Question

why from a historical perspective was there so much social change in the 1960’s?

Answer 1

The Tumultuous 1960s

The 1960s was a decade of hope, change, and war that witnessed an important shift in American culture. Citizens from all walks of life sought to expand the meaning of the American promise. Their efforts helped unravel the national consensus, and laid bare a far more fragmented society. As a result, people from a wide range of ethnic groups attempted to reform American society to make it more equitable.

The Fight for Civil Rights

The African American Civil Rights Movement made significant progress in the 1960s. While Congress played a role by passing the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and the Civil Rights Act of 1968, the actions of civil rights groups were instrumental in forging new paths, pioneering new techniques and strategies, and achieving breakthrough successes. Civil rights activists engaged in sit-ins, freedom rides, and protest marches, and registered African American voters. Despite the movement’s many achievements, however, change remained slow, and many grew frustrated with the failure of the government to alleviate poverty, and the persistence of violence against African Americans, particularly the tragic 1968 assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. Many African Americans in the mid- to late 1960s adopted the ideology of Black Power, which promoted their work within their own communities to redress problems without the aid of whites.

Although the African American Civil Rights Movement was the most prominent of the crusades for racial justice, other ethnic minorities also worked to seize their piece of the American dream during the promising years of the 1960s. Many were influenced by the African American cause and often used similar tactics. The Mexican American Civil Rights Movement, led largely by Cesar Chavez, also made significant progress at this time. The emergence of the Chicano Movement signaled Mexican Americans’ determination to seize their political power, celebrate their cultural heritage, and demand their citizenship rights.

Women’s Rights, Sexual Liberation, and the the Counter-Culture

By the 1960s, a generation of white Americans raised in prosperity, and steeped in the culture of conformity of the 1950s, had come of age. However, many of these baby boomers (those born between 1946 and 1964) rejected the conformity and luxuries that their parents had provided. These young, middle-class Americans, especially those fortunate enough to attend college when many of their working-class and African American contemporaries were being sent to Vietnam, began to organize to fight for their own rights and end the war that was claiming the lives of so many. Influenced and inspired by the Civil Rights Movement, organizations and student groups formed across the country to protest the Vietnam War, advocate for women’s rights, and stand up against discrimination faced by lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) people.

As groups like the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) and the National Organization of Women (NOW) asserted their rights and strove for equality for themselves and others, they upended many accepted norms and set groundbreaking social and legal changes in motion. Many of their successes continue to be felt today, while other goals remain unfulfilled. American Indians, LGBTQ people, and women organized to change discriminatory laws and pursue government support for their rights; others, disenchanted with the status quo, distanced themselves from white, middle-class America by forming their own countercultures centered on a desire for peace, the rejection of material goods and traditional morality, concern for the environment, and drug use in pursuit of spiritual revelations. These groups, whose aims and tactics posed a challenge to the existing state of affairs, often met with hostility from individuals, local officials, and the U.S. government alike. Still, they persisted, determined to further their goals and secure for themselves the rights and privileges to which they were entitled as American citizens.

The War in Vietnam and Turmoil at Home

The United States became more embroiled in international politics in the 1960s, striving to prevent the spread of communism and maintain its position as a world superpower. The country’s role in Vietnam revealed the limits of military power and the contradictions of U.S. foreign policy. Its increasing support for the Vietnam War also led to a steady rise in dissatisfaction and active protest at home, especially from student-led groups around the country.

In 1963, Lyndon Johnson brought to his presidency a vision of a Great Society in which everyone could share in the opportunities that the United States offered for a better life, and in which the words “liberty and justice for all” would have real meaning. His social programs, investments in education, support for the arts, and commitment to civil rights changed the lives of countless people and transformed society in many ways. However, Johnson’s insistence on maintaining American commitments in Vietnam, a policy begun by his predecessors, hurt both his ability to realize his vision of the Great Society and his support among the American people. Kennedy’s assassination in 1963, and the assassinations five years later of Martin Luther King, Jr., and Robert F. Kennedy, made it dramatically clear that not all Americans shared this vision of a more inclusive democracy

Civil Rights vs. “Law and Order”

The Nixon administration did not prioritize civil rights to the extent of the previous Kennedy and Johnson administrations. Public support for civil rights had peaked in the mid-1960’s, galvanized by Martin Luther King ‘s leadership and media coverage of overt repression in the south. However, violent urban protests, which first broke out in the summer of 1965, and recurred occasionally for the rest of the decade, sparked a conservative backlash in the public opinion of white citizens. A majority of fearful white Americans began to prioritize “law and order” over the advancements of civil rights. Nixon sought a politically viable stance on civil rights, promising a return to law and order while simultaneously offering improved educational and business opportunities to African Americans. Nixon’s presidency thus saw the continuation of some of the civil rights progress set in motion by previous administrations, even as he courted conservative voters.

Public School Integration

The Nixon years witnessed the first large-scale integration of public schools in the south. Nixon sought a middle way between the segregationists (those supporting school segregation), and liberal Democrats who supported integration. He supported integration in principle, but he was opposed to the use of busing (using bus systems to transport African American students to previously all-white school districts and vice versa) to force integration. Nixon’s goals were partly political; he hoped to retain the support of southern conservatives, many of whom had voted Republican for the first time in the 1964 and 1968 elections. These southern voters had been alienated from the Democratic party by Kennedy and Johnson’s civil rights legislation; to capitalize on this, Nixon tried to get the issue of desegregation out of the way with as little damage as possible.

Soon after Nixon’s inauguration, he appointed Vice President Spiro Agnew to lead a task force to work with local leaders—both white and black—to form a plan for integrating local schools. Agnew had little interest in the work, so most of it was done by Labor Secretary George Shultz. The task force’s plan made federal aid and official meetings with President Nixon available as rewards for school committees who complied with desegregation plans. By September of 1970, fewer than 10% of African American children were attending segregated schools. Many whites reacted angrily to busing and forced integration, sometimes protesting and rioting. Nixon opposed busing personally, but enforced court orders requiring its use.

Affirmative Action

In addition to desegregating public schools, Nixon implemented the Philadelphia Plan in 1970—the first significant federal affirmative action program. The Philadelphia Plan was based on an earlier plan developed in 1967 by the Office of Federal Contract Compliance and the Philadelphia Federal Executive Board. Executive Order 11246 put the Philadelphia Plan into effect, and Department of Labor Assistant Secretary for Wage and Labor Standards Arthur Fletcher was in charge of implementing it.

The plan required government contractors in Philadelphia to hire minority workers, meeting certain hiring goals by specified dates. It was intended to combat institutionalized discrimination in specific skilled building trade unions that prevented equitable hiring of African Americans. The plan was quickly extended to other cities. The Philadelphia Plan was challenged in the lawsuit Contractors’ Association of Eastern Pennsylvania v. Shultz, et al, but the court upheld the plan and the Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal.

Equal Rights Amendment

Nixon’s civil rights efforts also included his endorsement of the Equal Rights Ammendment (ERA). The ERA was a proposed amendment to the United States Constitution that outlawed any form of legal discrimination based on sex. In 1972, it passed both houses of Congress and went to the state legislatures for ratification. The ERA failed to receive the requisite number of ratifications before the final deadline mandated by Congress of June 30, 1982 expired, so it was not adopted.