To what extent was the Vietnam War the cause of a split within the Democratic Party in the late 1960 s and early 1970 s? IB History HL February 26, 2018 Word Count: 2,200
Table of Contents A. Plan of Investigation...2 B. Evaluation of Sources.2 C. Analysis..4 D. Conclusion..7 E. Reflection...8 F. Works Cited...10 1
A. Plan of Investigation This investigation will answer the question, to what extent was the Vietnam War the cause of a split within the Democratic Party in the late 1960 s and early 1970 s? This question is important because it addresses one impact of the longest war in United States history on American politics. The scope of this investigation focuses on the division between groups within the Democratic Party in the 1960 s and 1970 s namely, Southern Whites, African Americans, and young voters. One method of investigation is to evaluate primary sources such as The Showing by McCarthy. This source is valuable because it details the 1968 presidential election, which was pivotal in the course of the Vietnam War. Another method of investigation is to evaluate sources about the Vietnam War Era such as 1968: The Democrats and the antiwar movement. This is an important source because it outlines the role of democratic leaders in the Vietnam war effort and discusses the antiwar movement. (158 words) B. Evaluation of Sources The origin of the excerpt 1968: The Democrats and the antiwar movement is the book Vietnam: The (Last) War the U.S. Lost, by Joe Allen, published by Haymarket Books in 2008. The purpose of this excerpt is to inform the reader on what was happening within the Democratic party in the 1960 s and early 1970 s with regard to the Vietnam War, stating, The mass opposition to the war in Vietnam was creating a major split in the Democratic Party. This source is valuable because it explains the timeline of the Democratic Party s impact on the Vietnam War, antiwar movement, and 1968 presidential election. For example, the violent protests at the 1968 Democratic National Convention are described, stating tens of thousands of 2
police officers, national guardsmen and FBI agents were stationed in Chicago to fight off antiwar Democrats, who marched down Michigan Ave and sat in front of the Hilton Hotel, hoping to hear from candidate Eugene McCarthy. This event shows that there was tension within the Democratic party over the issue of the Vietnam War. This source is limiting because it is a summarization of events and does not go in depth into anti-war demonstrations carried out by democrats other than the 1968 DNC protests. The origin of The Showing by McCarthy is the Washington Bureau of The News in the Dallas Morning News newspaper, from March 14th 1968, by Robert E. Baskin. This article s purpose was to inform the reader on the 1968 presidential primaries, specifically about Democratic candidates Eugene McCarthy and incumbent Lyndon B. Johnson. This source is valuable because it provides results from the primaries and one interpretation of those results. Baskin asserts that the two candidates opposed each other on the issue of the Vietnam War, stating that the aspect of McCarthy s campaign which set him apart from Johnson was his desire to give a voice to the opposition to Vietnam War. Eugene McCarthy won 42 percent of the votes in the New Hampshire primary and 22 of the 24 delegates to the DNC, showing that there was significant opposition to the War. Baskin acknowledges other reasons for the division of Democrats when he writes, This year the vote for McCarthy probably reflected an uneasiness about many matters-- not just Vietnam. The other matters being referred to include inflation, civil disturbances, and the general economic scene. This source is limiting because Baskin briefly mentions these matters without full explanations. For example, Baskin writes that civil disturbances caused uneasiness during the presidential race without describing specific events showing public uneasiness about the civil rights movement. (429 words) 3
C. Analysis Division within the Democratic Party during the 1960 s resulted from the Vietnam War. In the 1968 presidential election, the three major candidates were Richard Nixon (Republican), Hubert Humphrey (Democrat), and George Wallace (Independent). On election day, November 5, 1968, Nixon won the presidency with 43.4% of the popular vote while Humphrey earned 42.7% and Wallace earned 13.5% ( 1968 Presidential ). The Democrats failure to unite on the issue of the Vietnam War cost Humphrey this election. During his campaign, Humphrey did not condemn the Vietnam War or endorse a swift withdrawal from the War (Schreiber 97). Humphrey s lack of a strong stance on the war caused many anti-war Democrats, specifically doves, to decide to either vote for other candidates or withhold their votes entirely. According to a poll of non-southern white Democrats, 22% of voters who wanted to pull out of the war did not vote at all and 21% voted for Nixon (Schreiber 96). On the other hand, Humphrey did gain 73% of votes from non-southern white Democrats who wanted negotiations to be used to end the Vietnam War (Schreiber 96). Humphrey s success in earning votes from a significant number of anti-war Democrats, while failing to gain votes of other anti-war Democrats indicates that there was division within the anti-war faction of the Democratic party regarding war policy. Even though anti-war Democrats were united in the fact that they all wanted the war to end, they could not agree on how the government should go about ending the war. These election results show that disagreement over Vietnam War policy was a major factor in the division within the Democratic Party. Yet, policy was not the only cause of division among Democrats in the 1960 s. Leftist Democrats, comprising a minority of anti-war Democrats, fell into two distinct categories: the Old Left and the New Left. The Old Left, operating through Communists and 4
Socialist Workers parties, were critical of the government s handling of the Vietnam War, prefering to use legal and peaceful demonstrations to express their desire for U.S. troops to be withdrawn immediately from Vietnam (Hall 13). Although the New Left also wanted the War to end, they used vastly different protest methods. The New Left was largely made up of young Democrats and activist groups such as the Yippies (Youth International Party) and Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) (Allen 6). As the 1960 s progressed, SDS leaders became increasingly radical, sometimes advocating for the use of violent protest tactics (Hall 13). One well known instance of this was organized in part by the Yippies and carried out at the 1968 Democratic National Convention (DNC) in Chicago. Ten thousand anti-war activists demonstrated in the streets of Chicago and protests turned chaotic and violent (Allen 6). Contrast between protest methods of the Old Left and the New Left caused major division between the groups. While the New Left felt that extreme tactics were most effective, the Old Left did not want to be associated with their wild, violent attacks on the government and pro-war Americans. The Old Left felt that America s image of anti-war Democrats was dominated by the New Left, causing them to distance themselves from the New Left. Allen s description of the extreme actions taken by the New Left at the 1968 DNC strengthen this argument because it shows why the Old Left would have felt alienated by the New Left. The Old Left s opposition to violent and radical anti-war protest methods caused tension between the two groups, resulting in division within the Democratic Party. The division within the Democratic Party during the 1960 s in America resulted from tension over the Civil Rights Movement. Stated in The Showing by McCarthy which was published in the Dallas Morning News on March 14,1968 by Robert E. Baskin, the results from primary elections before the 1968 presidential election reflected an uneasiness about many 5
matters-- not just Vietnam. (Baskin). One of the many matters Baskin referred to was the Civil Rights Movement. According to writer and political activist involved in the Black Panther Party, Leroy Eldridge Cleaver, young Whites in the late 1960 s understood Black Americans more than any other generation of Whites before. Young Whites in the 1960 s felt that they could relate to Blacks in that they just wanted to end war and exploitation. This caused many young, white, Democrats to support the Civil Rights Movement. On the other hand, many older and blue collar white Democrats were strongly opposed to the Civil Rights movement, especially in the Southern United States, which was largely Democratic for the previous 80 years (Curry). Southern Democrats were particularly anxious and fearful about how integration and Black advancement might impact property values, their children s schools, and workplace security (Cohen). This discord between Democrats is evidenced in results from the 1968 presidential election. The Democratic candidate, Hubert Humphrey, competed with George Wallace, the Independent candidate, for Democrats votes. Wallace ran as an Independent even though he was a Democrat for most of his career; he served as governor of Alabama several times in the mid 1900 s ( Politics ). The Democratic Party was predominantly liberal on social justice issues, however Wallace was known for his strong support of states right to preserve racial segregation ( Politics ). Wallace targeted his message at working-class white Americans who were increasingly resentful of the Civil Rights Movement and integration efforts (Cohen). At Wallace s inauguration for governor of Alabama in 1963, he said In the name of the greatest people that have ever trod this earth, I draw the line in the dust and toss the gauntlet before the feet of tyranny and I say segregation today segregation tomorrow segregation forever. Wallace s efforts to rally working-class, white Democrats on the issue of segregation proved effective in the 1968 election when he split the Southern Democrats votes allowing Nixon to 6
take the election ( Politics ). By attracting votes from Southern Democrats with his antiintegration platform, Wallace took votes away from the leading Democratic candidate Hubert Humphrey (Allen). While Democrats who supported the Civil Rights Movement generally voted for Humphrey, Democrats who were against the Movement voted for Wallace. Baskin s view that the Civil Rights Movement was a cause of tension and division during the 1960 s adds to the credibility of this argument because he was alive during the 1960 s and may have experienced this tension firsthand. This shows that the Civil Rights movement was so divisive for Democrats during the 1960 s that a significant number of Democratic voters chose an Independent candidate instead of the Democratic candidate. (1072 words) D. Conclusion Opposition to the Vietnam War among Democrats caused apparent differences between Democrats, creating division in the party. With regard to war policy, Democrats were split over whether U.S. troops should be pulled out of Vietnam immediately or if negotiations should be carried out. This split in policy preference was shown in a poll from 1968; Humphrey, who did not focus strongly on Vietnam, gained votes from Democrats wanting negotiations to end the war and failed to gain the votes of Democrats who wanted a swift pull-out from Vietnam. There was also division surrounding methods of protest used by the New Left and Old Left. The New Left s extreme methods of protest alienated the Old Left who, consequently, did not want to be associated with the New Left. However, the Civil Rights Movement played a larger role in the Democratic Party split. The 1968 presidential election results show clear ideological differences between Democrats on 7
issues of race. George Wallace earned significant votes from Southern Democrats because of his anti-integration platform. Southern Democrats were fearful of their way of life being threatened by Black advancement. Since the Democratic Party was predominantly liberal on social justice issues, the anti-integration stance of Southern Democrats was extremely divisive. (204 words) E. Reflection In historical investigations, historians face the challenge of determining what the most valuable interpretation to an event is. To investigate division in the Democratic Party in the 1960 s, I analyzed results from the 1968 presidential election, much like a historian would have, to better understand the political atmosphere at a crucial time in American history. Election results are valuable because they show who voted for certain candidates in the 1968 election. I was able to analyze the significance of certain candidates winning the majority of popular votes in specific states. Combined with analyzing the major party platforms and candidates views on significant issues, I could assume why voters chose certain candidates. However, without more primary sources from voters, I can only make assumptions. I cannot definitely say that many Southern Democrats voted for Wallace instead of McCarthy because of his stance on civil rights issues. Researching Wallace s candidacy, I found that, although he was a Democrat, he strongly favored racial segregation. This surprised me because I grew up with very liberal, Democratic parents. It was hard to believe that a Democrat could be so in favor of discrimination against a group based on race. Wallace s opposition to integration caught my attention. Upon finding the election results showing that Wallace won the popular vote in five Southern States, I concluded that since Wallace s stance on integration was central to his political identity, many Southern 8
Democrats voted for him because they were also against integration. As someone who generally has liberal views on social justice issues, my views impacted my assumptions about the election results. Since I was not alive for the 1968 election, I cannot be certain that my assumption is correct for all Democrats who voted for Wallace. With numerous issues of great political significance-- specifically the Civil Rights Movement and the Vietnam War-- during the 1960 s, it is difficult to make a valid argument while completely isolating one issue. I imagine many factors contributed to votes Wallace earned, not only tension surrounding the Civil Rights Movement. (337 words) 9
Works Cited Allen, Joe. 1968: The Democrats and the antiwar movement. Vietnam: The (Last) War in the U.S. Lost, Haymarket Books, 2008. Baskin, Robert E. The Showing By McCarthy. Dallas Morning News [Dallas, Texas], 14 Mar. 1968. America s Historical Newspapers, infoweb.newsbank.com. Accessed 11 Feb. 2017. Cleaver, Leroy Eldridge. The Politics of Race, Civil Rights, and Segregation. 1960-1969, edited by Cynthia Rose, pp. 333-37. Gale Virtual Reference Library, go.galegroup.com. Accessed 6 Jan. 2018. Cohen, Michael. How did the dramatic election of 1968 change U.S. politics? This new book explains. Interview by John Sides. The Washington Post, 25 May 2016, www.washingtonpost.com. Accessed 1 Dec. 2016. Curry, Tom. In 1986, Democratic Split Helped Nixon Win. Politics on NBCNews.com, 29 Sept. 2008, www.nbcnews.com. Accessed 15 May 2017. Election of 1968. The American Presidency Project, edited by Gerhard Peters and John Woolley, www.presidency.ucsb.edu/showelection.php?year=1968. Accessed 13 Jan. 2018. Hall, Mitchell K. The Vietnam Era Antiwar Movement. Vietnam (Oct., 2004), Oxford UP, 2004, pp. 13-17. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/25163716. Accessed 12 Jan. 2018. Mintz, S., and S. McNeil. The War s Consequences. Digital History, 2016, www.digitalhistory.uh.edu. Accessed 30 Nov. 2016. Nixon, Richard. Address to the Nation the War in Vietnam. 3 Nov. 1969. The American 10
Presidency Project, edited by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, www.presidency.ucsb.edu. Accessed 15 May 2017. Speech. Schreiber, E. M. Vietnam Policy Preferences and Withheld 1968 Presidential Votes. Spring, 1973, Oxford UP, pp. 91-98. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/2747817. Accessed 12 Jan. 2018. 11