9. MIDDLE-CLASS AMERICA TRIUMPHANT
|
| DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER |

Nixon during and after his
televised "Checkers speech" in
which he bared his soul to ward off a cruel (and
false) smear
by the Liberal New York Post about his campaign
finances
With the long period of peace that followed, he took up both
further military study and service as a staff officer in a variety of commands,
before being sent to the Philippines in 1935 to serve under General MacArthur, and the following year
receive the rank of Lt. Colonel. He
returned to the States at the end of 1939 where he again served as a staff
officer to various generals, finally attaining the rank of brigadier general in
1941, just prior to America's involvement in World War Two.
Thus far,
however, there was nothing notable about his service that suggested he would
one day find himself commanding the most important and final phase of a war in
Europe. Yet his administrative work and
well-recognized strategic mind impressed General Marshall. And his ability to move things forward in the
midst of personality clashes was what had him sent to London to take command of
operations there, at the time focused on North Africa, Sicily and then Italy.
But as already noted, it was his selection as commander of the
crossing of the English Channel and march across France, Belgium and the
Netherlands that secured his place in the history books as a battlefield
hero. And after the war, Truman brought
him on board as his Army Chief of Staff (Marshall had been sent to China to try
to work out some kind of cooperation between Chiang and Mao). And thus as the 1948 elections approached, it
was also that both the Republican and Democratic Parties courted him as a
possible candidate for the U.S. Presidency, something that Eisenhower
refused.
Instead, he accepted the offer to become Columbia University's
president, a strange calling considering the vast difference in mentalities
that existed between the scholarly and quite idealistic professors and the
quite pragmatic – and deeply religious Eisenhower. But Eisenhower was much more the scholar
– or at least man of well-thought-through ideals – than the country understood
about him at the time. He was very
active on the prestigious Council on Foreign Relations and a founder of the
American Assembly, an organization designed to bring together leaders from all
walks of American life to go over a broad range of political, economic and
social issues facing the country. Here Eisenhower developed from a starting
point of deep knowledge of military strategy and organization to a quite
sophisticated understanding of the broader world of business, economics, and
social-cultural matters.
Actually, Eisenhower
was vastly much brighter
than his Columbia University professors – many of whom disliked
Eisenhower intensely – and was learning to cultivate excellent working
relations
with American business leaders – whom liberal professors also tended to
distrust.
In 1950 he was appointed Supreme Commander of the North Atlantic
Treaty Organization – nonetheless retaining his position at Columbia until
sworn in as U.S. president in January of 1953.
This was an important appointment because Eisenhower could generate stronger
support in Congress for this peacetime organization and its operations than
could Truman, and at the same time could
leverage America's European allies to make a deeper material commitment (men
and money) so as not to make NATO a strictly American operation.
[1]"Dixiecrat" was a label applied to hard-core Southern
Democrats, also known as "yellow dog Democrats", because they claimed
that they would vote for a yellow dog for elective office before they would
ever vote for a Republican. The Republican Party was still identified in the
mind of Dixiecrat Southerners as the party of the hated Abraham Lincoln! Dixiecrats were reliable Democratic Party
voters under all circumstances. [2]The motto had actually appeared on American coinage since the
mid-1800s, although it would not appear on paper money until the 1950s.
Indeed, it would be during his presidency that the
words "under God" would be added to the Pledge of Allegiance in 1954, and "In God We
Trust" would be confirmed as the nation's motto in 1956.[2]
KOREAN ARMISTICE

Meeting
at Panmunjom 28 July 1953 between US Army General
Blackshear M. Bryan
and North Korean General Lee Sang Cho
the day after the Armistice
finally went into effect
U.N. troops at the Korean Demilitarized Zone (DMZ)
| McCARTHY FINALLY BROUGHT DOWN |
Edward R. Murrow takes on Joe McCarthy
Radio newsman of World War
Two fame, Edward R. Murrow,
turned to TV in 1951 with his own program, See
It Now.
In the spring of 1954 he devoted two of his programs to
exposing
the dangers of McCarthy and McCarthyism
Wisconsin Senator Joe McCarthy
on the attack against the
U.S. Army command. McCarthy is supposedly demonstrating
the full extent of the Communist infiltration into American
life
(with statistics completely fabricated
by himself
personally) even into the law firm of Joseph
Welch (seated
left).
Welch has been defending the US
Army against
McCarthy's accusations of its being full of Communists.
Army attorney Joseph Welch
to Senator Joseph McCarthy:
"Have you no sense of decency, sir?"
His response to a
McCarthy
smear of a young law partner as being a
Communist suspect.
| DIRECTIVES TO THE BOOMER: "CHALLENGE ALL AUTHORITY" |
So, the
Vet parents thought themselves to be very wise in teaching their children to
challenge all voices, all efforts of anyone, coming at them as "authority." They were to do their own thinking, come at
rational choices through using their own natural logic.
Tragically,
the Vets had fallen into typical Humanist thinking in presuming that
their Boomer children – by way of natural
human instinct – would come to hold the same social-spiritual values, and go at
life in the same way that they, their Vet parents, did. The Boomers would do so because supposedly
these values were instinctive to all humankind, values that anyone thinking
freely and clearly on such matters would necessarily come to hold.
On two counts, the Vets (as with all Humanists, ancient
as well as modern) would be making a huge mistake in their program. First of all, there was nothing "natural"
about how they, the Vets, were raised. Very precise circumstances had made them to
be the people they were: the hardships
of the Great Depression and the massive sacrifices they made during World War
Two. As a distinct generation, they were
very reflective of this particular development ... willing to sacrifice
personal interest in order to serve a higher social good. They had been forced into that
moral-spiritual position in order to survive.
And in doing so, they came to believe religiously that this was just a
natural instinct of all decent people.
As
for their highly pampered Boomer offspring, this generation had
come to understand life and its dynamics through a very different set of
circumstances, and would therefore understand life's "natural"
dynamics quite differently – in fact, very differently – than their
parents.
And
secondly, as Christians, the Vets should have known better than to
take up the religious idealism of Secular-Humanism, having been shown
repeatedly in long-standing Biblical Scripture – not to mention in the life
they had been required to live – that man's instincts are not naturally always
so beautiful, and that human Reason does not always bring things forward nobly,
but is often simply the tool by which people justify the worst kinds of
behavior. As Christians they should have
been acutely aware of the fact that original sin – not original goodness – was
what spiritually mature humans always ended up having to deal with constantly, especially
when that very sinful instinct came from themselves.
So
actually the Vets were themselves "brainwashing"
their children, with very interesting but very foolish Humanist Idealism. They were carefully shaping the
thought-processes of a rising generation so that when they reached adulthood,
they would finally begin to act on this training, training that had taught them
to challenge all social authority.
But the only social authority at hand for their Boomer offspring to challenge would
be the social authority of the American society and culture that their own
parents (and many generations before them) had carefully put in place. By their very training, the Boomers would see
themselves called to challenge that authority, especially in the social areas
touching close to home: their jobs,
their marriages, their social affiliations, their local communities, even their
nation. And being a pampered generation,
it was easy for these Boomers to find reasons to challenge those social ties,
those social responsibilities, when it involved commitment and sacrifice rather
than just social payoff.
And
in this crusade against their inherited social world, they would also have the
mentoring or support of the alienated intellectuals, who themselves felt that
they had good cause to oppose, or even overthrow, the social-cultural world of Middle America. Most importantly, those mentors included "Progressive"
professors, under whom the Boomers studied in fast-rising numbers, playwrights
making plays and movies encouraging new social attitudes (ones highly shocking
to the Vet world!), and young journalist crusaders, etc. ... that is, any group
of people who lived in the world of "progressive"
idea-production. They would be quite
active in encouraging and ultimately providing moral justification for the new Boomer-think.
The first Hollywood movie
to overtly take on Middle America's
"conformist" thinking, Storm Center appeared in 1956 Bette
Davis "plays a small-town
librarian who refuses, on
principle, to remove a book called The Communist
Dream
from the shelves when the local council deems it
subversive."
Sneering attitudes of high
brow (intellectual) America
concerning low brow (middle class) America
"The Individualist"
The New Yorker
Magazine
| THE VETS' FOREIGN POLICY IDEALISM |
Certainly the intense strain of going to war against Germany and
Japan in World War Two – and then against the North Koreans and their Chinese
allies in the Korean War – called for some kind of Idealism to get the Vets through the ugliness of it
all. Thus they were not merely involved
in killing bad people, the enemy. They
were serving the much more noble cause of bringing "democracy" to the
world. That grand goal seemed to give
their efforts much greater stature, grander purpose.
But
huge dangers would accompany this idealizing of American foreign policy. For one thing, democracy is not the natural,
inevitable outcome for a people when they have suddenly been freed from what
Americans understand as nothing more than dictatorship. They should have learned that lesson from
World War One when they sent thousands of American boys off to die in the
trenches of Northern France, all for the grand purpose of making the world safe
for democracy.
They
should have learned that lesson at the end of World War Two when they took such
a strong stance opposing their Dutch allies – who were determined to regain
their 300-year old colony in Indonesia.
Instead, America supported a local independence movement there (and thus
the old Wilsonian principle of "the rights of self-determination of
peoples everywhere" ... one that supposedly, when implemented, leads
automatically to democracy) conducted by a regime set up by the Japanese at the
time of their surrender to the Americans in August of 1945. But after the Dutch were chased off (or just
slaughtered), this led not to Indonesian democracy but rather to the ruthless
22-year dictatorship of Sukarno!
UN (actually American) military observers checking
up on a
UN-sponsored cease-fire in Indonesia – 1948
National Archives
Achmed Sukarno challenging
his Indonesian countrymen
to grand acts of patriotism
Likewise,
there was nothing noble that Lincoln was feeling when he sent
Union troops into the rebellious Confederacy in order to force the ongoing
unity of the United States. It was
simply a job that had to be done. And
even in World War Two and Korea the actual task was simply to bring down those
whose actions threatened the social world entrusted to the Americans. Nothing about it was very glamorous. But it was all quite necessary.
The same kind of fundamental Realism driving America's
actions abroad however cannot be said to have been present in America's entry
into World War One. Wilsonian Idealism
was the sole motive, and it proved disastrous in the end. And tragically many of the "save the
world for democracy" crusades that America as the West's superpower would
undertake from the 1960s onward would be just as bad: Cuba, the Congo, Vietnam, Iran, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria. Idealistic crusades, though emotionally
thrilling (for a little while anyway) are dangerous enterprises, which a great
power like America should carefully avoid.
| DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING, Jr ... AND THE CALL FOR BLACK CIVIL RIGHTS |
But
that began to change in the mid-1950s, when an exhausted Black seamstress, Rosa Parks, refused to give up her
seat to a White male on a crowded Montgomery (Alabama) bus, and was
arrested and fined. But the Montgomery chapter of the National
Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) decided to fight the
case. Parks was secretary of the Montgomery chapter of the NAACP, which included also within its
local leadership a young pastor who had recently taken a Montgomery pulpit, the Rev. Dr.
Martin Luther King, Jr. – who would come to head up
a boycott of the town's buses.[3] Not only would they encourage Blacks to avoid
the use of the town's buses, they would fight the $14 fine – as far up the
judicial appeals ladder as the case would go – in opposition to the segregation
laws designed to keep Blacks in their place.
Rosa Parks – whose refusal
to give up her seat to a White
started the Montgomery bus boycott

Despite
his father's social influence, King Jr. had to face the discrimination typical
of "Coloreds" in his day and time, for instance, having to go to a
school for Blacks while his best friend went to a school for Whites – and
having the White boy's parents inform their son that he would have to stop
playing with his Colored friend. But
King, Sr. taught his son to respond to these hurts not through hate, but
through the struggle to love even those who persecuted you, even though they
were still to resist strongly the racism behind such cruelty.
Typical
of a teenager, King, Jr. distanced himself from his father's deep faith, no
longer able to identify with the emotional spirit so strong in the Black
community – and in his father's church.
Instead he devoted himself to scholarly study in history, English and
public speaking, and debate – excelling in these areas. At the same time, he still had to face
insults from Whites, which infuriated him greatly. Then, even before finishing high school, he
went off to attend All-Black Morehouse College,[4]
It
was during these years that he first traveled outside the South, and was
surprised to find that the racial discrimination so strong in the South
appeared to be relatively absent in the North. The contrast would help him form
a strong idea of what he wanted to see happen in his Atlanta homeland. And it was also in these years, in great part
due to his deep admiration for his father – and his equally deep appreciation
of the role that the Church played in the lives of those struggling against the
pain that the world hurled at them – that King, Jr. decided to prepare for the
ministry.
Off
to Pennsylvania the 19-year-old King, Jr. went … to study at Crozer
Seminary – and to become involved as youth pastor in the Calvary Baptist Church
nearby, which a family friend, J. Pius Barbour, pastored. During those years (1948-1951), Barbour would
become something like a second father to King, Jr. Also during those years he
would fall in love with an immigrant German woman and wanted to marry her, except
his friends warned him that this would cause problems in both the Black and the
White communities, certainly preventing him from finding a church to lead in
the South. So he broke off the
relationship, leaving another deep hurt in his life.
After
graduation from Crozer, King headed off to Boston University to undertake
doctoral studies in systematic theology, serving as assistant pastor in the
Twelfth Baptist Church in Boston. It was
also during his Boston years that he met Coretta Scott, who was attending the
New England Conservatory of Music. They
dated for about a year and then in early 1953 announced their intentions to
marry, which took place in Alabama that June.

A growing call for Black civil rights.
The bus boycott dragged on for days, then weeks, then months, gaining
national attention in the process.
Meanwhile another Montgomery racial segregation case
had made its way all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, which concluded that Montgomery's laws were in violation
of the Fourteenth Amendment.[5] Now the Southern segregation rules had the
full attention of Middle America.
Thurgood Marshall with Autherine
Lucy, who in 1956 was
prevented from entering the
University of Alabama, heading
to the U.S. District Court in Birmingham to contest the action.
He won the case in court
but the University
expelled her anyway
Then
the following year (1957) focus turned to Arkansas and its Governor Orville Faubus, who decided to court
White votes by calling out the Arkansas National Guard to block the entrance
into Little Rock's Central High School of a small number of Blacks (opened to
them by the local school board).
President Eisenhower then responded by placing
Arkansas's National Guardsmen under his command (plus sending members of the
101st Airborne Division to Little Rock) to open the school. But Faubus fought back, closing all public
schools the next year and reopening them as "private" schools, excluding
the Blacks of course. But the Federal
courts then shut that project down, and Faubus left them closed for the rest of
the 1958-1959 school year. But bit by
bit, multitudes of Americans were growing very tired of such racist behavior on
the part of their public officials.
The forced integration of
the Little Rock Arkansas High
School (September 1957)
101st Airborne in Little
Rock mobilized by Eisenhower
to protect Blacks entering
Central High School –
September 1957
[3]The boycott lasted over a year, until the struggling bus company
finally put aside the seating restriction. [4]Many young Blacks had been sent to fight in World War Two and thus the
College allowed high school juniors to apply and then enter in what would have
been their senior year, in order to maintain a sufficiently large student body.
[5]"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the
privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State
deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the
laws."

Go on to the next section:The Cold War Takes on a New Quality