MEDFORD, Mass. — JUNE 11, 1963, may not be a widely
recognized date these days, but it might have been the single most important
day in civil rights history.
That morning, Gov. George Wallace, in an effort to block the
integration of the University of Alabama, made his futile “stand at the
schoolhouse door.”
That evening, Boston N.A.A.C.P. leaders engaged in their first public confrontation with Louise Day Hicks, the chairwoman of the Boston School Committee,
...over de facto public school segregation, beginning a decade-long struggle that would boil over into spectacular violence during the early 1970s.
And just after midnight in Jackson, Miss., a white segregationist murdered the civil rights leader Medgar Evers. But the most important event was one that almost didn’t happen: a hastily arranged speech that evening by President John F. Kennedy.
That evening, Boston N.A.A.C.P. leaders engaged in their first public confrontation with Louise Day Hicks, the chairwoman of the Boston School Committee,
...over de facto public school segregation, beginning a decade-long struggle that would boil over into spectacular violence during the early 1970s.
And just after midnight in Jackson, Miss., a white segregationist murdered the civil rights leader Medgar Evers. But the most important event was one that almost didn’t happen: a hastily arranged speech that evening by President John F. Kennedy.
Kennedy had dabbled with the idea of going on TV should the
Alabama crisis drag out, so when it ended, his staff assumed the plan was off.
But that afternoon he surprised them by calling the three networks and
personally requesting airtime at 8 p.m. He told his speechwriter Theodore
Sorensen to start drafting the text, but shortly before he went on air the
president was still editing it.
The president had been routinely criticized by black leaders
for being timid on civil rights, and no one knew just what to expect when the
cameras started filming.
Kennedy began slowly and in a matter-of-fact manner, with an
announcement that the National Guard had peacefully enrolled two black students
at the University of Alabama over Wallace’s vociferously racist objections.
But he quickly spun that news into a plea for national unity
behind what he, for the first time, called a “moral issue.” It seems obvious
today that civil rights should be spoken of in universal terms, but at the time
many white Americans still saw it as a regional, largely political question.
And yet here was the leader of the country, asking “every American, regardless
of where he lives,” to “stop and examine his conscience.”
Then he went further. Speaking during the centennial of the
Emancipation Proclamation — an anniversary he had assiduously avoided
commemorating, earlier that year — Kennedy eloquently linked the fate of
African-American citizenship to the larger question of national identity and
freedom. America, “for all its hopes and all its boasts,” observed Kennedy,
“will not be fully free until all its citizens are free.”
Perhaps the most significant part of the speech came near
the end, when Kennedy, borrowing directly from the movement’s rhetoric,
recognized the civil rights struggle as part of a political and cultural
revolution sweeping the land — again, an obvious point to anyone on the other
side of the 1960s, but not to a white population still living in the stifling
bliss of the Eisenhower era.
Kennedy not only reported the revolution, but invited
Americans of all backgrounds to engage in the kind of civic activism that
reflects the tough work of democracy. “A great change is at hand, and our task,
our obligation, is to make that revolution, that change, peaceful and
constructive for all.”
Nor was this just stirring rhetoric: Kennedy’s announcement
that he would introduce comprehensive civil rights legislation and spur school
desegregation beyond its frustratingly glacial pace gave teeth to his historic
address.
Kennedy’s speech was almost immediately overshadowed by
Evers’s murder. Two months later the March on Washington would further render
it a forgotten artifact of the civil rights movement’s heroic period.
Still, the speech had real consequences. A little over a
week later, Kennedy followed through on his promise to submit strong civil
rights legislation to Congress, which he pushed aggressively until his
assassination in November 1963.
Kennedy’s death made him a martyr for many causes, and in a
cruel twist, it provided a huge boost to the civil rights bill, which his
successor, Lyndon B. Johnson, signed on July 2, 1964. But without the moral
forcefulness of the June 11 speech, the bill might never have gone anywhere.
The speech also set the tone for how presidents should
address civil rights. No longer could they dance around the issue, qualifying
it as a strictly regional or legal or economic issue (though many would later
try to do so). The power of the White House, and of the federal government, was
on the side of the struggle.
And it continues to resonate today. Barack Obama’s March
2008 “race speech,” delivered amid the Jeremiah Wright controversy, has been
rightfully applauded for its nuanced depiction of contemporary American race
relations. And yet it must be read within the context of Kennedy’s address:
both reflected and defined the tenor of race relations at a moment of great
tension and change.
Kennedy’s
words anticipated some of the key themes found in King’s soaring March on
Washington address two months later. And that shared moral force, that
commonality of thinking between the two speeches, is the most important reason
to remember the president’s address, 50 years ago today: it reminds us of a
forgotten moment of the civil rights era, when presidential leadership and
grass-roots activism worked in creative tension to turn the narrative of civil
rights from a regional issue into a national story promoting racial equality
and democratic renewal.
Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:
Δημοσίευση σχολίου