just
as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the
bondage of myths and half-truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal, we
must we see the need for nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men
rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and
brotherhood.
The purpose of our direct-action program is to create a situation so crisis-packed that it will inevitably
open the door to negotiation. I therefore concur with you in your call for negotiation. Too long has our
beloved Southland been bogged down in a tragic effort to live in monologue rather than dialogue.
In your statement you assert that our actions, even though peaceful, must be condemned because they
precipitate violence. But is this a logical assertion? Isn’t this like condemning a robbed man because his
possession of money precipitated the evil act of robbery? Isn’t this like condemning Socrates because his
unswerving commitment to truth and his philosophical inquiries precipitated the act by the misguided
populace in which they made him drink hemlock? Isn’t this like condemning Jesus because his unique Godconsciousness and never-ceasing devotion to God’s will precipitated the evil act of crucifixion? We must
come to see that, as the federal courts have consistently affirmed, it is wrong to urge an individual to
cease his efforts to gain his basic constitutional rights because the quest may precipitate violence. Society
must protect the robbed and punish the robber.
If this philosophy had not emerged, by now many streets of the South would, I am convinced, be flowing
with blood. And I am further convinced that if our white brothers dismiss as "rabble-rousers" and "outside
agitators" those of us who employ nonviolent direct action, and if they refuse to support our nonviolent
efforts, millions of Negroes will, out of frustration and despair, seek solace and security in black-nationalist
ideologies a development that would inevitably lead to a frightening racial nightmare.
4. Freedom is fought for, it is not easily
given.
• One of the basic points in your statement is that the action that I and my
associates have taken in Birmingham is untimely.
• My friends, I must say to you that we have not made a single gain civil
rights without determined legal and nonviolent pressure. Lamentably, it is
an historical fact that privileged groups seldom give up their privileges
voluntarily.
• We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily
given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. Frankly, I
have yet to engage in a direct-action campaign that was "well timed" in
the view of those who have not suffered unduly from the disease of
segregation. For years now I have heard the word "Wait!" It rings in the
ear of every Negro with piercing familiarity. This "Wait" has almost always
meant “Never." We must come to see, with one of our distinguished
jurists, that "justice too long delayed is justice denied."
• Oppressed people cannot remain oppressed forever. The yearning for
freedom eventually manifests itself, and that is what has happened to the
American Negro.
5. The prevalent social injustices so readily imposed on the black
community must come to an end without further delay. The long
endured “Wait” is over.
•
We have waited for more than 340 years for our constitutional and God-given rights. The nations of Asia and
Africa are moving with jetlike speed toward gaining political independence, but we stiff creep at horse-and-buggy
pace toward gaining a cup of coffee at a lunch counter. Perhaps it is easy for those who have never felt the stinging
dark of segregation to say, "Wait." But when you have seen vicious mobs lynch your mothers and fathers at will
and drown your sisters and brothers at whim; when you have seen hate-filled policemen curse, kick and even kill
your black brothers and sisters; when you see the vast majority of your twenty million Negro brothers smothering
in an airtight cage of poverty in the midst of an affluent society; when you suddenly find your tongue twisted and
your speech stammering as you seek to explain to your six-year-old daughter why she can’t go to the public
amusement park that has just been advertised on television, and see tears welling up in her eyes when she is told
that Funtown is closed to colored children, and see ominous clouds of inferiority beginning to form in her little
mental sky, and see her beginning to distort her personality by developing an unconscious bitterness toward white
people; when you have to concoct an answer for a five-year-old son who is asking: "Daddy, why do white people
treat colored people so mean?"; when you take a cross-county drive and find it necessary to sleep night after night
in the uncomfortable corners of your automobile because no motel will accept you; when you are humiliated day
in and day out by nagging signs reading "white" and "colored"; when your first name becomes "nigger," your
middle name becomes "boy" (however old you are) and your last name becomes "John," and your wife and
mother are never given the respected title "Mrs."; when you are harried by day and haunted by night by the fact
that you are a Negro, living constantly at tiptoe stance, never quite knowing what to expect next, and are plagued
with inner fears and outer resentments; when you no forever fighting a degenerating sense of "nobodiness" then
you will understand why we find it difficult to wait. There comes a time when the cup of endurance runs over, and
men are no longer willing to be plunged into the abyss of despair. I hope, sirs, you can understand our legitimate
and unavoidable impatience.
•
More and more I feel that the people of ill will have used time much more effectively than have the people of
good will. Human progress never rolls in on wheels of inevitability; it comes through the tireless efforts of men
willing to be co-workers with God, and without this hard work, time itself becomes an ally of the forces of social
stagnation. We must use time creatively, in the knowledge that the time is always ripe to do right. Now is the time
to make real the promise of democracy…
6. There are 2 types of laws, just and
unjust
•
•
•
You express a great deal of anxiety over our willingness to break laws. This is certainly a legitimate
concern. Since we so diligently urge people to obey the Supreme Court’s decision of 1954
outlawing segregation in the public schools, at first glance it may seem rather paradoxical for us
consciously to break laws. One may won ask: "How can you advocate breaking some laws and
obeying others?" The answer lies in the fact that there fire two types of laws: just and unjust. I
would be the Brat to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility
to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree
with St. Augustine that "an unjust law is no law at all“
Now, what is the difference between the two? How does one determine whether a law is just or
unjust? A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust
law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of St. Thomas
Aquinas: An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law. Any law
that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust. All
segregation statutes are unjust because segregation distort the soul and damages the personality. It
gives the segregator a false sense of superiority and the segregated a false sense of inferiority.
Let us consider a more concrete example of just and unjust laws. An unjust law is a code that a
numerical or power majority group compels a minority group to obey but does not make binding
on itself. This is difference made legal. By the same token, a just law is a code that a majority
compels a minority to follow and that it is willing to follow itself. This is sameness made legal.
6. Continued… Examples of just and
unjust laws.
•
•
•
Sometimes a law is just on its face and unjust in its application. For instance, I have been arrested
on a charge of parading without a permit. Now, there is nothing wrong in having an ordinance
which requires a permit for a parade. But such an ordinance becomes unjust when it is used to
maintain segregation and to deny citizens the First Amendment privilege of peaceful assembly and
protest.
A law is unjust if it is inflicted on a minority that, as a result of being denied the right to vote, had
no part in enacting or devising the law. Who can say that the legislature of Alabama which set up
that state’s segregation laws was democratically elected? Throughout Alabama all sorts of devious
methods are used to prevent Negroes from becoming registered voters, and there are some
counties in which, even though Negroes constitute a majority of the population, not a single Negro
is registered. Can any law enacted under such circumstances be considered democratically
structured?
We should never forget that everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was "legal" and everything the
Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was "illegal." It was "illegal" to aid and comfort a Jew in
Hitler’s Germany. Even so, I am sure that, had I lived in Germany at the time, I would have aided
and comforted my Jewish brothers. If today I lived in a Communist country where certain principles
dear to the Christian faith are suppressed, I would openly advocate disobeying that country’s
antireligious laws.
7. We learn of civil disobedience throughout
history. It is not a new “extreme.”
•
Of course, there is nothing new about this kind of civil disobedience. It was evidenced
sublimely in the refusal of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego to obey the laws of
Nebuchadnezzar, on the ground that a higher moral law was at stake. It was practiced
superbly by the early Christians, who were willing to face hungry lions and the excruciating
pain of chopping blocks rather than submit to certain unjust laws of the Roman Empire. To a
degree, academic freedom is a reality today because Socrates practiced civil disobedience. In
our own nation, the Boston Tea Party represented a massive act of civil disobedience.
•
But though I was initially disappointed at being categorized as an extremist, as I continued to
think about the matter I gradually gained a measure of satisfaction from the label. Was not
Jesus an extremist for love: "Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them
that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you." Was not
Amos an extremist for justice: "Let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like an
ever-flowing stream." Was not Paul an extremist for the Christian gospel: "I bear in my body
the marks of the Lord Jesus." Was not Martin Luther an extremist: "Here I stand; I cannot do
otherwise, so help me God." And John Bunyan: "I will stay in jail to the end of my days before
I make a butchery of my conscience." And Abraham Lincoln: "This nation cannot survive half
slave and half free." And Thomas Jefferson: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that an
men are created equal ..." So the question is not whether we will be extremists, but what
kind of extremists we will be. Will we be extremists for hate or for love? Will we be extremist
for the preservation of injustice or for the extension of justice?
8. It is just to openly break unjust laws, especially if
one is willing to accept the consequences.
• I hope you are able to see the distinction I am trying to point out. In no
sense do I advocate evading or defying the law, as would the rabid
segregationist. That would lead to anarchy. One who breaks an unjust law
must do so openly, lovingly, and with a willingness to accept the penalty. I
submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is
unjust and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to
arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality
expressing the highest respect for law.
• As in so many past experiences, our hopes bad been blasted, and the
shadow of deep disappointment settled upon us. We had no alternative
except to prepare for direct action, whereby we would present our very
bodies as a means of laying our case before the conscience of the local
and the national community. Mindful of the difficulties involved, we
decided to undertake a process of self-purification. We began a series of
workshops on nonviolence, and we repeatedly asked ourselves : "Are you
able to accept blows without retaliating?" "Are you able to endure the
ordeal of jail?"
9. “I have been greatly disappointed
with the white moderate.”
• I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s
great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White
Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate,
who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a
negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace
which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with
you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of
direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the
timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by a mythical
concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a
"more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of
good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from
people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering
than outright rejection.
10. We should protest, but we should
do so non-violently.
•
•
•
I began thinking about the fact that stand in the middle of two opposing forces in
the Negro community. One is a force of complacency, made up in part of Negroes
who, as a result of long years of oppression, are so drained of self-respect and a
sense of "somebodiness" that they have adjusted to segregation; and in part of a
few middle class Negroes who, because of a degree of academic and economic
security and because in some ways they profit by segregation, have become
insensitive to the problems of the masses.
The other force is one of bitterness and hatred, and it comes perilously close to
advocating violence. It is expressed in the various black nationalist groups that are
springing up across the nation, the largest and best-known being Elijah
Muhammad’s Muslim movement. Nourished by the Negro’s frustration over the
continued existence of racial discrimination, this movement is made up of people
who have lost faith in America, who have absolutely repudiated Christianity, and
who have concluded that the white man is an incorrigible "devil.“
I have tried to stand between these two forces, saying that we need emulate
neither the "do-nothingism" of the complacent nor the hatred and despair of the
black nationalist. For there is the more excellent way of love and nonviolent
protest. I am grateful to God that, through the influence of the Negro church, the
way of nonviolence became an integral part of our struggle.
Questions
• Why are non-violent demonstrations the best
choice?
• Who would you have sided with and why?
The Negro Family
(1965)
Patrick Moynihan
Patrick Moynihan
Born: March 16,1927 Tulsa, Oklahoma
Died: March 26,2003 New York, New York
Nationality: American
Political party: Democrat
Spouse: Liza Moynihan
Alma mater: Tufts University
Patrick
Moynihan
United States Senator
from New York
In office:
1977-2001
He was a Kennedy delegate at the
1960 Democratic National Convention.
Moynihan was an Assistant Secretary
of Labor for policy in the Kennedy
Administration and in the early part of
the Johnson Administration.
In that capacity, he did not have
operational responsibilities,
allowing him to devote all of his
time to trying to formulate
national policy for what would
become the War on Poverty. He
had a small staff including Paul
Barton, Ellen Broderick, and
Ralph Nader (who at 29 years of
age, hitchhiked to Washington,
D.C. and got a job working for
Moynihan in 1963).
1. At the heart of deterioration of the fabric of
Negro society is the deterioration of the Negro
family.
“ It is the fundamental source of the weakness of the Negro
community at the present time.”
“ The role of the family in shaping character and ability is so
pervasive as to be easily overlooked. The family is the basic
social unit of American life: it is the basic socializing unit….”
“ Nearly a quarter of Negro women living in cities who have ever
married are divorced, separated, or are living apart from
their husbands… As a direct result of this high rate of divorce,
separation, and desertion a very large percent of Negro
families are headed by female.”
2. There are unquestionable events that worked
against the emergence of a father figure.
“ With the emancipation of the slaves, the Negro American
family began to form in the United States on a widespread
scale.”
“ The Negro was given liberty, but not equality.”
“The Negro male, particularly in the South, became an object of
intense hostility, and attitude unquestionably based in some
measure of fear.”
“When Jim Crow made its appearance towards the end of the
19th century, it may be speculated that it was the Negro male
who was must humiliated.”
3. Unemployment and poverty has
contributed to the crisis of the Negro
family.
“ The impact of unemployment on the Negro family, and particularly on the
Negro male is the least understood.”
“ There is little analysis because there has been almost no inquiry.
Unemployment, for whites and nonwhites alike, has on the whole been
treated as an economic phenomenon,”
“The impact of poverty on Negro family structure is no less obvious, although
again it may not be widely acknowledged.”
“During times when jobs were reasonably plentiful…the Negro family become
stronger and more stable. As jobs became more and more difficult to find,
the stability of the family became more and more difficult to maintain. In
essence, the Negro community has been forced into a matriarchal
structure which, because it is so out of line with the rest of the American
society, seriously retards the progress of the group as a whole, and
imposes a crushing burden on the Negro male, and in consequence, on a
great many Negro women, as well.”
4. A National Effort
• [A] national effort towards the problems of
Negro Americans must be directed towards
the question of family structure. The object
should be to strengthen the Negro family so as
to enable it to raise and support its members
as do other families…
Energy and National Goals
1979
Jimmy Carter
Jimmy Carter…
• Was born and grew up in Georgia in the tiny southwest hamlet of Plains.
• Attended Georgia Tech and Georgia Southwestern State University
before entering the United States Naval Academy where he received a
generic Bachelor of Science degree in 1946.
• Married Rosalynn Smith in 1946 and had four children together.
• Served two terms in the Georgia Senate and as the 76th Governor of
Georgia, from 1971 to 1975.
• Served as the 39th President of the United States and was the 1st to be
born in a hospital.
• Created the cabinet-level departments: Department of Energy and the
Department of Education.
• After leaving office, he founded The Carter Center with his wife and
became a key figure in Habitat for Humanity.
• Was the recipient of the 2002 Nobel Peace Prize.
• Is the second-oldest living former President, three months and nineteen
days younger than George H.W. Bush.
Americans lack of confidence was a growing crisis and
fundamental threat to American democracy.
• “We can see this crisis in the growing doubt about the
meaning of our own lives and in the loss of a unity of
purpose for our Nation.”
• “The erosion of our confidence in the future is threatening
to destroy the social and the political fabric of America.”
Self indulgence and consumption weakened the
American spirit and the individual sense of purpose.
• “Human identity is no longer defined by what one does,
but by what one owns.”
• “…piling up material goods cannot fill the emptiness of
lives which have no confidence or purpose.”
• “The productivity of American workers is actually
dropping , and the willingness of Americans to save for
the future has fallen below that of all other people in the
Western world.”
Gradual changes over the last generation
formed a gap between citizens and
government that had never been so wide.
• “Looking for a way out of this crisis, our people have
turned to the Federal Government and found it isolated
from the mainstream of our Nation’s life. Washington,
D.C., has become an island.”
“Energy will be the immediate test of
our ability to unite [the] nation.”
• “We are the generation that will win the war on the energy
problem and in that process rebuild the unity and confidence
of America.”
• “On the battlefield of energy we can win for our Nation a new
confidence, and we can seize control again of our common
destiny.”
• “..the solution of our energy crisis can also help us to conquer
the crisis of the spirit in our country. It can rekindle our sense
of unity, our confidence in the future, and give our Nation and
all of us individually a new sense of purpose.”
Questions to Consider
Why did Carter’s speech provoke
such a hostile response?
SUPPORT FOR CONTRAS
RONALD REAGAN
1984
BACKGROUND - REAGAN
Feb. 6, 1911
Ronald Wilson Reagan is born in Tampico, Ill., to Nelle Wilson Reagan and John Edward
Reagan. The Reagans already had one previous son, Neil.
1926
Reagan begins work as a lifeguard at Lowell Park, near Dixon. He was credited with saving 77
lives during the seven summers he worked there.
1928-1932
Reagan attends Eureka (Illinois) College, where he majored in economics and sociology.
During his sophomore year, Reagan becomes interested in drama. Reagan also serves as
student body president.
1937
Reagan enlists in the Army Reserve as a private but is soon promoted to 2nd lieutenant in
the Officers Reserve Corps of the Cavalry. An agent for Warner Brothers "discovers"
Reagan in Los Angeles and offers him a seven-year contract.
1942
Reagan is called to active duty by the Army Air Force. He is assigned to the 1st Motion
Picture Unit in Culver City, Calif., where he makes over 400 training films.
1945
After the war, Reagan resumes his acting career, which continues for 20 years. Reagan
makes 53 motion pictures and one television movie during his career.
1962
Reagan officially changes his party registration to Republican.
Oct. 27, 1964
Reagan gives a television address supporting Republican presidential candidate Barry
Goldwater. The speech, called "A Time for Choosing," launches Reagan's political career.
1966
Reagan defeats incumbent California Gov. Edmund G. "Pat" Brown in a landslide.
1968
Reagan makes a tentative run for the presidency, waiting until the Republican National
Convention in Miami to announce his candidacy. He later joins in supporting nominee
Richard Nixon.
Nov. 20, 1975
Reagan announces his candidacy for the Republican nomination for president.
1976
He loses the Republican Party's nomination to Gerald Ford, but a strong showing sets the
stage for Reagan's election in 1980. In the meantime, Reagan works on his ranch, gives
speeches, does radio commentaries and writes a weekly newspaper column.
Nov. 13, 1979
Reagan announces his candidacy for president. After winning the party's nomination, he
chooses George Bush as his running mate. The platform calls for "a new consensus with all
those across the land who share a community of values embodied in these words: family,
work, neighborhood, peace, and freedom."
Nov. 4, 1980
Reagan is elected president in a landslide victory over incumbent Jimmy Carter.
Jan. 20, 1981
Reagan is sworn in as the 40th president of the United States. On the same day, Iran
releases the 52 remaining hostages who had been held at the U.S. embassy in Tehran
for 444 days.
March 30, 1981
Reagan is shot in the chest upon leaving a Washington hotel but makes a full recovery
after surgery. Three other people, including Reagan press secretary James Brady, are
wounded in the assassination attempt. John Hinckley Jr. is charged but found not guilty
by reason of insanity.
June 8, 1982
In a speech to the British House of Commons, Reagan predicts "the march of freedom
and democracy...will leave Marxism-Leninism on the ash heap of history ..."
.
March 8, 1983
In a speech to the National Association of Evangelicals, Reagan warns against ignoring "the
aggressive impulses of an evil empire," the U.S.S.R.
Sept. 1, 1983
A Soviet fighter downs Korean Air Lines flight (KAL 007), killing all 269 people aboard,
including 61 Americans. Reagan denounces it as a "crime against humanity."
Oct. 23, 1983
A suicide truck bomber crashes into the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, killing 241 members
of the peacekeeping force.
Oct. 25, 1983
U.S. troops invade Grenada to oust Marxists who had overthrown the government, and to
protect U.S. medical students on the Caribbean island.
Jan. 16, 1984
Reagan calls for a return to arms talks with the U.S.S.R.
May 9, 1984
In a televised speech, Reagan urges helping the Contra "freedom fighters" in Nicaragua.
Aug. 11, 1984
While checking a microphone prior to a radio broadcast, Reagan jokes: "...I've signed
legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. We begin bombing in five minutes."
NICARAGUAN REVOLUTION
• Nicaraguan Revolution, uprising and civil war, beginning in 1978, that overthrew
the long dictatorship of the Somoza family in Nicaragua and replaced it with a
leftist government. The rebellion was led by a Marxist guerrilla force, the
Sandinista National Liberation Front (FSLN), known as the Sandinistas. With
widespread popular support, the group deposed Anastasio Somoza Debayle and
took power in July 1979.
• Nicaragua’s new rulers attempted to institute revolutionary political, social,
and economic changes. The revolutionary government achieved some success
in land reform, literacy, and health programs, but their efforts were hampered
by their own inexperience, by severe economic problems, and by strong
opposition from the United States. By the mid-1980s the government was
focusing on fighting U.S.-supported rebels trying to overthrow it. In 1990, with
the economy on the verge of collapse, the Sandinistas lost national elections,
ending Nicaragua’s revolutionary experiment but leaving the country
fundamentally changed.
MAIN POINT #1
• U.S.A’s Foreign Policy will not be attained by good
will and noble aspirations alone.
• “ In the last 15 years, the growth of Soviet military power has
meant a radical change in the nature of the world we live in.
Now, this does not mean, as some would have us believe, that
we're in imminent danger of nuclear war. We're not".
• “As long as we maintain the strategic balance and make it
more stable by reducing the level of weapons on both sides,
then we can count on the basic prudence of the Soviet leaders
to avoid that kind of challenge to us”.
“They are presently challenging us with a different kind of
weapon: subversion and the use of surrogate forces, Cubans, for
example. We've seen it intensifying during the last 10 years, as the
Soviet Union and its surrogates move to establish control over
Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Angola, Ethiopia, South Yemen,
Afghanistan, and recently, closer to home, in Nicaragua and now
El Salvador. It's the fate of this region, Central America, that I want
to talk to you about tonight”.
“The issue is our effort to promote democracy and economic
well-being in the face of Cuban and Nicaraguan aggression, aided
and abetted by the Soviet Union. It is definitely not about plans
to send American troops into combat in Central America. Each
year, the Soviet Union provides Cuba with $4 billion in assistance,
and it sends tons of weapons to foment revolution here in our
hemisphere”.
MAIN POINT #2
• Democracy and Economic Well-Being
• “The issue is our effort to promote democracy and economic well-being in
the face of Cuban and Nicaraguan aggression, aided and abetted by the
Soviet Union. It is definitely not about plans to send American troops into
combat in Central America. Each year, the Soviet Union provides Cuba
with $4 billion in assistance, and it sends tons of weapons to foment
revolution here in our hemisphere”.
• “The defense policy of the United States is based on a simple premise: We
do not start wars. We will never be the aggressor. We maintain our
strength in order to deter and defend against aggression, to preserve
freedom and peace. We help our friends defend themselves”.
MAIN POINT #3
Central America Our Doorstep
• “Central America is a region of great importance to the United
States. And it is so close: San Salvador is closer to Houston,
Texas, than Houston is to Washington, DC. Central America is
America. It's at our doorstep, and it's become the stage for a
bold attempt by the Soviet Union, Cuba, and Nicaragua to install
communism by force throughout the hemisphere”.
• “When half of our shipping tonnage and imported oil passes
through Caribbean shipping lanes, and nearly half of all our
foreign trade passes through the Panama Canal and Caribbean
waters, America's economy and well-being are at stake”.
MAIN POINT #4
• Central American Refugees
• “Right now in El Salvador, Cuban-supported aggression has
forced more than 400,000 men, women, and children to flee
their homes. And in all of Central America, more than 800,000
have fled—many, if not most, living in unbelievable hardship.
Concerns about the prospect of hundreds of thousands of
refugees fleeing Communist oppression to seek entry into our
country are well-founded”.
MAIN POINT #5
• Right Thing to Do and Commitment
• “We can and must help Central America. It's in our national interest to
do so, and morally, it's the only right thing to do. But helping means
doing enough—enough to protect our security and enough to protect
the lives of our neighbors so that they may live in peace and democracy
without the threat of Communist aggression and subversion. This has
been the policy of our administration for more than 3 years”.
• But making this choice requires a commitment from all of us—our
administration, the American people, and the Congress. So far, we have
not yet made that commitment. We've provided just enough aid to avoid
outright disaster, but not enough to resolve the crisis, so El Salvador is
being left to slowly bleed to death. Part of the problem, I suspect, is not
that Central America isn't important, but that some people think our
administration may be exaggerating the threat we face. Well, if that's
true, let me put that issue to rest.
MAIN POINT #6
• The Sandinistas are [Cuba’s Cubans] Agents for
U.S.S.R.
• “The Sandinistas, who rule Nicaragua, are Communists whose relationship and
ties to Fidel Castro of Cuba go back a quarter of a century. A number of the
Sandinistas were trained in camps supported by Cuba, the Soviet bloc, and the
PLO. It is important to note that Cuba, the Sandinistas, the Salvadorian
Communist guerrillas, and the PLO have all worked together for many years”.
• “Castro cynically instructed them in the ways of successful Communist
insurrection. He told them to tell the world they were fighting for political
democracy, not communism. But most important, he instructed them to form a
broad alliance with the genuinely democratic opposition to the Somoza regime.
Castro explained that this would deceive Western public opinion, confuse
potential critics, and make it difficult for Western democracies to oppose the
Nicaraguan revolution without causing great dissent at home”.
•“The Sandinistas engaged in anti-Semitic acts against the Jewish community, and they
persecuted the Catholic Church and publicly humiliated individual priests”.
•“Nicaraguan Bishop Pablo Antonio Vega recently said, “We are living with a totalitarian
ideology that no one wants in this country”—this country being Nicaragua”.
•“the moment the Sandinistas took over the internal repression of democratic groups, trade
unions, and civic groups began. Right to dissent was denied. Freedom of the press and
freedom of assembly became virtually nonexistent. There was an outright refusal to hold
genuine elections, coupled with the continual promise to do so. Their latest promise is for
elections by November 1984. In the meantime, there has been an attempt to wipe out an
entire culture, the Miskito Indians, thousands of whom have been slaughtered or herded
into detention camps, where they have been starved and abused. Their villages, churches,
and crops have been burned”.
•“The Sandinista rule is a Communist reign of terror. Many of those who fought alongside the
Sandinistas saw their revolution betrayed. They were denied power in the new government.
Some were imprisoned, others exiled. Thousands who fought with the Sandinistas have
taken up arms against them and are now called the contras. They are freedom fighters”.
“Shortly after taking power, the Sandinistas, in partnership with Cuba and the
Soviet Union, began supporting aggression and terrorism against El Salvador,
Honduras, Costa Rica, and Guatemala”.
“The role that Cuba has long performed for the Soviet Union is now also being
played by the Sandinistas. They have become Cuba's Cubans. Weapons,
supplies, and funds are shipped from the Soviet bloc to Cuba, from Cuba to
Nicaragua, from Nicaragua to the Salvadoran guerrillas”.
“As soon as I took office, we attempted to show friendship to the Sandinistas
and provided economic aid to Nicaragua. But it did no good. They kept on
exporting terrorism. The words of their official party anthem describe us, the
United States, as the enemy of all mankind. So much for our sincere but
unrealistic hopes that if only we try harder to be friends, Nicaragua would
flourish in the glow of our friendship and install liberty and freedom for their
people. The truth is, they haven't.… "
MAIN POINT #7
• El Salvador Compared to Nicaragua
Some argue that El Salvador has only political extremes—the violent left and
the violent right—and that we must choose between them. Well, that's just
not true. Democratic political parties range from the democratic left to center
to conservative.
Let me give another example of the difference between the two countries, El
Salvador and Nicaragua. The Government of El Salvador has offered amnesty to
the guerrillas and asked them to participate in the elections and democratic
processes. The guerrillas refused. They want to shoot their way into power and
establish totalitarian rule.
By contrast, the contras, the freedom fighters in Nicaragua, have offered to lay
down their weapons and take part in democratic elections, but there the
Communist Sandinista government has refused. That's why the United States
must support both the elected government of El Salvador and the democratic
aspirations of the Nicaraguan people.…
“The simple questions are: Will we support freedom in this hemisphere or not? Will we
defend our vital interests in this hemisphere or not? Will we stop the spread of
communism in this hemisphere or not? Will we act while there is still time”?
“There are those in this country who would yield to the temptation to do nothing. They
are the new isolationists, very much like the isolationists of the late 1930's who knew
what was happening in Europe, but chose not to face the terrible challenge history had
given them. They preferred a policy of wishful thinking, that if they only gave up one
more country, allowed just one more international transgression, … surely sooner or
later the aggressor's appetite would be satisfied. Well, they didn't stop the aggressors;
they emboldened them. They didn't prevent war; they assured it.”…
“It's up to all of us—the administration, you as citizens, and your representatives in the
Congress. The people of Central America can succeed if we provide the assistance I
have proposed. We Americans should be proud of what we're trying to do in Central
America, and proud of what, together with our friends, we can do in Central America to
support democracy, human rights, and economic growth while preserving peace so
close to home. Let us show the world that we want no hostile Communist colonies
here in the Americas—South, Central, or North.”…
WHAT HAPPENED AFTER SPEECH
Oct. 10, 1984
Congress outlaws funding for military aid to the Nicaragua Contras.
Jan. 20, 1985
Reagan, 73, begins a second term, making him the oldest president ever to be sworn in.
Nov. 13, 1986
Reagan admits sending some defensive weapons and spare parts to Iran but denies it was part of an arms-forhostages deal.
Nov. 25, 1986
National Security Adviser John Poindexter resigns and national security aide Col. Oliver North is fired in the widening
Iran-Contra affair. In a press conference, Attorney General Edwin Meese announces that $10-$30 million of profits
from the sale of U.S. arms to Iran had been diverted to the Nicaraguan Contras.
Feb. 26, 1987
The Tower Commission report on Iran-Contra concludes that Reagan's passive management style allowed his staff to
mislead him about the trade of arms to Iran for hostages held in Lebanon and to pursue a secret war against the
Nicaraguan government.
March 4, 1987
Reagan acknowledges a "mistake" in the Iran-Contra affair.
March 16, 1988
Oliver North, John Poindexter, and two others are indicted by a federal grand jury on charges of conspiring to
defraud the U.S. government by secretly providing funds and supplies to the Contra
February 1990
Reagan gives videotaped testimony in the Iran-Contra trial of former aide John Poindexter.
Reagan Doctrine
Reagan Doctrine, 1985
The “Reagan Doctrine” was used to characterize the Reagan administration’s (1981-1988) policy of supporting antiCommunist insurgents wherever they might be. In his 1985 State of the Union address, President Ronald Reagan
called upon Congress and the American people to stand up to the Soviet Union, what he had previously called the
“Evil Empire”:
"We must stand by all our democratic allies. And we must not break faith with those who are risking their lives—on
every continent, from Afghanistan to Nicaragua—to defy Soviet-supported aggression and secure rights which have
been ours from birth."
Breaking with the doctrine of “Containment," established during the Truman administration—President Ronald
Reagan’s foreign policy was based on John Foster Dulles’ “Roll-Back” strategy from the 1950s in which the United
States would actively push back the influence of the Soviet Union. Reagan’s policy differed, however, in the sense
that he relied primarily on the overt support of those fighting Soviet dominance. This strategy was perhaps best
encapsulated in NSC National Security Decision Directive 75. This 1983 directive stated that a central priority of the
U.S. in its policy toward the Soviet Union would be “to contain and over time reverse Soviet expansionism,”
particularly in the developing world. As the directive noted:
"The U.S. must rebuild the credibility of its commitment to resist Soviet encroachment on U.S. interests and
those of its Allies and friends, and to support effectively those Third World states that are willing to resist Soviet
pressures or oppose Soviet initiatives hostile to the United States, or are special targets of Soviet policy."
To that end, the Reagan administration focused much of its energy on supporting proxy armies to curtail Soviet
influence. Among the more prominent examples of the Reagan Doctrine’s application, in Nicaragua, the United
States sponsored the contra movement in an effort to force the leftist Sandinista government from power. And in
Afghanistan, the United States provided material support to Afghan rebels—known as the mujahadeen—helping
them end Soviet occupation of their country.
Andrew Sullivan
This Is a Religious War: September 11 was Only the
Beginning
Background Information:
Andrew Sullivan was born in England on August 10, 1963 and
is a renowned journalist in both the United Kingdom and the
U.S. He is the former editor of The New Republic for his
battling lifestyle between conservative Catholicism and active
gay lifestyle with HIV. He is also a pioneer in the genre of
Blog Journalism. Sullivan also briefly wrote for The New York
Times Journal. He is often compared to Camille Paglia,
another homosexual who argues from a non-leftist
perspective.
Historical Context:
This article was written after the attacks on September 11,
2001 on the Twin Towers in New York City. It was written in
response that people were not calling this a “religious war”
when he clearly saw that it was.
Andrew Sullivan
This Is a Religious War: September 11 was Only the Beginning
Main Points:
1. This is a religious war between Islamic Fundamentalism and faiths of all kinds that are at peace
with freedom and modernity.
“[T]his surely is a religious war, but not of Islam versus Christianity and Judaism. Rather, it is a war of
fundamentalism against faiths of all kinds that are at peace with freedom and modernity.”
Osama bin Laden: “The call to wage war against America was made because America has
spearheaded the crusade against the Islamic nation, sending tens of thousands of its troops to the
land of the two holy mosques over and above its meddling in its affairs and its politics and its support
of the oppressive, corrupt and tyrannical regime that is in control.” Our terrorism is “of the
commendable kind, for it is directed t the tyrants and the aggressors and the enemies of Allah.” “[O]ur
call is the call of Islam that was revealed to Muhammad. It is a call to all humankind. We have been
entrusted with good cause to follow in the footsteps of the messenger and to communicate his
message to all nations.”
2. Historically, Christianity has a worse record in the “use of religion for extreme repression, and
even terror…”
“From the Crusades to the Inquisition to the bloody religious wars of the 16th and 17th centuries,
Europe saw far more blood spilled for religion's sake than the Muslim world did. And given how
expressly nonviolent the teachings of the Gospels are, the perversion of Christianity in this respect
was arguably greater than bin Laden's selective use of Islam. But it is there nonetheless. It seems
almost as if there is something inherent in religious monotheism that lends itself to this kind of
terrorist temptation.”
Andrew Sullivan
This Is a Religious War: September 11 was Only the Beginning
Main Points:
3. We should not condescend to fundamentalism, no matter how much we may
disagree with it. Fundamentalism elevates and comforts, and it has attracted
millions of adherents for centuries. In the Fundamentalists’ world of “sin begets
sin,” they must attempt to coerce others to conform to God’s laws.
“The first mistake is surely to condescend to fundamentalism. We may disagree with it, but it has attracted
millions of adherents for centuries, and for a good reason. It elevates and comforts. It provides a sense of
meaning and direction to those lost in a disorienting world. The blind recourse to texts embraced as literal
truth, the injunction to follow the commandments of God before anything else, the subjugation of reason
and judgment and even conscience to the dictates of dogma: these can be exhilarating and
transformative. They have led human beings to perform extraordinary acts of both good and evil. And they
have an internal logic to them. If you believe that there is an eternal afterlife and that endless
indescribable torture awaits those who disobey God's law, then it requires no huge stretch of imagination
to make sure that you not only conform to each diktat but that you also encourage and, if necessary,
coerce others to do the same. The logic behind this is impeccable. Sin begets sin. The sin of others can
corrupt you as well. The only solution is to construct a world in which such sin is outlawed and punished
and constantly purged -- by force if necessary. It is not crazy to act this way if you believe these things
strongly enough. In some ways, it is crazier to believe these things and not act this way.”
Andrew Sullivan
This Is a Religious War: September 11 was Only the Beginning
Main Points:
4. Fundamentalist religions cannot exist alone in a single Person
Dostoyevsky’s Grand Inquisitor explains to Jesus: “these pitiful creatures are
concerned not only to find what one or the other can worship, but to find something
that all would believe in and worship; what is essential is that all may be together in
it. This craving for community of worship is the chief misery of every man individually
and of all humanity since the beginning of time.
This is the voice of fundamentalism. Faith cannot exist alone in a single person.
Indeed, faith needs others for it to survive -- and the more complete the culture of
faith, the wider it is, and the more total its infiltration of the world, the better.”
Andrew Sullivan
This Is a Religious War: September 11 was Only the Beginning
Main Points:
5. America has its struggle with fundamentalism
“America is not a neophyte in this struggle. The United States has seen several waves
of religious fervor since its founding. But American evangelicalism has always kept its
distance from governmental power. The Christian separation between what is God's
and what is Caesar's – drawn from the Gospels – helped restrain the fundamentalist
temptation. The last few decades have proved an exception, however. As modernity
advanced, and the certitudes of fundamentalist faith seemed mocked by an
increasingly liberal society, evangelicals mobilized and entered politics. Their faith
sharpened, their zeal intensified, the temptation to fuse political and religious
authority beckoned more insistently.”
Andrew Sullivan
This Is a Religious War: September 11 was Only the Beginning
Main Points:
6. Fundamentalists are reacting to the threat of the ever-changing modern world. Because
change sometimes contradicts the reality found in their ancient religious texts, they often
lash out against proponents or symbols of social change. Much of American and Western
culture represent social change to traditional societies, yet these cultures are in some ways
tempting. Thus, attacks against American and Western culture often are an acting out of an
internal conflict.
“The temptation of American and Western culture -- indeed, the very allure of such culture -- may well require a
repression all the more brutal if it is to be overcome. The transmission of American culture into the heart of what bin
Laden calls the Islamic nation requires only two responses -- capitulation to unbelief or a radical strike against it. There is
little room in the fundamentalist psyche for a moderate accommodation. The very psychological dynamics that lead
repressed homosexuals to be viciously homophobic or that entice sexually tempted preachers to inveigh against
immorality are the very dynamics that lead vodka-drinking fundamentalists to steer planes into buildings. It is not
designed to achieve anything, construct anything, argue anything. It is a violent acting out of internal conflict.”
“The critical link between Western and Middle Easter fundamentalism is surely the pace of social change. If you take your
beliefs from books written more than a thousand years ago, and you believe in these texts literal, then the appearance of
the modern world must terrify you.”
“If you believe that women should be consigned to polygamous, concealed servitude, then Manhattan must appear like
Gomorrah…It is not a big step to argue that such centers of evil should be destroyed or undermined as bin Laden does, or
to believe that destruction is somehow a consequence of their sin.”
Andrew Sullivan
This Is a Religious War: September 11 was Only the Beginning
Main Points:
7. Locke and our Founding Fathers advocated religious toleration
One central influence on the founders' political thought was John Locke, the English
liberal who wrote the now famous ''Letter on Toleration.'' In it, Locke argued that
true salvation could not be a result of coercion, that faith had to be freely chosen to
be genuine and that any other interpretation was counter to the Gospels. Following
Locke, the founders established as a central element of the new American order a
stark separation of church and state, ensuring that no single religion could use
political means to enforce its own orthodoxies.
We cite this as a platitude today without absorbing or even realizing its radical
nature in human history -- and the deep human predicament it was designed to
solve. It was an attempt to answer the eternal human question of how to pursue the
goal of religious salvation for ourselves and others and yet also maintain civil peace.
What the founders and Locke were saying was that the ultimate claims of religion
should simply not be allowed to interfere with political and religious freedom. They
did this to preserve peace above all -- but also to preserve true religion itself.
Andrew Sullivan
This Is a Religious War: September 11 was Only the Beginning
Main Points:
8. In this religious war, we are fighting for our Constitution and the principle of the
separation of politics and religion.
“What is really at issue here is the simple but immensely difficult principle of the
separation of politics and religion. We are fighting not for our country as such or for
our flag. We are fighting for the universal principles of our Constitution -- and the
possibility of free religious faith it guarantees. We are fighting for religion against
one of the deepest strains in religion there is. And not only our lives but our souls
are at stake.”
President Says Saddam Hussein
Must Leave Iraq Within 48 Hours
Remarks by the President in Address to the Nation (March 17,
2003).
George W. Bush
Bush: President Says Saddam Hussein Must Leave Iraq Within 48 Hours
Background:
After Iraq invaded and annexed Kuwait, the U.S. in
August 1990 President Bush appeared before a joint
session of Congress on September 11, 1990 and
announced that Saddam Hussein aggression would not
stand. After a brief war, Iraq was defeated and Kuwait
liberated. However, Saddam Hussein remained in power.
A condition of the peace treaty signed with Hussein was
that Iraq must disarm. Hussein violated the treaty and
UN Resolutions on multiple occasions, choosing instead
to conceal its weapon programs and defense
capabilities from United Nations weapons inspections.
On September 11, 2001, Al Qaeda attacked destroyed
New York’s World Trade Center, killing some three
thousand innocent victims.
Bush: President Says Saddam Hussein Must Leave Iraq Within 48 Hours
Main Points:
1. Iraq still has weapons of mass destruction, even though
they pledge to reveal and destroy them as a condition for
ending the Persian Gulf War of 1991. Iraq also harbors
terrorists, including al Qaeda.
2. FEAR: The United Nation’s Security Council has failed to live
up to its responsibilities to Saddam Hussein, but we must
confront him to avoid the danger of Iraq giving terrorists
chemical, biological or nuclear weapons to kill hundreds of
thousands of people in our country.
3. ULTIMATUM: If Saddam Hussein and his sons do not leave
Iraq within 48 hours, the United States will attack Iraq.
Bush: President Says Saddam Hussein Must Leave Iraq Within 48 Hours
Main Points:
4. “I urge every member of the Iraqi military and
intelligence services, if war comes, do not fight for a
dying regime that is not worth your own life.”
5. The American people should feel assured. Our
government is taking action to protect our homeland.
6. After the United States removes Saddam Hussein, the
Iraqi people “can set an example to all the Middle East
of a vital and peaceful and self-governing nation.
“[T]he greatest power of freedom is to overcome
hatred and violence, and turn the creative gifts of men
and women to the pursuits of peace.”
Bush: President Says Saddam Hussein Must Leave Iraq Within 48 Hours
Questions:
In the speech, President Bush stated, “The security of the world
requires disarming Saddam Hussein now.” Were sanctions
insufficient? The dangerous regimes of Iran and North Korea were
arguably further along in developing weapons of mass destruction.
What made Iraq different so as to require immediate disarmament?
Bush stated, “…the greatest power of freedom is to overcome hatred
and violence, and turn the creative gifts of men and women to the
pursuits of peace.” Has this happened? If not, why has this not
happened?
Bush: President Says Saddam Hussein Must Leave Iraq Within 48 Hours
Historical Significance:
Bush launched the long-anticipated invasion of Iraq on March 19, 2003. Saddam
Hussein’s vaunted military machine collapsed almost immediately. In less than
a month, Baghdad had fallen. Some nine months later, Hussein was captured.
Contrary to rosy predictions that the democracy would blossom in Iraq after the
removal of Hussein, Iraq became a seething cauldron of apparently endless
violence. Iraqi factions jockeyed murderously for political position in the postSaddam era. Iraqi insurgents, aided by militants drawn from other Islamic
nations, repeatedly attacked American troops, killing more soldiers during the
occupation than during the invasion itself. Meanwhile, the invasion and
subsequent unrest claimed the lives of as many as 17,000 Iraqi civilians. By
many accounts, Iraq today is near the brink of civil war. Arguably, U.S. military
in Iraq is now in the difficult position of being both a catalyst for the insurgency
and the only force keeping the country from outright civil war.
The United States’ image in many quarters around the world has been further
tarnished by the preemptive strike against Iraq. Revelations in April 2004 about
American abuse of Iraqi prisoners in Baghdad’s notorious Abu Ghraib prison
have further inflamed anti-American sentiment in Iraq and beyond.
Nevertheless, most Iraqis are not actively fighting the U.S., and instead desire
peace and security. The number of newspapers in Iraq has increased, and so
too has the number of Iraqi policemen and government soldiers. Meanwhile,
many Iraqi politicians are struggling to resolve deep-seated enmities and create
a viable democratic government.
Source: The American Pageant, 13th edition, pp. 1005-1006.
Documented civilian deaths from violence
77,847 – 84,812
Deaths in each week from 2003–2007
Deaths per day from gunfire / executions
Deaths per day from vehicle bombs
Refugees from Iraq have increased in
number since the US-led invasion into Iraq
in March 2003. An estimated 1.6-2.0
million people have fled the country. The
United Nations High Commissioner for
Refugees estimated in a report released in
November 2006 that more than 1.6 million
Iraqis had left Iraq since March 2003,
nearly 7 percent of the total population.
The BBC on 22 January 2007 placed the
refugee figure at 2 million.
http://costofwar.com/index-world-hunger.html
Many Iraqis are leaving their country.
Bush: President Says Saddam Hussein Must Leave Iraq Within 48 Hours
Historical Significance:
In Iran, a backlash response to the
United States’ invasion of Iraq has
resulted in the defeat of a more liberalleaning government and the rise to
power of a radical conservative
government that has aggressively
decided to develop nuclear weapons.
Mohammad Khatami
President of Iran from 1997-2005
BACKLASH IN IRAN: On 24 June 2005 Mahmoud Ahmadi Nejad
[mah-MOOD ah-mah-dih-nee-ZHAHD ] was elected as Iran's
president. Ahmadinejad swept to the presidential post with a
stunning 17,046,441 votes out of a total of 27,536,069 votes
cast in the runoff election. His rival and Expediency Council
Chairman Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani gained only 9,841,346.
Mahmoud
Ahmadi
Nejad
Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani
Iran's nuclear chief said that Iran has enriched
uranium up to 4.8 percent — the upper end of
the range needed to make fuel for reactors —
as it continues to defy U.S. and European
demands to stop enrichment.