CHRONICLING THE GOLDEN ERA:
 

(The rise of youth rebellion and social change overview)

PART THREE: 1962

DEVELOPMENTS IN YOUTH CULTURE

1962 was the year that youth culture and change really began to move forward.

The British Teddy Boys were pretty well phased out by the emerging ‘Mods’ – a very British youth phenomenon, which blended elements from the Beatniks and the distinctly British Rock and Roll youth expression that was the sharp dressing Teddy Boy image.

The Mods had been more or less a background appendage to the Beatnik scene in the late 50s – and frequented the same venues, listening to the same Jazz. But they were mostly working class youths, rather than middle-class student types (who were the main core of Beatniks), and so in that respect at least, the Mods related more to the Teddy Boys. They adopted the sharp dressing of the Teds – but altered it to suit themselves (stylish suits - but draped over by a parka anorak), and moved away from the Jazz of their Beatnik associates towards a more R’n’B / Blues preference. It was this melding of the Beatnik’s working class fringe with the sharp dressing stylish working class Rock 'n' Roll Teds that caused the full emergence of the scooter driving, suit (and parka) wearing Mods that became so familiar in the UK in the early 1960s.

I have suggested that the gradual development of youth culture in the 1960s - from a division of chin-stroking, ineffectual Beatnik intellectualising on one hand, and surly, scowling malcontent Rock and Roll energy on the other - into a co-operative and cohesive force for protest and change, was driven in large part by the emergence, post WWII, of a better educated, better nourished and healthier British working class, which was now able to ally its traditional inclinations towards socialism and protest for social change and fairness to that intellectual, well-reasoned and articulate (though ineffectual) protests of the Beatniks and Folkies, and the rebellious power of Rock and Roll.

This mix of cultural elements began to give youth protest a distinct profile and an image in Britain, or rather, in the early 60s, a range of ‘images’: Beatniks and their Mod Fringe, Teds, Greasers – and Mersey Beat…

The traditional leather clad, motorbiking, American style Rockers – or Greasers – were being replaced – overtaken – in Britain, and they didn’t like it… They didn’t go quietly, and in the next few years with the emergence of British dominance of youth culture - particularly music, with the Mersey Beat bands like The Beatles, Gerry and the Pacemakers, Freddie and the Dreamers, etc., and British Mod bands like The Who, The Kinks and The Small Faces, etc., and the fading popularity of 'Greaser' Rock and Roll music, 60s Britain was, for a few years, notorious for mass fights between Mods and the fading Rockers.

THE BEATLES EMERGE... 

The demise of the leading status of Rock'n'Roll and the whole Greaser sub-culture had begun to really take effect in 1962, when The Beatles were ‘unleashed’ with their first single ’Love Me Do’… (Rock 'n' Roll would, of course, survive as a genre, but not as the main focus of youth cultural expression).

But the emergence of The Beatles with their first big hit in the UK: 'Love Me Do', was to be the catalyst for a social and cultural revolution that, at the time, no-one could have anticipated... 

Youth, society, modern culture, politics - and popular attitudes towards politics - would never be the same again: a paradigm shift was about to happen... 

THE USA: THE YOUTH FOLKY FRINGE OF THE BEATNIKS GAINS IN PROMINENCE

Meanwhile in America the influence of earlier protest Folk singers – notably Woody Guthrie – and the lyrically abstract social commentary Jazz / Folk of Jaques Brel, along with, I suggest, the profile and spotlight grabbing posture of Rock and Roll, had, by the early 60s, begun to generate a new breed from the Beatnik camp: the high profile protest singer. Joan Baez released her debut album in 1960 and the follow-up in 1961; Judy Collins debuted in 1961; Peter Paul and Mary released their debut album (see this section – under ‘Music’; and see our ‘Classic Albums’ section) in 1962, and it was discernibly ant-war. It was also highly successful – reaching No.1 in the U.S album chart. Bob Dylan also made his album debut, but more significantly, he wrote what remains one of the most potent protest songs ever: ‘A Hard Rain’s Gonna Fall’ – which he wrote in response to the Cuban Missile Crisis.

THE 1960s YOUTH SOCIAL AND CULTURAL REVOLUTION BEGINS TO TAKE SHAPE... 

Youth rebellion was underway – still in its early stages, and still not co-ordinated, coherent or cohesive, but it was beginning to move in that direction. When the brash power and social justice of the British invasion combined with the invention, direction and coherence of American Folk / Rock / Beatnik youth – and it soon would – things were going to happen…

The later 'Hippie' culture - and associated youth culture: ('Hippie' was to become a convenient 'catch-all' term for a range of youth expression, such as Freaks; Flower Children; Children of God; Heads; Rockers etc.) and unified, cohesive, coherent ideals of Peace and Love – and a search for an alternative to the Establishment and established social structure - was being created by a mix of these social and cultural ingredients... 

THE ORIGINS OF THE 1960s DRUGS SUBCULTURE... 

This mix was to be added to presently, by the phenomenon of Psychedelia, and psychedelic drugs: most notably LSD: it was in 1962 that Timothy Leary and his associates began controlled experiments with hallucinogenic drugs whilst employed by Harvard University in the USA. .

These experiments into the mental: consciousness raising / altering effects of hallucinogens complemented the move towards interest in eastern (particularly Indian) and other non-European cultures and philosophies, already being explored by some on the innovative fringe of Beatnik Jazz culture, and would later be more fully and high profile in the mid-1960s, by The Beatles and Donovan (and some others), as the youth revolution gained cohesion and coherence, and developed into more than just a protest against Establishment 'norms': but rather a paradigm shift in the social and cultural psyche; a search for a new perspective on 'reality' - to supersede the 'reality' that had brought humanity to the brink of annihilation... (See our section: Politics, Society, and the Quest for Change’).

IN POLITICS AND THE COLD WAR: THE THREAT TO THE WORLD WAS RAMPED UP: THE NEED FOR PROTEST BECAME MORE CRUCIAL... 

(For more details, see the up coming re-posting of the article: 'Politics and the Cold War 1962'; here's an overview):

The Cuban Missile Crisis: perhaps the closest the world came to nuclear war / annihilation; as the USSR tested the young President Kennedy on his strength and resolve... 

The USA implements the defoliation of the jungles of Vietnam, by the intensive spraying of the chemical Agent Orange... The immediate outcomes - and the long term outcomes of this ecological and humanitarian disaster are now well known... 

India and China are involved in a border war... 

PROTEST

(See the upcoming re-posting of the article: 'Protest For Change; 1962', for more details)

US students issue The Port Huron Statement: insisting on greater democracy.

Folk protest music becomes more popular and makes an impact on the charts.

That's an overview of 1962, folks; look out for more details in the days ahead... 

(I found the images for this collage online. My acknowledgment and thanks to the various people who made them (identity unknown to me). ) (M).

Textual content:
©Copyright MLM Arts 25. 08. 2014. Edited and re-posted: 23. 11. 2015. Edited and re-posted: 02. 03. 2017. Edited and re-posted: 16. 09. 2019. Edited and re-posted: 25. 06. 2022

ROTESTS FOR CHANGE: 1962

1962 saw significant events in the gathering momentum for social change and a safer, fairer world.

A BREAKTHROUGH FOR RACIAL INTEGRATION IN THE USA

James Meredith from Mississippi, who had previously enlisted and served in the U.S Air force in the 1950s, and had been a student at Jackson State College, tested the assertions about racial freedoms made by the Kennedy administration in 1961, by applying to be admitted as a student into the segregated Mississippi State University. His application was granted, and he became the first African American to attend that previously 'whites only' University. He needed to have an escort of U.S Marshals to protect him in his initial attendance at the University.

THE PORT HURON STATEMENT

Also in the U.S, the student organisation Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) held its first convention in the town of Port Huron, Michigan. At this meeting it unveiled its political manifesto: The Port Huron Statement, which criticised the U.S government for its failure to properly pursue the cause of world peace, and its international relations: particularly its part in the escalation of The Cold War. The statement also declared the SDS stance on promoting racial equality, and a fairer economic system.

ANTI-NUKES PROTESTS

In the USA there were anti-nuclear weapons protests, most notably in Washington DC in February, where tens of thousands demonstrated against nuclear proliferation: including members of the SDS and also members of the 1950s anti-nuclear protest group, the National Committee for a Sane Nuclear Policy: known as SANE for short; and a protest, also by SANE, on Broadway, NYC, which included many Broadway stars.

THE EMERGING INFLUENCE OF PROTEST THROUGH MUSIC

1962 was also the year that music began to protest in a way that was high profile and successful... 

Peter, Paul and Mary released their debut album (see our 'Classic Albums' section). This was, for me, the first real 'protest' album - and the first 'biggie': it reached No.1 in the U.S album chart. It's an album conscious of the environment, hippie love and peace and anti-war sentiments, with tracks like 'Cruel War', 'If I had My Way', 'If I had A Hammer', etc... For me, Pete Seeger’s old Folk standard from 1955 'Where Have All The Flowers Gone' is the most significant track. I contend that the inclusion of this simple, powerful song in the year that the U.S began the herbicidal spraying of the jungles of Vietnam - and the horrific consequences of that - both to the environment and in terms of the devastating cost to human lives in death, deformity, and disability which it caused (and still causes to this day) is poignant - and, I suggest, was meant to be so. This album, I'd say, set the tone for the Hippie (and other youth social and cultural expression) ideology and for this generation's protest through music and other arts. This album, I suggest, may be considered as partly responsible for the alignment of Beatniks, Rockers and youth in general into a cohesive and coherent movement against the Establishment.

Also in 1962 - Bob Dylan wrote the classic protest song: 'A Hard Rain's A-Gonna Fall' It was the year of The Cuban Missile Crisis - Dylan was inspired to write this song as a response. It has been said that every verse is the start of an individual song in itself: as though Dylan was trying to get down as many of his ideas as he could before the end... Which he feared would be soon... 

(I found the images for this collage online. My thanks to the various people who made them.)

(M).

Textual content:
©Copyright MLM Arts 01. 09. 2014 Edited and re-posted 27. 11. 2015. Edited and re-posted: 14. 03. 2017. Edited and re-posted: 23. 09. 2019. Edited and re-posted: 01. 07. 2022

1962: this is a political cartoon from an Indian newspaper (I found the cartoon on Google Images) - it's by the late Indian cartoonist, Rasipuram Krishnaswami Laxman (my acknowledgment and thanks to him... ).

It shows that 'fake news'; misinformation; spin doctored information released the us 'ere plebs and hoi polloi, was yet another thing that the social, cultural, and political revolution of the generations of the 1960s & 70s was determined to expose and reject: and not just in the West and in Eastern Europe - but the world over: this is another example of the Indian subcontinent showing the way... 

We exposed it - and at least made the general population more aware of it - progress was made... for a while... 

But call it irony... Call it prophetic... Call it just another example of the good that our revolutionary era achieved being undone... The fact is that today.... Well, what to we see...? Sanctions being clamped down on anyone who declares anything that goes against the prescribed narrative: even when the narrative flies in the face of what is obviously common-sense and true...?

Yep. That's what we have today... If Rasipuram Krishnaswami Laxman were alive today, he'd likely e cancelled - or even arrested... 

1962: the heads-up is called; the suppression of facts and truth is ridiculed and condemned...  2022: we see pretty much the reverse happening... And, to my dismay, it seems to me that it's the youth of today who are the cheer leaders for this kind of thing... (Just my own perception / opinion - feel free to disagree, discuss and debate: it's what we do well - anda always amicably - on 'Chronicles'...
paragraph

POLITICS AND THE COLD WAR 1962

1962 saw more escalation of Cold War tensions, and, in fact, the event which probably brought the world closest to nuclear annihilation: The Cuban Missile Crisis in October.

PRESIDENT JFK ADDRESS TO THE USA (AND THE WEST) A FOREWARNING OF A CALL TO ARMS...??? 

The year augured badly from the outset, I suggest, when, in January, the supposedly liberal President Kennedy gave an address to the USA which included the statement to the effect that the people of the ‘free world’ were lucky to be in a position at that period in history to be the defenders of freedom during its greatest threat.

It's my personal opinion / suggestion, that this was not talk of seeking a diplomatic solution, nor looking for ways in which Western and Eastern political ideologies could peacefully co-exist, and move together in time towards a stable, peaceful relationship. No: this kind of rhetoric could, I suggest, only be seen as gung-ho, sabre rattling – a forewarning to the youth of the day that they would soon be called to arms – and sent to war; but couched in terms of this emotive rhetoric which glorified the idea.

Even the old ‘war horse’ Churchill had previously mellowed his views to ‘jaw-jaw is better than war-war’. This declaration from Kennedy did not seem to echo that… 

All the while the USA continued to deny suspicions that there were active U.S combat troops in Vietnam: the absence of U.S combat troops in Vietnam may have been the case in fact - but would not continue to be the case for much longer... 

THE USA TAKES AN ACTIVE ROLE IN THE VIETNAM WAR VIA CHEMICAL INTERVENTION... 

Whether the USA did or did not have combat troops active in the Vietnam conflict at the time, it was to get openly involved in the conflict in other ways 1962...

In February the U.S commenced what was nothing more or less than a chemical weapons attack on Vietnam from the air. The now notorious defoliant chemical ‘Agent Orange’ was sprayed over vast tracts of jungle in order to remove the advantage that the Vietcong were perceived to have in the war: that of knowledge of, and tactical use of the terrain.

The devastation that this strategy caused in terms of damage to the environment and in terms of the death, disfigurement and disability inflicted on human beings is horrifically evident to this day. (Google images show some evidence of this, but be warned: the images are extremely disturbing).

In terms of military objectives, this strategy by the U.S achieved absolutely nothing what-so-ever... 

(For more information, please see the excellent Morton G. Hughes review of the Fred A. Wilcox book 'Waiting For An Army To Die' :

https://m.facebook.com/.../a.8881807.../4426044724152096/... )

THE SINO - INDIAN WAR

October was the major flash point. In this month Cold War tensions were stretched almost to breaking point.

In Asia the communist Peoples Republic of China threatened its borders with India. The two countries had attempted to maintain cordial relations since their respective creation as states: in 1947 (when India gained independence from Britain), and 1949 (when Mao Tse Tung’s communist revolution gained control in China). Tensions mounted when China annexed Tibet in 1956, and relations became fraught when, in 1959, India offered political asylum to the Tibet’s Buddhist spiritual leader The Dalai Lama, who had reluctantly been persuaded to flee the Chinese occupation after a brief, and unsuccessful, uprising by the Tibetans against Chinese rule.

The Chinese took this as provocation enough to be considered an act of hostility.

India in turn, and with good cause, it seemed, suspected China’s territorial ambitions. The result was a number of flash points throughout the summer of 1962, which escalated to a height in October, and a face-off between the armies of the two countries across the borders of Nepal, Sikkim and Bhutan.

In the end an uneasy peace was brokered by diplomacy, and both sides backed down without loss of face.

Although war was never formally declared, this confrontation is recorded as the Sino – Indian war.

THE CUBAN MISSILE CRISIS

In February 1962 the USA announced a trade embargo against Cuba: banning trade in all but food and medicines; but in this same year the USSR countered this move by signing a trade agreement with Cuba. The stage was being set for the Cuban Missile Crisis that was to define Cold War tensions in a way even more potent than the building of the Berlin Wall in 1961.

From the presentation on August 31st of evidence (via aerial photographs) to the U.S Senate that Cuba was building missile installations – probably to hold missiles from the USSR, and that this amounted to an obvious threat to U.S security; to the declaration by the USSR on September 11th that a U.S attack on Cuba would lead to war with the USSR, the tension over this issue mounted in the weeks that followed. This was the back yard ‘diplomacy’ of nose to nose ‘who'll blink first’- writ large. The world was on a high state of alert over the threat of nuclear war.

President Kennedy had already been out manoeuvred by his Soviet counterpart, President Khrushchev, over the building of the Berlin Wall in 1961, and had lost face over the abysmal failure of the U.S backed Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba, also in 1961. The Soviets must have believed him weak and ineffectual: they would, I contend, feel confident of a U.S climb down on this issue, and that confidence would drive their brinkmanship.

It is for these very reasons, however, that Kennedy could not be the one to ‘blink’, and was equally determined to push this to the brink.

It was this scenario that put the world on the very edge of obliteration. Everyone who had a T.V or radio, or could see cinema news reels, or who could read a newspaper – anywhere in the world – knew how close to the edge the world was at this time; and the world collectively held its breath…

Over the period 14th – 28th of October sabre rattling was loud and threatening – and diplomacy worked in the background… I would not be here to write this, and you would not be here to read this, if diplomacy had not found a way to pull these gung-ho, juvenile, posturing ‘superpowers’ apart: simple as that… 

The diplomacy involved the USSR agreeing to abandon its plans to deploy nuclear missiles on Cuba in return for the withdrawal of US nuclear missiles from some territories close to the USSR.

Bob Dylan wrote his classic song ‘A Hard Rain’s A Gonna Fall’ in 1962 as his reaction to the Cuban Missile Crisis. 

(M).

Textual content ©Copyright. MLM Arts 06.09.2013 Edited and reposted: 28. 08. 2014, and 25. 11. 2015. Edited and re-posted: 09. 03. 2017. Edited and re-posted: 20. 09. 2019. Edited and re-posted: 29. 06. 2022

The cartoon image in this posting (which I found online), is a cartoon (from 1962: the year that we are currently revisiting) by American political cartoonist, Herbert Block (known as Herblock: my acknowledgment and thanks to him). It's an excellent, unusually balanced assessment of the Cuban Missile Crisis negotiations. It depicts President Kennedy and his USSR counterpart, President Krushchev, as equally engaged in trying to avert nuclear war - while defending their own position in the precarious Cold War world... 

It's an image that's included in history text books these days (I'll post that in the comments section) - I'm happy to say... 

The quote, attributed to Kruschev (from 'Krushchev Remembers' - first published in 1970), also gives us (particularly people in the West) a fairer insight into the motivations and thinking of the leader of the USSR - and (which should be no surprise) reveals a mind-set and struggle pretty much exactly the same as Kennedy's: a consideration of the safety of humanity and the world... 

For me, it's another induction that, at a human level, there is no Us v Them - that's a manufactured division: when really, we all want the same thing; we all want what's best and safest for all humanity...

PROTEST FOR CHANGE: 1964

This was a year when the effects of protest really began to make a difference in terms of Civil Rights. It also marked the beginning of a serious and co-ordinated anti-war protest that was to gather momentum and world wide support year on year, until it finally played a very major part in the ending of American involvement in the Vietnam War, which led to that war coming to an end soon after…

THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT

After several years of courageous, peaceful and dignified campaigning, led by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and the Civil Rights Movement, seeking equality and justice for all people in the USA, in 1964 the U.S government of President Lyndon B. Johnson passed The Civil Rights Act , which granted equal rights to all citizens of the USA, irrespective of gender, race, religion, etc. Of course, this did not actually make these rights a reality overnight, and African Americans, women and other oppressed sections of society still had now to push to be allowed into these opportunities, and to break down the inherent social prejudices that had built up over generations and which resisted change, before real equality could actually be seen to be happening as a fact: and that was to be a long struggle (which is yet to be completed), but the door was open…

MARGARET CHASE SMITH: FEMALE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE

One immediate result of this legislation was a not insignificant event in the struggle for women’s rights. Senator Margaret Chase Smith ran for the Republican Party nomination for the 1964 Presidential Election: the first time that a woman from either of the two main parties (Democrat and Republican) had run for the Presidency. She lost out to Barry Goldwater, who was soundly defeated by Lyndon B. Johnson in the election, but this was a breakthrough in women’s standing in Western politics.

WOMEN'S LIBERATION

Although there had been prominent women’s rights groups in the past (the Suffragettes being the most celebrated, of course), it was in 1964 that the term Women’s Liberation was first used, and, like all human rights and anti-war movements of the era, it was to become a powerful, well organized, coordinated movement, and it would break down the barriers that had kept women in a position of subordination to men. This liberation of women benefitted the cause of greater equality and freedom of both genders - though the social equality and freedom that this won for men was only really realised and appreciated after greater freedom for women began to happen. Also like all of these protests – it was to be a long struggle…

THE FREE SPEECH MOVEMENT (FSM)

In 1964 the Free Speech Movement (FSM) was founded at University of California, Berkeley. Students demanded the right to on campus political activities, which had hitherto been banned. Students’ protests had cantered around Civil Rights, and increasingly on anti-war protests, but all of this activity had been prohibited within the academic environment in which they learned and honed their intellectual and debating skills: kind of ironic, and, for Americans, surely unconstitutional (it seems to me, as someone who isn't American) - as it infringes freedom of speech...(???) The protestors were joined at one stage by Folk singer / protest legend Joan Baez. In 1965 they were allowed some structured freedom to engage in political activity.

BURNING DRAFT CARDS PROTEST

A major event in this year was the anti-war protest of organized Draft Card burning in the USA... This was the very public refusal of some young men to respond to the call to National Service in the U.S Military, by the act of burning their call –up (or Draft) papers.

Although the U.S had not yet committed to full military deployment in Vietnam, and President Johnson had indicated his reluctance to do so, there was a mood of trepidation, and an expectancy that U.S military involvement in Vietnam would inevitably happen – and soon. The public mood against U.S involvement in Vietnam was growing, and already there had been protest demonstrations, but this was a new and very pro-active form: actual refusal to obey an order to enlist for a war that went against people’s consciences, and against any reasonable argument. In the past ‘conscientious objectors’ had always been few in number: most people were too intimidated by the power and authority of the Establishment, its use of propaganda - and its control of the populace by political rhetoric. Those people of conscience who did demonstrate their dissent were invariably shunned, stigmatized and usually imprisoned. But this was a new generation of youth – who were robust, educated, and tired of the old Establishment that had brought the world to the brink of nuclear destruction. This was not just a few bold people protesting their conscientious beliefs: this was the beginning of a mass worldwide anti-war movement, and one that would be backed by prominent figures in music, the arts and politics… And one that would ultimately succeed…

THE SLOGAN 'MAKE LOVE NOT WAR'

What also seems to have first come to prominence in 1964 is the anti-war slogan that was to become probably the best known and most repeated throughout this era: ‘Make Love Not War’. The exact origins of this simple sentiment are vague, other than it is dated to the 1960s; its first use is attributed to a number of different people. It is believed that it first started to become widely used and taken up as a popular slogan when it appeared on badges (or buttons as they are known in the U.S) that were handed out in thousands during the 1965 Mother’s Day Peace March in Chicago. But I think (I may be wrong!) that 1964 was the year that it first achieved a public profile during anti-war protests…(???)

CONCLUSION

1964 may be considered the year when youth cultural and social revolution began to gel into a cohesive and coherent popular protest movement that would challenge Establishment ‘norms’ of inequality, injustice and war-mongering. In the years that followed it would grow in strength and confidence, and would be the cause of the greater freedoms, equality and social fairness that exist today…

(M).

Textual content:
© Copyright MLM Arts 17. 09. 2013. Edited and re-posted: 30. 12. 2015; 20. 06. 2017. Edited and re-posted: 26. 10. 2019. Edited and re-posted: 29. 08. 2022

POLITICS, SOCIETY AND PROTEST IN 1965:

THE UNITED NATIONS INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION YEAR: HOW THAT PLAYED-OUT IN THE 1960s WORLD OF COLD WAR CONFLICT AND YOUTH CULTURAL AND SOCIAL REVOLUTION...

(PART ONE)

1965 was, as stated above, the U.N ‘International Cooperation Year’. In recognition of that I have decided to change the format of the politics and history section of this ‘Chronicle’ and give a TWO PART overview of how the concept of cooperation played out in the world that year… (And could not resist the occassional resort to irony and satire...  )

THE INTENDED ROLE OF THE UNITED NATIONS

The United Nations was set up in 1945 following the end of WWII. It was set up as a means of bringing nations together to resolve conflict by diplomacy, debate and an intelligent, mature exchange of opinions, with the aim of reaching a compromise. It was a pretty good idea – BUT…

HOW THE UNITED NATIONS WAS - TOO OFTEN - ACTUALLY USED... 

All too often the U.N has been used as a forum for diplomatic points scoring and grandstand gestures, rather than as a place to peacefully debate conflicting points of view and attempt to find a peaceful solution.

The Cold War saw opposing power blocs verbally beat each other up in U.N meetings, as one side supported this revolutionary army in some corner of the world, while the other side supported their opponent. Political pressure was brought to bear on the U.N - by the USA in particular - to refuse recognition of nationhood to countries which fell under communist rule, such as The People’s Republic of China (PRC), Castro’s Cuba, North Korea, and North Vietnam. The USSR and its satellite states in eastern Europe responded by backing those regimes, and vehemently arguing their case in the U.N. The over-all effect of all this was, as the saying goes when ‘debate’ is carried out in this way: ‘the generating of more heat than light…’ 

SO, HOW DID THIS 'COOPERATION YEAR' IDEA PLAY-OUT IN THE WORLD OF 1964..? PLEASE READ ON... 

CIVIL RIGHTS

In January in America Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. sought to encourage ‘cooperation’ with the ideas of equality which had become law in the USA with the passing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, by ensuring that black people in Alabama could register to vote. Unfortunately, some U.S states were not so cooperative with the ideas of equality and civil rights – even after the Civil Rights Act – and restricted voting rights on grounds of competence in literacy and by the existence of a ‘poll tax’, which effectively meant that the right to vote had to bought. As a great many black people in America were poor and had been deprived of adequate education, these restrictions meant that they were denied the equality of being able to register to vote in these states. Dr. King’s campaign set out to challenge that situation. President Lyndon B. Johnson was agreeably cooperative and met him for talks on the issue. In May The Voting Rights Act was passed in the USA, and voting restrictions were ended.

SOUTH VIETNAM - USA RELATIONS

President Johnson was also very cooperative with the dictatorship in South Vietnam. Actually he was more ‘cooperative’ with them than they were with themselves: by January 1965 they’d had their second military coup and consequent change of leadership since the previous November, so a third leader in just two months. But, heigh-ho, the U.S had cooperated with all the previous incumbents up to this latest one, and would cooperate with future leaders too, so the spirit of cooperation continued. (The leadership of South Vietnam was to change another FOUR times in the course of 1965..!) I guess one Vietnamese military dictator is much the same as the next as far as the USA and the ‘free’ West was concerned… Well, unless they were NORTH Vietnamese that is…)

NORTH VIETNAM - SOUTH VIETNAM - USA RELATIONS

U.S cooperation with the regime(s) in South Vietnam in 1965 included the carpet bombing of the cities of their communist enemies in the north, with the objective of bombing them out of the ability to wage war.

Unsportingly, in view of the U.N’s ‘lovely idea’ of cooperation, North Vietnam did not cooperate, and simply changed its military strategy by directing the Viet Cong to focus its attacks on U.S air bases in South Vietnam.

This non-cooperation by North Vietnam may, in part, be understood in light of the USA’s pressure on the U.N to deny the very existence of North Vietnam, just as it had done with communist China, Cuba and North Korea.

(AN ASIDE: PANIC MEETING OF THE LEADERS OF FANTASY LANDS... 

This penchant that the USA had for taking hostile action against ‘non-existent’ countries caused widespread panic in Shangri-La; Middle Earth was put on a state of constant invasion defence alert; and Narnia began negotiations with the USSR for the acquisition of the atomic bomb… According to undisclosed sources… ).

BACK TO RELATIONS BETWEEN THE USA AND NORTH and SOUTH VIETNAM...

The U.S increased its ‘cooperation’ with South Vietnam and sent troops: first as protection for its air bases, but later as an offensive commitment. (See our ‘Politics, Society, and The Quest for Change’ album section: ‘The Vietnam War and the Flower Power Protest’). Consequently, the communist People's Republic of China offered increased (military) cooperation to North Vietnam, and Cambodia cut diplomatic cooperation with the USA.

USA RELATIONS WITH ITS ALLIES...

On the plus side for the USA, the governments of Australia and New Zealand both agreed to cooperate with their military efforts in Vietnam, and send troops...

But the British Labour government of Prime Minister Harold Wilson refused to cooperate and declined to do so...

THE HORRORS OF WAR ARE TELEVISED... 

One incident in particular deserves attention: in late May a Viet Cong attack on the U.S airbase at Da Nang caused the death of seven U.S Marines. U.S forces responded in early August by destroying several villages near the airbase – claiming that they were pro – Viet Cong. (Whether this was the case or not is uncertain, but even if so – they were civilian villages all the same). This military action was broadcast on U.S T.V – and did not play well with mainstream America. This was the beginning of the televising of war in all its horror – bringing that horror into U.S living rooms. This, along with the ever growing peace movement which was gaining in profile year by year, was the commencement of the groundswell of anti-war opinion that would play a massive part in bringing the Vietnam War to an end…

CONSEQUENCES OF THE USA - SOUTH VIETNAM - NORTH VIETNAM 'COOPERATION'...

In 1965 these events caused a more unified and international cooperation – in protest against them - and against the Vietnam War...

In the USA the sending of troops to Vietnam as an offensive force caused the massive increase in the numbers of young men being ‘drafted’ into military service each month. As a result the previously small scale, but growing, protests against the war – and the burning of ‘draft cards’ - greatly increased, and gained a higher profile in the media, and in the psyche of mainstream America. There was a significant protest of some 15,000 people (mainly students) in Washington D.C in this year, and also others in Boston and in Berkeley, California.

There was indeed ’international cooperation’ on this issue, as these protests were repeated in Australia, which had also committed troops to Vietnam, and in other countries such as the U.K – which had declined to send troops there.

PART TWO coming soon..!

(M).

Textual content:
© Copyright. MLM Arts 03.10.2013 Edited and re-posted: 19. 11. 2014. Edited and re-posted: 19. 01. 2016. Edited and re-posted: 10. 07. 2017. Edited and re-posted: 19. 11. 2019. Edited and re-posted: 18. 09. 2022 

This is a very poignant, relevant political cartoon by the cartoonist who signed his work as 'Conrad'.

It captures - and combines - two events from March in the year that we are currently revisiting: 1965:

The significant increase in US troops sent to Vietnam.

The Civil Rights protest march in Selma, Alabama: which protested against the attempt by some US states to avoid implementing the equality of voting rights that was part of the 1964 Civil Rights Act: which gave equal voting rights to African Americans.

Some US states imposed provisos that stated that voters must pass tests of intelligence / education, and / or financial ability: which was essentially a 'poll tax': voting rights based on the ability to pay a levy.

As most African Americans within these states were kept in social and economic conditions of depravation, which restricted access to adequate education and employment opportunities, it rendered them unlikely (to say the least) to be able to pass these iniquitous tests.

This situation was, quite clearly, a corruption of the spirit of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. 

The Civil Rights protest march was met by violent reaction by those opposed to Africa America equality... 

The bitter or irony of this cartoon, shows that, for African Americans, there were two fronts in the battle for liberty: the one promoted by the USA and its allies in the 'free' world of democracy: which was the fight against communist dictatorship; and the fight at home in the USA: the fight for freedom and equality for African Americans - in their own land: the land that they were being recruited and / or drafted into military service to fight for, overseas... 

The cartoon shows an African American soldier in South Vietnam - receiving a letter from home: the caption being 'A letter FROM the Front': meaning, of course, the OTHER Front: the battle for equality at home: the news from Selma, Alabama... 

This is another example of powerful and effective media protest by a political cartoonist...

(This image is stamped: Opper Project. Ohio State University. My acknowledgement and thanks to them).  (M).

Textual content:© Copyright: MLM Arts September 2022

PROTEST FOR CHANGE: 1966

ANTI-VIETNAM WAR PROTESTS: THE EFFECT ON US PRESIDENT JOHNSON... 

“Hey! Hey! LBJ! How many kids did you kill today?”

By 1966 this had become a common chant among anti-Vietnam War protestors – and according to some accounts it stung President Lyndon B. Johnson; the protests against all the horrors of the war, and the responsibility for it, were, in this slogan, aimed at him - personally. In the grand scheme of things this could hardly be described as truly fair – President of the USA or not, Johnson was none-the-less merely the assessor of a range of opinions and pressure groups that fed into the White House – including the very considerable power of the hawkish U.S military Joint Chiefs of Staff.

IN FAIRNESS: A DEFENCE OF PRESIDENT JOHNSON'S POSITION... 

The world was deep into Cold War politics and confrontation, and the word ‘appeasement’ still rang alarm bells after the failure of that policy by Neville Chamberlain’s Conservative U.K government in its dealings with Nazi Germany in the 1930s. Certainly Presidents make the final decision – but that is seldom – surely, NEVER – one arrived at purely from their own independent reasoning, but is, rather, what they deem to be the best call made for political and strategic expediency, after considering all the pressures that have been brought to bear upon them. I imagine that there are times when U.S Presidents must rue the famous declaration made by President Truman: ‘The buck stops here!’

ANTI-WAR PROTESTS ESCALATE... 

Protest against the Vietnam War escalated year on year throughout the 60s and 70s. In 1966 some 50,000 protestors marched in New York City, and there were other protests in the USA and around the world: in Boston, Philadelphia, Washington, Chicago, Detroit, San Francisco, Oklahoma City. Abroad, in Ottawa, London, Oslo, Stockholm, Lyon, and Tokyo, etc…

POLITICIANS AND PUBLIC FIGURES SHOW SUPPORT FOR THE ANTI-WAR MOVEMENT... 

These public protests were given added ‘clout’ when politicians added their voices in protest against the war. (See this section: ‘Politics and The Cold War’ 1966). Various celebrities became involved over the years, such as Bob Dylan, Joan Baez, Donovan, Vanessa Redgrave, Jane Fonda (etc…).

A SPECIAL MENTION FOR THE ANTI-WAR / CIVIL RIGHTS PROTEST OF MUHAMMAD ALI... 

I think it’s fair to say, the single most media catching and high profile protest against the war by any individual was when the greatest sportsman on the planet, who could, arguably, even then claim the appellation that was to be attached to him: ‘the most famous man [person] in the world’ declared himself a pacifist and a conscientious objector - and refused to be drafted into the U.S Army. I refer, of course, to the great Muhammad Ali: who was at the time the undisputed heavyweight boxing champion of the world…

Ali’s protest was not simply a ‘draft dodge’, nor some ploy to avoid having to disrupt his boxing career: his protest was totally sincere, dignified, courageous, and done for reasons of genuine pacifism, and feelings of affinity with oppressed peoples. He paid for that by being stripped of his title in 1967. He was also threatened with a lengthy prison sentence. All this meant nothing to Ali compared to his principles. Ali took it all with dignity and his usual charisma. He set an example that was admired throughout the world.

THE BLACK PANTHERS and the slogan 'BLACK POWER'

I966 saw developments in the campaign for black rights and equality which were at odds with the peaceful, dignified – and ultimately successful methods employed by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and The Civil Rights Movement.

I have mentioned the founding of the political / protest / paramilitary group The Black Panthers in the article in this section: ‘Politics and the Cold War 1966’.

The Black Panthers was a militant organisation that promoted racial division; it set up laudable charitable projects in support of the African American community - but also used and advocated extreme violence in pursuit of its goals - which were, essentially, as racist as the racism that they reacted against.

A similar phenomenon also arose that year: the slogan ‘Black Power’, around which various groups and individuals gravitated – although it was, in essence, only ever a slogan – at best a rhetorical statement of intent, and an assertion of black culture and identity – coined by activists.

The phrase was first used to effect by (mixed race) New York politician Adam Clayton Powell Jr., in May 1966 in an address to Howard University and, essentially, was meant to promote the empowerment of black people in America. It was used to more rhetorical effect and politicised by black rights activist Stokely Carmichael in June 1966 after the shooting of Civil Rights activist James Meredith. Carmichael had been a pacifist, but later joined The Black Panthers.

Although originally an expression of demands for the equality and civil rights of black people in America, and to promote black heritage and a pride in black history and culture, ‘Black Power’ became adapted by some for use as a provocative slogan – promoting a separatist agenda and often used to incite racial tension and conflict. It became, in some quarters, a divisive expression, and was even regarded by some liberal opponents with the same distaste as the phrase (or slogan) ‘White Supremacy’.

MLK's REACTION TO 'BLACK POWER'

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and others within the Civil Rights Movement were, it is said, uneasy with the separatist and divisive connotations of Black Power, but, as ever, Dr. King was able to rationalise and explain the human core of its sentiments:

"It is necessary to understand that Black Power is a cry of disappointment. The Black Power slogan did not spring full grown from the head of some philosophical Zeus. It was born from the wounds of despair and disappointment. It is a cry of daily hurt and persistent pain."

Still, the militant exponents of the ‘Black Power’ ideology jeered him for his reassertion of the use non-violent methods and for his insistence that freedom for the oppressed could only be won in any meaningful and lasting way by patient and resilient persuasion and by sound rational arguments to convince the oppressors of what they, as fellow human beings, already knew inside: that they were wrong…

WOMEN'S LIBERATION

Non-violence and reasonable persuasion was the ideology taken up by the National Organization for Women, founded in June 1966, in Washington DC. The opening of its founding statement reads:

‘We, men and women who hereby constitute ourselves as the National Organization for Women, believe that the time has come for a new movement toward true equality for all women in America, and toward a fully equal partnership of the sexes, as part of the world-wide revolution of human rights now taking place within and beyond our national borders.’

Although a feminist organisation, it was open to male and female membership – and recognised that freedom and equality were rights that everyone should embrace – and insist upon for each other – together: and not as separate sections of society fighting each other for the right to have what should be the human rights of every human being.

This group became the most potent activist group in pursuit of women’s rights, and were instrumental in the gaining of the rights and equalities that women have today, and they still campaign to complete this process and gain full equality for women.

THE YOUTH CULTURAL REVOLUTION' FIRST MAJOR 'EVENT'... 

Finally… I mentioned in my overview of 1966 that this was the year that the Hippie movement really gelled together ('Hippie' has become a 'catch-all term to encompass the several forms of youth rebellion that existed at the time: not everyone identified as 'Hippie' - though many did...) This was actively demonstrated by the first major ‘event’ that might be called a Hippie gathering. In San Francisco’s Golden Gate Park. The Love Pageant Rally took place on October 6, 1966. This was a free outdoor gig, and was organised by Allen Cohen and Michael Bowen, who ran the San Francisco Oracle: an underground newspaper. The event was staged to coincide with the hallucinogenic drug LSD being made illegal in California, and was a peaceful protest against that legislation, with the intention of demonstrating the believed 'wisdom' at the time (as promoted by such as Dr. Timothy Leary, the main driving force behind the LSD promoting ideology), that LSD was, in fact, a peace promoting and harmless – indeed beneficial – substance.

These were the early years of the LSD experiment - which was begun by Dr. Timothy Leary at Harvard University in 1960 as a means of trying to ‘find’ a new perception of reality: one that would raise humanity out of the destructive reality that it was entrenched in. But it was already spiralling out of control - motivated as it was by that time by Leary’s rampant ego as much as anything else. All the same, the drug subculture had yet to reach its full momentum, and this event may be seen as the launch pad for that, and was to lead to 1967s ‘Summer of Love’.

For a more complete overview of psychadelia and drug sub-culture of the era, please read the article: ‘The Drug Sub-culture and Psychedelia’, in our photo albums section: ‘Politics, Society and the Quest for Change’.

(M).

Textual content: © Copyright: MLM Arts 26. 07. 2012 Edited and re-posted 16. 10.2013. Re posted: 29. 12. 2014; and 16. 02. 2016; and 15. 08. 2017. Edited and re-posted: 10. 12. 2019. Edited and re-posted: 15. 10. 2022

POLITICS AND THE COLD WAR 1964

THE OVERALL SENSE OF DISTRUST... 

In some ways the political events in 1964 showed up the core reason why the new and rebellious generations of the West distrusted the politics and the politicians that ruled their lives: the Establishment powers which, aided and abetted by their counterparts and opponents in the communist East, had brought the world to a state of constant fear of nuclear destruction.

The blurring of the lines of ethics, integrity and ideology; the political manoeuvring; the insincerity and broken promises – all served to compound the belief that the system was wrong and had failed, and that it must be challenged and changed…

THE UK GENERAL ELECTION

The U.K had a General Election, and old-school aristocratic Conservative Prime Minister Sir Alec Douglas Home’s government was narrowly defeated by the progressive Labour Party leader Harold Wilson.

In my opinion, a case can be made for considering Wilson to be the prototype / template for the modern politician: the model copied and ‘refined’ by all P.Ms (and, I suggest, all politicians - at least in the West) who came after him: especially Margaret Thatcher, and even more so Tony Blair.

Wilson was the master of political opportunism, grabbing popularist photo opportunities, double speak, posturing, and manipulation of events: what is, I think you could say, referred to in modern terms 'political spin'.

It has been suggested that Wilson was summed up by his opponent, Douglas-Home, who detested Wilson, thus (paraphrase): ‘Even when you knew for certain that he was telling a LIE – you still couldn’t believe him…’ 

This is not intended to make any personal judgement on Douglas-Home, nor on Wilson. It is for the purpose of assessing the nature of politics, and the change that Wilson brought to that. If it had been flawed in the past, then this new approach was to be little, if any, improvemen... But it could be said to have been very effective as image making for the modern politician... And manipulating public opinion... 

It's worth noting that in 1964 Wilson achieved the extraordinary distinction - for a politician - of winning a 'Personality of the Year' award... 

WILSON'S LABOUR PARTY TURN OUT TO BE JUST AS PRO-NUKES AS THE CONSERVATIVES... 

The Labour Party had been the traditional party of social liberalism in the U.K, and had been on the side of nuclear arms reduction – in sympathy with the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament. The big issue for the CND in this election was the Tory party’s decision to update the U.Ks nuclear submarine force from Polaris to Trident. They had already felt let down by the Labour party’s decision to drop support for unilateral nuclear disarmament, but (I suggest) woul likely have been confident that a Labour government would not escalate nuclear proliferation by adopting the Tory policy. In fact, once elected, Wilson did just that… 

He would later go on to define the art of political manoeuvring in the modern age in various ways… 

For a start, as our picture shows, he was quick to get a photo opportunity with the emerging youth phenomenon of the day – The Beatles. (Hmm… Which OTHER P.R driven political leaders have followed THAT trend since…??? ).

THE USA PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION

In the USA, there was the 1964 Presidential Election. Having ‘inherited’ the Presidency after the tragic death of John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson was seeking the clear mandate of election in his own right. The Vietnam conflict was already gaining public disapproval, especially amongst American youth, both for reasons of pacifism, and because they were concerned that America would soon send combat troops into that country, and that they’d be part of that – against their will, and against their belief that it was not right for the U.S to intervene in Vietnam.

LYNDON B. JOHNSON: ANTI-ESCALATION OF US INVOLVEMENT IN THE VIETNAM WAR: vs. BARRY GOLDWATER: PRO-ESCALATION... 

The election was fought between Democrat Johnson and Republican Barry Goldwater. Goldwater openly declared that U.S involvement in Vietnam should be escalated. Johnson declared that he was not willing to:

‘"...to send American boys nine or ten thousand miles away from home to do what Asian boys ought to be doing for themselves."

LBJ WINS - US INVOLVEMENT IN THE VIETNAM WAR IS ESCALATED... 

Lyndon B. Johnson was seen as the candidate that would keep American troops out of Vietnam. It is said, however, that this was merely an election ploy, and that Johnson meant who appease the ‘Hawks’ around him - in government and in the military - and assured them that if they helped to get him elected, then they could ‘have their war’.

In the meantime the Johnson administration seemed intent upon provoking the North Vietnamese into giving America cause to attack. Operation Plan 34A sent Asian mercenaries into North Vietnam to carry out sabotage and assassinations.
Then thing's hot very murky indeed... 

THE GULF OF TONKIN INCIDENT

It was reported that on August 2nd., 1964, the U.S Navy destroyer Maddox entered North Vietnamese waters, and was engaged in a conflict with North Vietnamese gunboats. This was to prove to be the ‘cause’ that the Johnson administration needed. Johnson ordered the bombing of certain Vietnamese naval bases and oil installations. He thought that this would deter North Vietnamese leader Ho Chi Min from continuing his support for the South Vietnamese communist National Liberation Force (aka the Viet Cong Guerrillas). This was not realistically going to happen, as Ho Chi Min had been directly responsible for setting up the NLF, and his North Vietnam, in turn, was sponsored and supported by the USSR.

The USS Maddox incident - recorded in historic as 'The Gulf of Tonkin Incident' - has since been shown (by the declassification of sensitive documents after a certain period of time) to be have been contrived: an event manipulated - perhaps(?) - for the purpose of serving the 'cause' of escalating US involvement in the Vietnam War... 

(An interesting (though not directly relevant) aside here: the commander of US Navy forces involved in the 'Gulf of Tonkin Incident', was Rear Admiral George Stephen Morrison: father of Doors frontman Jim Morrison.)

PRESIDENT LBJ ORDERS 'ROLLING THUNDER': THE INTENSE BOMBING OF NORTH VIETNAM

In the 1964 Presidential Election, Lyndon B. Johnson won one of the most emphatic victories in the history of U.S presidential elections. Just three months into office he launched 'Operation Rolling Thunder', which was the regular bombing of North Vietnam, with the aim of destroying its economy.

THE VIET CONG TARGET US AIR BASES: THE US COMMANDER PLEADS FOR MORE US TROOPS TO BE SENT TO SOUTH VIETNAM... 

The NLF responded by concentrating its efforts on U.S air bases in South Vietnam. U.S commander General Westmoreland pleaded that he had insufficient troops to defend the air bases. This resulted in the first major deployment of U.S troops into Vietnam in 1965… 

THE MURKY WATERS OF POLITICS... 

There were two things about the U.S election campaign that show the murky blurred lines of political sincerity and ethics. One of the candidates for the supposedly more liberal (or at least LESS conservative) Democratic Party nomination was Alabama Governor George Wallace, who, even as a Democrat, was the leading advocate of the racial – racist - segregation policy of the Southern states.

BUT ON THE PLUS SIDE: THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964

1964 was the year of that the U.S Civil Rights Act became law. It contained legislation which, as well as at least opening the door to racial equality, did the same for the cause of women's equality. This saw the beginning of the movement called ‘Women’s Liberation’, which evolved out of previous women’s rights groups.

On the plus side, however, one of the conservative Republican candidates was Senator Margaret Chase Smith, who was the first woman from one of the mainstream parties to run for the U.S Presidential nomination.

MANIPULATIVE POLITICS AND PROTEST INTERMINGLING - DIVISIVELY... 

This was also the year that The Nation of Islam came to prominence. This is a group that was begun by Wallace D. Fard Muhammad in July 1930, but had little impact up until the 1960s.

Their purpose was to elevate the status of African Americans, but I cannot include them in our ‘Protest’ section, as, although they set up as religion, their aims were in large part political (the establishment of a black / African American state in America), and their doctrine was, frankly, racist, and employed the most detestable traits of the White ruling class who had oppressed, and did oppress African Americans. This, to me, is not protest; not a purpose towards the unity and harmony of all humanity and the overcoming of hatred, division and war; it is, on the contrary, the reinforcing of these negative elements.

It must also be pointed out that The Nation of Islam has no connection what-so-ever in ideology or lineage to mainstream Islam. Islam is a faith which is welcoming to all human beings, and does not practice racial prejudice.

In the 60s The Nation of Islam was led by Elijah Muhammad. Their success in gaining a profile was, I suggest, due to three factors: the momentum for equality built up by the honourable and courageous efforts of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and the Civil Rights Movement; the effect of the charismatic Malcolm X; and Malcolm X’s enlistment of the then Cassius Clay, who had just become boxing’s World Heavyweight Champion – and the most high profile and charismatic sports celebrity in the world. In 1964 he converted to The Nation of Islam and changed his name to Muhammad Ali.

Ali is one of my all-time heroes, and that he, like all African Americans, had sincere, obvious and worthy cause to reject the way that he and his fellow African Americans were treated in their own country is undeniable, and laudable. But it is regrettable that he went down the road of an organisation that was as racist and divisive as that of the society that he grew up in.

I got the impression, even as a kid, that Ali was uncomfortable with the racist, virulently anti – Whites dogma of the Nation of Islam. I recall watching him being interviewed on UK TVs ‘Parkinson’ chat show (the biggest chat show in the U.K at the time). Ali was adored in the U.K – by just about everyone – and they (we) let him know that everywhere he went. Parkinson asked him how he could endorse the condemning of white people, when he could see how much he was respected and loved there. The great man paused, and shifted uneasily in his chair, before offering what he himself must have known was a thin ‘get out’, saying that the Nation of Islam’s doctrine only applied to white people in America…

In 1975 Ali declared that he now followed mainstream Sunni Islam. It is said that some time after that he became drawn to mystical Sufi Islam.

Malcolm X changed his attitude to The Nation of Islam’s anti-whites doctrine after going on the mainstream Muslim Hajj pilgrimage to Mecca and Medina in 1965, where he met mainstream Muslims from all cultures celebrating Islam in equality and peace.

CONCLUSION

The political wrangling, conniving and patent lack of integrity that was evident in 1964, was to prove to be another motivation for the already active, and increasingly cohesive and determined, 1960s youth cultural and social revolution that was emerging to challenge the Establishment, and to protest for equality, fairness and an end to war-mongering… And in the years that followed – it would succeed…

(M).

Textual content: ©Copyright MLM Arts 15. 09. 2013 Edited and re-posted: 28. 12. 2015; 13. 06. 2017. Edited and re-posted: 01. 11. 2019. Edited and re-posted: 26. 08. 2022

POLITICS, SOCIETY AND PROTEST IN 1965:

THE UNITED NATIONS INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION YEAR (No less…).

(PART TWO)

WHEN GOOD CAUSES ARE PURSUED IN BAD WAYS... 

1965 also showed the sinister side of non-cooperation when good causes are divided, and when they are pursued, by some, by use of bad, divisive, and destructive methods.

I mentioned the Nation of Islam – the so-called ‘Black Muslim’ U.S religious - political movement, which has no connection what-so-ever to mainstream Islam, and which preaches racism to combat racism.

MALCOLM X

One of its most charismatic figures: Malcolm X, quit this group and became a mainstream Muslim after going on the Hajj pilgrimage to Mecca and Medina, where he witnessed and experienced Islam being shared and celebrated by peoples of all cultures and ethnicities, in peace and harmony.

Malcolm X was assassinated in 1965 by up to 6 gunmen. The statement made by one of them, Thomas Hagan, indicated that he had murdered Malcolm X because of his rejection of the Nation of Islam.

Had he lived I believe that Malcolm X could have been a great force for peace and reconciliation in the world.

Elsewhere in the world:

INDIA - PAKISTAN CONFLICT

India and Pakistan declined this spirit of international cooperation, and resumed armed hostilities in the mutual hostility that existed between the two since the British partition of India in 1947 (When Pakistan and India became two separate countries (East and West Pakistan occupying territories on the opposite sides of the sub-continent). This particular flare-up in 1965, was over the on-going dispute over occupation of the province of Kashmir. The conflict was short – August – September – but bitter, and there were many casualities on both sides. A cease fire was brokered, with both sides claiming victory…

GENERAL FRANCO'S SPAIN RELAXES PERSECUTION OF JEWS

In Spain General Franco (one time great buddy of Hitler and Mussolini, but whom the ‘free’ world left unchallenged to keep his fascist regime intact after those guys had been taken down) decided to cooperate with the concept of basic humanity and held talks with Spain’s Jewish community about legitimizing their right to exist in his fascist enclave.

THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH RENOUNCES CONDEMNATION OF THE JEWS...

This move by Franco was made even before Pope Paul VI and the Roman Catholic Cardinals ‘cooperated’ with their own Christian beliefs in love, peace, justice, forgiveness, and all the rest of that Hippie stuff - and declared at the Vatican Council (1962 – 1965) that the Jews did NOT carry collective blame for the killing of Jesus after all! – So that’s a big papal SORRY then – for centuries of pogroms and oppression… Hmm… it seems that the Pope and Roman Catholic Church could admit to being wrong after all… With this in mind they might re-think their attitudes to women and Gays at some stage (???) – Though that’ll probably be in about another 2000 years… 

... AND RECONCILES WITH THE EASTERN ORTHODOX CHURCH - AFTER OVER 1000 YEARS OF SCHISM... 

The Pontiff and his pals must have been in a really great mood that year (well, the meeting had lasted since 1962 – and was finally coming to an end: they must have been buoyed-up by the thought of the end of gig party that loomed; after three years at the grindstone, what a ‘rave-up’ THAT was going to be..!) Anyway – as well as forgiving the Jews, they also made-up with the Eastern Orthodox Church (these two blocs of the Christian Church had split in 1054 – after a petulant swapping of excommunications between them). The Pope and Patriarch Athenagoras gave each other a big hug and said a mutual big SORRY! Ah well, this time it only took around 1000 years. I know that Elton John said: ‘sorry seems to be the hardest word’, but the extent to which Christian Churches bear grudges takes that to ridiculous levels… 

NOTE: THIS IS NOT A CONDEMNATION OF RELIGION: IT'S S WRY LOOK AT HUMAN BEHAVIOUR AND THE INTERACTIONS OF POWER / POLITICS / RELIGION... 

I must add though, that this is not a ‘blame religion for everything’ diatribe: although I’ve never belonged to any faith – even as a kid – I, personally, see a very great deal more good that can be attributed to religion than whatever harm it has been involved in (note: not that it has CAUSED, but rather has been involved in: utilised for the purpose of facilitating (shall we say); just as other ideologues have been: it's human behaviour - rooted in power and control) throughout human history. The everyday community work of religious groups in the world today is by far laudable and beneficial.

Rather, this is frustration at the slowness and reluctance by religious hierarchy to consider and implement change. T

Moreover, these examples from modern times show that religious doctrines are not set in stone and inviolable – and never have been, and were never meant to be – I’d argue. Changes in attitude towards women and the Gay community can be debated and applied – without breaking any inflexible divine decrees… Controversial, but just my ‘Two Bob’s worth’… 

JUST A QUICK CONCLUSION THEN - TO THE U.N:

Look guys – having these ‘lovely ideas’- like 'International Cooperation Year' - is all very nice, but you really need to be more specific about it, huh? I mean, you can’t just throw a word out there and leave it to interpretation. Try: ‘The Year of International Cooperation for Peace’, for example. – Spell it out, folks! – You need to! – You’re dealing with politicians and diplomats – they’re sure to ‘spin’ things around their way if you don’t...! 

Just sayin’… 

(M).

Textual content:
© Copyright. MLM Arts 03.10.2013 Edited and re-posted: 22. 11. 2014. Edited and re-posted: 22. 01. 2016. Edited and re-posted: 14. 07. 2017. Edited and re-posted: 22. 09. 2022 

POLITICS AND THE COLD WAR: 1966

OOPS... NEARLY NUCLEAR DEVASTATION... BUT NEVER MIND, EH... 

...The year when much of Spain came close to being pretty much obliterated, and much of the rest of Europe laid waste too as a consequence - by accident... But 'they' decided it was best to sweep it under the carpet...

That was the bizarre Cold War world, that was; just one example of it, that is... Curious..? Read on..! 

THE VIETNAM WAR: THE US ONLY WANTS NORTH VIETNAM 'ROBERT MCNAMARA'D INTO SUBMISSION'*

In 1966 U.S Defence Secretary Robert McNamara stated that U.S. objectives in Vietnam are [paraphrasing]: 'not to destroy or overthrow the Communist government of North Vietnam. They are limited to the destruction of the insurrection and aggression directed by North Vietnamese against the political institutions of South Vietnam.'

BUT IT RANG HOLLOW... 

This may have been true, or it may have been an attempt to put America’s (and its allies) involvement in The Vietnam War in a better light: one of ‘anti-aggressors’, rather than imperialistic conquerors. However, it rang hollow with a great many people in America and around the world, and 1966 was to prove to be the most brutal and aggressive year to date, in the already long war in Vietnam, in terms of the involvement of U.S other allied forces.

Some appalling acts of barbarity occurred which, because of the relatively free access allowed to the media to report the war – and ‘beam’ it in into U.S living rooms on T.V, caused even greater resistance to, and protest against, the involvement of the U.S and its allies in a war that was, arguably, indefensible from the outset.

SOME TOP POLITICIANS VOICE ANTI-WAR PROTESTS... 

Influential U.S politicians from President Lyndon B. Johnson’s own Democrat Party, such as Mike Mansfield (Montana), J. William Fulbright (Arkansas), George McGovern (South Dakota), and Robert and Edward Kennedy (New York and Massachusetts), spoke out against U.S involvement in the war, and protest from the public in the USA and elsewhere in the world escalated.

PRESIDENT JOHNSON ESCALATES AGGRESSIVE ACTION IN VIETNAM... 

January saw a resumption of President Johnson’s ‘Rolling Thunder’ policy of the blanket bombing of North Vietnam, and this alone did not play well in public opinion. Also in January, a campaign of combined U.S and Australian troops - the Battle of the Ho Bo Woods - signalled an increase in aggressive action by the allied forces.

But it was a campaign between February and March by combined U.S, South Vietnamese, and Republic of Korea troops – at first cynically called ‘Operation Masher’, but later changed to the more poetic and positive (but in my view even more cynical) sounding ‘Operation White Wing’: which resulted in massacres of innocent South Vietnamese civilians, most often carried out by the Republic of Korea Army (ROK) - such as, for example, The Tay Vinh massacre - that greatly swelled public and political outrage against the war. Sadly, it was to be several years yet before this public outcry finally brought the war to an end, and in those years more massacres were committed – some by U.S troops.

THE DYSFUNCTIONAL POLITICS OF SOUTH VIETNAM... 

The whole dysfunctional nature of Vietnam – and indeed the region - and the futility of Allied involvement in its affairs, had always been apparent: between November 1964 and January 1965 there had been three military coups, and the U.S had issued warnings to the Vietnamese government against its brutal oppression of the Buddhist majority. In 1966 this was highlighted yet again, when Buddhist elements of the South Vietnamese army rebelled against what they considered to be their unfair treatment. (Tensions between the Buddhist population and the ruling authorities – who tended to be Roman Catholic (a by-product of French colonial rule) – had been on-going for many years). This resulted in a 'mini civil war' within a war – with Buddhist and non-Buddhist South Vietnamese troops clashing. It was short lived, and the Buddhist rebellion was crushed – but the internal unrest continued. If ever there was an example of the ham-handed, heavy footed and ill-informed intervention of Western dogma and interference in other cultures – Vietnam was it… 

THE USSR TAKES AN AGGRESSIVE STANCE UNDER PRESIDENT BREZHNEV... 

In the Soviet Union, 1966 saw the 23rd Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) in Moscow. It was the first one to be chaired by Leonid Brezhnev – a thorough going hawk of Soviet politics. There was much sabre rattling and warning the USA to get out of Vietnam. (This from a USSR that was actively supporting North Vietnam).

TENSIONS BETWEEN THE USSR AND COMMUNIST CHINA... 

Even more significantly, Brezhnev made mention of the unsatisfactory state of relations between the USSR and fellow communist country The People’s Republic of China. It was the beginnings of the split that would result in the Cold War developing into a three way standoff between the nuclear power blocs of the Warsaw Pact in Eastern Europe, ‘The West’ (the USA and it’s alliances in the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), and a The Australia, New Zealand, United States Security Treaty (ANZUS or ANZUS Treaty), and China and its allies.

CHINA: CHAIRMAN MAO INSTIGATES 'THE CULTURAL REVOLUTION'... 

1966 was a major year too for The People’s Republic of China: it saw Mao Tse Tung return to power after a period of political exile, and that signalled the beginning of China’s ‘Cultural Revolution' - which set about eradicating all traces of capitalist or Western influence from the country, and setting a strictly Maoist – Socialist agenda for China’s future. This proved to be extremely popular, especially with Chinese youth, and was the launch pad for the personality cult that grew up around Mao.

THE UK: PRIME MINISTER HAROLD WILSON: THE PROTOTYPE SLICK, SCHEMING MODERN POLITICIAN...? 

In the U.K, the slender 4 seat majority that won the Labour party the 1964 general election had, by 1966, been whittled down to just 1 seat – due to by-election defeats. Prime Minister Harold Wilson, (whom I have previously described as: '… the prototype modern U.K politician: the model copied and ‘refined’ by all P.Ms who came after him: especially Thatcher, and even more so Blair. Wilson was the master of political opportunism, double speak, posturing, and manipulation of events. It is what is called in modern terms: 'political spin’ (See our ‘Chronicle of 1964)),

In 1966 he called a ‘snap’ general election - held on the 31st. of March. It is supposed by some that the slick Wilson called the election to cash in on the ‘feel good’ momentum that was sweeping England (perhaps not so much in the rest of the UK) in the build-up to the hosting of the FIFA World Cup competition. This train if thought surmises that he dared not wait until after the competition was over, from dread of the negative mood in England if England hadn’t won it (though, as it turned out, they did), and so caught the up-beat mood before the actual start of the contest in July, and called the election for March 31st. (This man was slicker than a Brylcremed otter..! LOL...! )

Labour won with a huge majority of 96 seats.

THE BEHIND THE SCENES REALITY OF THE 'FREE WORLD' ALLIES... 

It's supposed by many, that the Western North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) allies during the Cold War were all squarely on each others side - and trusted and fully collaborated with each other... 

It's an open secret, however, that this wasn't the case...  They all spied on each other - just as they spied on the communist powers in the other side of the divide...  The USA was particularly suspicious of its allies - being as it was, still in the shadowy influence of McCarthyism: the extreme anti-communist purge instigated (almost to the point of national paranoia) by Senator Eugene McCarthy, between the late 1949s and into the 1950s...

HAROLD WILSON'S LABOUR PARTY CAUSED PARTICULAR CONCERN... 

The Labour government of Harold Wilson was distinctly left of centre: it could fairly be called Socialist... 

This didn't play well with the USA - actually, there are reports that it didn't play well with British Intelligence: MI5: it's said (though not confirmed) that efforts were made to undermine Wilson and his government... 

The fact that Wilson refused pressure from the USA to send troops to Vietnam, clearly increased his unpopularity with the American government and security agencies... 

But to add to this suspicion of him, in 1964 Wilson had visited the USSR and had cordial discussions with the newly appointed Soviet leader, President Leonid Brehznev... And in 1966, it's suggested that Wilson requested a direct 'hotline' telephone link between The Kremlin and 10 Downing Street...  The kind of direct link that existed between The Kremlin and The White House... 

It's fair to surmises that, perhaps (?), US Military Intelligence may have sought to eaves-drop in any cosy little chats that Harry and Leo might have... 

THE BRITISH COMMONWEALTH: THE RHODESIA PROBLEM... 

Previous to calling the election Wilson had been to Lagos, Nigeria in January to discuss the problem of Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe), which, due to its government’s insistence on adhering to its policy of apartheid, had declared itself independent of British political interference in November 1964. The Lagos meeting declared that Rhodesia was in rebellion against the Commonwealth, and pressure was asserted to try to get that country to accept free and inclusive elections that would give power to the black majority. Rhodesian leader Ian Smith’s government rejected this move, and declared Rhodesia to be no longer in the Commonwealth. Along with its apartheid practicing neighbour and ally South Africa, these two countries dug in for a long war against freedom and democracy…

THE BLACK PANTHERS... 

Also on the negative side of struggle – 1966 saw the founding of the militant African – American political / protest group The Black Panthers, whose policies and methods were at odds with the pacifism, dignity and strength, and the ultimately successful policy of the Civil Rights Movement of Dr. Martin Luther King Junior. The Black Panthers, founded in Oakland, California by Huey Newton and Bobby Seale, started as a quasi - vigilante group for the protection of black neighbourhoods – against injustices by the police. They grew into a political / paramilitary group, which promoted and encouraged conflict as the means for black people to overcome injustice and inequality: stopping little short of civil war. They were involved in a number of violent actions – including shoot outs with police, which cost lives on both sides.

I contend that, ultimately, this group achieved nothing of worthwhile note, and what’s worse, gave the authorities an almost caricature image of the ‘angry, violent black person’ to present to the public – thereby only doing harm to the cause of black liberation.

THE IRISH REPUBLICAN ARMY SIGNALS INTENT... 

In Dublin, Ireland, the Irish Republican Army (IRA) blew up a statue of Lord Nelson as a demonstration of its on-going rejection of British influence on Irish history, and, I suggest, to signal its readiness to resume armed conflict in the province of Ulster (Northern Ireland), in its determination to reunite Ulster with the rest of Ireland. (See our section: Politics, Society, and the Quest for Change).

ROBERT C. WEAVER 

On a positive note! – In America the cause of freedom and equality for black people took a significant step forward when Robert C. Weaver was appointed Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development in the Johnson administration. I think that it’s fair to say that President Obama’s road to the Whitehouse was built, in large part, by Mr. Weaver…

INDIRA GHANDI

India followed the example of neighbouring Sri Lanka by electing a woman as leader of the country when Indira Priyadarshini Ghandi, was elected Prime Minister.

OH - AND THAT 'LITTLE' NUCLEAR DEVASTATION NEAR MISS FAUX PAS IN SPAIN... 

Finally I come to a Cold War event that SHOULD have been jaw dropping news – but wasn’t, as it was so serious, and so shocking that it was covered up for many years, and even now is played down. I refer to the accidental dropping of four (possibly five) hydrogen bombs on Spanish territory by the USA. This is NOT a spoof – nor conspiracy theory hokum – it happened, and is acknowledged to have happened: on January 17th 1966. It is referred to as ‘the Palomares incident’.

A U.S B - 52 bomber carrying the H bombs collided with its refuelling plane. Both planes were destroyed and the crews tragically lost. Three of the bombs fell to earth close to the village of Palomares (near the Mediterranean coast), and one fell into the sea. One of the land fall bombs remained intact; the other two detonated their non-nuclear explosives, which caused leaks of radioactive material to contaminate to area. (The USA took responsibility to decontaminate). The sea bound bomb also remained intact, but was not recovered until March. Some believe that there may have been a second sea fall bomb, which remained undetected and was responsible for increased radioactivity levels in the sea and in some sea creatures for some time afterwards: but this is unconfirmed and denied.

CONCLUSION

And THAT – fellow ‘Chroniclers’ – was the shady, dangerous, cynical Cold War world that we inhabited...! No wonder we protested, objected – and demanded changes…

(*My thanks to Paul Simon for that phrase... ; it's from the song title: 'A Simple Desultory Philippic (Or How I Was Robert McNamara'd Into Submission' 1966)).

Textual contents ©Copyright MLM Arts 23. 07. 2012 Edited and re-posted: 12. 10. 2013. Edited and re-posted: 26. 12. 2014 . Edited and re-posted: 13. 02. 2016. Edited and re-posted: 09. 08. 2017. Edited and re-posted: 08. 12. 2019. Edited and re-posted: 15. 10. 2022

I found this cartoon online; it is a 1966 political cartoon by the British cartoonsit, who signs as Franklin.

The cartoon satirises the political intrigues between governments during The Cold War - and the suspicion that the left of centre UK Labour government of Harold Wilson came under (some have suggested) - even from the UK's allies...

CHRONICLING THE GOLDEN ERA:

Part VIII – 1967

THE GELLING OF DIFFERENT YOUTH CULTURES

1967 was the year when the various strands of youth culture and protest came together as a cohesive and focussed unity - but expressed in different ways: Hippies, Freaks, Heads, Flower Children, Children of God, Psychedelics etc. (these have since become collectively referred to by the convenient (but inaccurate) ‘catch-all’ term – ‘Hippies’) with ‘The Summer of Love’…

SAN FRANSISCO 'HUMAN BE-INS'...

The San Francisco ‘Human Be-Ins’ of 1966 and January 1967 prepared the way, but the global protest / festivals of the summer marked the real arrival of the new generations’ culture and ideology. Peace, love, equality, fairness, justice and human harmony was the aim, and it was expressed through all aspects of culture and through peaceful protest. The beauty of love, peace and nature, contrasted with the ugliness of war, prejudice and hate - with the Flower Power protest as the main symbol of that. (See our section ‘Politics, Society and the Quest for Change’ article: ‘Vietnam War and the Flower Power Protest).

PSYCHEDELIA...

In 1967 Psychedelia was the main expression of the cultural identity of the social and cultural paradigm shift brought about by the emerging generations. It was influenced by experimental use of hallucinogenic drugs (most notably LSD), and eastern philosophy and culture: which involved concentration on sounds and images, such as the meditative AUM sound and the reciting of mantras (repeated chants of devotion), and the focussing on visual images: yantras and mandalas (intricate diagram images which focus the attention and concentration). The Hindu doctrine of maya, which teaches that corporeal reality is an illusion created by our reliance upon the empirical senses, and that true reality is realised by detaching oneself from that, played a big part in informing this 'Hippie', psychedelic ideology.

EXPERIMENTS AND DEVELOPMENTS IN MODERN MUSIC...

Experimenting with new sounds – and with older and traditional sounds adapted to new formats, such as Indian sitar and tabla music and western classical music, was the way ahead for Rock. It was the beginning of Prog. Rock experimentation, and The Beatles ‘Sergeant Pepper’ and ‘Magical Mystery Tour’ albums, The Moody Blues ‘Days of Future Passed’ album, Pink Floyd’s debut album ‘Piper at the Gates of Dawn’, and Procol Harum’s ‘A Whiter Shade of Pale’ are examples of that. - The Beatles got the 'hippie' message out across the world when they played the song 'All You Need Is Love' live - on the first ever global satellite broadcast...

PROTESTS FOR CHANGE...

Protest for peace and justice for all was, of course, part of the psyche of the times, and Dr, Martin Luther King Jr. encouraged unity between the anti – Vietnam War protests and the Civil Rights protests in his speech in New York City.

The power of the popular urge for of Love and Peace was beginning to have an effect: in the course of the year it changed U.S Defence Secretary Robert S. McNamara from military ‘hawk’ to diplomatic ‘dove’…

In Czechoslovakia protests began against the oppressive pro-USSR government, which would later lead to a new and more liberal form of communism being adopted in that country (if only briefly).

AND, SADLY - DAMAGING CONFLICTS AROUND THE WORLD...

Sadly, this year was also marked by one of the most damaging conflicts of modern times: the Six Day War between Israel and its Arab neighbours; the consequences of which are still having a major effect on peace in the Middle East to this day.

Also, the Nigerian Civil War (or Nigeria – Biafra War) broke out in Africa.

COLD WAR AGREEMENT THAT SPACE (AT LEAST...!) SHOULD BE KEPT PEACEFUL...

On a positive note: The Space Race, which up to now had been used as yet another muscle-flexing demonstration of Cold War rivalry and a propaganda exercise by both East and West, in 1967 was the cause of a demonstration of the need for human cooperation and mutual trust, when the Outer Space Treaty was agreed, which recognised that space exploration and space missions should not be militarised, but should be used for peaceful purposes and for the common good of humanity...

It was a hopeful political gesture in a year of hope and good vibes... But, as history shows us, it was not adhered to, and in the 1980s and 90s space projects were planned with the intention of putting weapons, and / or the means of neutralising enemy weapons, into space...

HAPPY BIRTHDAY, CANADA... 

To conclude on a wholly positive note – 1967 was the year to say HAPPY BIRTHDAY CANADA! – It was the Centenary of the Canadian Federation. 

(I found the pictures that make up this collage online. My acknowledgement and thanks to the various people that made them / own them (identity unknown to me. :)) (M).

Textual content:
©Copyright MLM Arts 31. 01. 2015. Edited and re-posted: 06. 03. 2016. Edited and re-posted: 11. 09. 2017. Edited and re-posted: 23. 12. 2919. Edited and re-posted: 08. 11. 2022

PROTESTS FOR CHANGE: 196PROTESTS FOR CHANGE: 1967

THE SUMMER OF LOVE...

1967 was the year of ‘The Summer of Love’; it was the unofficial launch of the Hippie ideology and its endeavours to change the world by the expression of Love and Peace.

(The youth cultural and social revolution was actually expressed in various ways: Hippies, Freaks, Heads, Flower Children, Children of God, Psychedelics etc. These have since become collectively referred to by the convenient (but inaccurate) ‘catch-all’ term – ‘Hippie').

THE ETHOS / RATIONALE OF THE YOUTH REVOLUTION...

In their search for a ‘new reality’ 'Hippies' experimented with eastern cultural and philosophical influences, and also with hallucinogenic and mood altering drugs – most notably the hallucinogenic drug LSD, an anti-psychotic drug developed by Dr. Albert Hoffman in the 1930s, the use of which had been experimentally developed in 1960 by Dr. Timothy Leary and his associates at Harvard University - and marijuana. (See our section: ‘Politics, Society, and The Quest for Change’ article: ‘Psychadelia and the Drug Sub-Culture’).

It was a well-intended and sincere, if perhaps naïve, search for a new perception of reality that, surely, had to be an improvement on the current, accepted perception of reality - which had led the world to the condition that it was in: one in which poverty, famine, racism, sexism, prejudice, and inequality were rife – and even accepted; one in which the whole world lived with the constant threat of nuclear annihilation…

THE IDEAL UNRAVELLED...

That the Hippie dream soon spiralled out of control, and was ‘hi-jacked’ by thrill seekers and band wagon jumpers, and, I’d suggest, was corrupted by the egoism and near self-deification of Timothy Leary himself, is, I further suggest, a reasonable assessment of what transpired as the phenomenon unfolded... 

BUT WAS WELL-INTENDED AND SINCERE...

However, as I said, it started out as a well-intended and sincere attempt to find an alternative way of living that would benefit all humanity and, make no mistake, it DID achieve major results in terms of hastening the end of the Vietnam War and advances in Civil Rights, women’s rights, gay rights and social equality – even if a long way short of the naïve Utopian goal that it strived for…

THE 1967 'HUMAN BE-IN'

The pre-cursor for The Summer of Love was 1966s ‘Human B-In’ festival / protest in San Francisco, which was staged to coincide with the State of California criminalising the use of LSD. (See our section: ‘The Chronicles: 1966’ article: ‘Protests for Change1966’).

1967 began with another ‘Human Be-In’, at Golden Gate Park, San Francisco, on January 14. The main focus in the summer, although again centered in San Francisco, where some 100,000 people converged on the Haight-Ashbury neighbourhood, saw similar gatherings / festivals all across the USA, Canada and Europe. The Grateful Dead guitarist Bob Weir reflected:

‘Haight Ashbury was a ghetto of bohemians who wanted to do anything—and we did but I don't think it has happened since. Yes there was LSD. But Haight Ashbury was not about drugs. It was about exploration, finding new ways of expression, being aware of one's existence’

'SGT. PEPPER'S LONELY HEARTS CLUB BAND' ALBUM...

The Beatles album ‘Sergeant Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band’ is often referred to as the central sound to ‘the soundtrack to The Summer of Love', and Perhaps the centrepiece event of The Summer of Love was The Beatles playing ‘All You Need Is Love’ ‘live’ on the first ever global satellite broadcast - on June the 25th 1967. The song was specially written for the broadcast: The Beatles has a slot of just a few minutes to get the 'Hippie' ideology of The Summer of Love across the international airwaves – so it had to be a good one! ‘All You Need Is Love’ – a direct message, and a mantra-like chorus – it worked superbly...

ANTI-VIETNAM WAR PROTESTS

Also in America, protests against the Vietnam War continued to gather momentum. In Oakland, California in October a protest at a U.S army induction centre resulted in several arrests, including that of Folk protest singer and veteran anti-war campaigner Joan Baez.

PROTESTS AGAINST DOW CHEMICAL: COLLABORATORS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF NAPALM...

Also in October, anti-war protestors on the University of Wisconsin's Madison campus blocked access to the Commerce building to prevent recruiters from Dow Chemical from entering the building on a recruitment drive. Dow chemical had collaborated with the U.S military to develop and produce the chemical weapon of mass destruction - napalm… This action resulted in use of force by the police, and rioting in response. The violence that ensued caused many students at the University of Wisconsin to become militant anti-war protestors.

DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING JR.

In April, in Riverside church New York City, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. called for unity between Civil Rights protestors and anti- Vietnam War protestors in common cause for justice and peace for all. As ever, Dr. King found words to express the situation (Vietnam in this case), in a way that few, if any, other people of the era could match:

"They must see Americans as strange liberators. The Vietnamese people proclaimed their own independence in 1945, after a combined French and Japanese occupation and before the communist revolution in China. They were led by Ho Chi Minh. Even though they quoted the American Declaration of Independence in their own document of freedom, we refused to recognize them. Instead, we decided to support France in its re-conquest of her former colony. Our government felt then that the Vietnamese people were not ready for independence, and we again fell victim to the deadly Western arrogance that has poisoned the international atmosphere for so long."

THE USA WRITERS AND EDITORS ANTI-WAR PROTEST...

1967 was a year when writers used their famously mighty pens to join in protests - to great effect. In the USA many writers and editors signed up to the Writers and Editors War Tax Protest pledge, organised by Gerald Walker of The New York Times Magazine and vowed to withhold a portion of their taxes in protest against the Vietnam War.

FREEDOM PROTRESTS IN CZECHOSLOVAKIA

In Czechoslovakia writers were prominent in the rising protests against the pro-USSR government of Communist Party Leader Antonin Novotný. In June liberal politicians, students, and the Writers’ Union Congress were openly speaking out, and calling for greater freedom. By September there was an organised movement against him, led by Alexander Dubček. These were the events that led to Dubček becoming leader of the country, and the Prague Spring ‘revolution’ of 1968. I will describe those events in the next ‘Chronicle’…

I conclude this section with a breakthrough for freedom and human rights that I wasn’t sure whether to put in the ‘Politics’ section, or here, in ‘Protest’…

DECRIMINALISING OF GAY SEXUALITY IN THE UK...

In 1967 the British government passed The Sexual Offences Act, which legalised homosexuality between consenting adults over the age of 21. This was an important first step towards civil rights for gay people, but it was very limited. It only applied in England and Wales: not Scotland and Northern Ireland: it was only in 1980 that being gay was legalised in Scotland. Also, there were limitations on gay relationships: they had to be strictly in private (to the extent, I’m told, that gay men could not even be in the same house together – doing nothing sexual - without having to close the curtains!)

The reason that I was inclined to put this in the ‘Politics’ section is this: gay protesting was not unknown, but it was very rare. It’s not difficult to reason why, I’d say: unlike Civil Rights, women’s rights, or anti-war protestors, gay people were criminalised and vilified by the Establishment, and reviled by most of society as a result. For a gay person to protest in the streets was to reveal themselves as a criminal, and risk not only prosecution, but persecution. Therefore it is difficult to say that the legalising of homosexuality was as a result of pressure from protest.

In the U.K the political arena, however, the absurdity of criminalising decent, law abiding responsible adults because of their sexuality came home to roost in Parliament…

In 1965 Edward Heath, the rising star of the Conservative Party, won the leadership of that party when Sir Alec Douglas Home stood down after narrowly losing the 1964 general election to the Harold Wilson led Labour Party. Wilson was the template for the modern, wily, opportunist politician; recognising the threat from the charismatic Heath he took advantage of the pre World Cup feel-good factor in England to call a snap general election in 1966. He won a convincing majority, but the Heath popularity continued to grow, and in 1970 the Conservatives won the U.K general election. Edward Heath was the only U.K Prime Minister in modern times to remain unmarried – unusual for an ambitious politician. No aspersions were ever cast concerning this, but what was known to people around Heath (but never revealed to the public until 2007 – two years after his death) – was that he was gay.

Clearly, it was not in the interests of Parliament to have a secretively gay – and publicly popular – leader of Her Majesty’s opposition party…??? Besides that, who knows how many other secretly gay politicians there were at the time…???

I suggest then, that it was more for reasons of protecting itself from scandal, than from pressure from protest that the U.K Parliament legalised homosexuality. However, it had the effect of making gay people more open about protesting for their rights, and from then on Gay Liberation protests became much more active and frequent, and were, in time, to lead to civil rights that gay people have in the U.K today, though, like all campaigns for equality, that remains a work in progress…

CONCLUSION: PROTESTS WERE BEGINNING TO HAVE A BIG AND POSITIVE EFFECT...

In 1967, I think it’s fair to say - things happened… Protest was making an impact… I think it was the year that began to loosen the grip of the Establishment, and protests of Love and Peace really made a difference to the struggle for freedoms and equality. The Peace and Love ethos and the protests and demonstrations expressing that, must, I suggest, be credited with hastening the end of the Vietnam War. It must have been a factor in U.S Defence Secretary Robert S. McNamara's decision to changed his erstwhile ‘hawkish’ approach, and advise President Johnson to pursue a diplomatic solution to the Vietnam War. Johnson rejected this, and McNamara tendered his resignation. The campaign against the war was having an effect - but there was much still to do…

(M).

Textual content:

© Copyright. M. L. M. 26. 08. 2012 Edited and re-posted 11.11.2013. Edited and re-posted 22. 01. 2015; 11. 03. 2016. Edited and re-posted: 19. 09. 2017. Edited and re-posted: 24. 12. 2019. Edited and re-posted: 12. 11. 2022

1967: AN ESTABLISHMENT PERSPECTIVE ON THE EFFECTS OF PROTEST IN THE USA...

This is a political cartoon from the Establishment perspective...

'Chronicles' is primarily a history page - for the purpose of recording a more accurate picture of this era than is often portrayed by modern historians... 🤔

While we highlight in particular the youth social and cultural revolution challenge to Establishment convention, and the protests and campaigns for change - we are also very particular about trying to be fair and even-handed, by giving everyone their say - and by postings and articles that describe the more Establishment point of view... 🤔

This political cartoon from 1967 is an example of that. It's (I think (?)) by American cartoonist Jack Knox (my acknowledgement and thanks to him).

The cartoon (as you can tell) depicts the various anti-Vietnam War protests - including Dr. Martin Luther King's pronouncements in New York in 1967, attempting to unite Civil Rights protests with the anti-Vietnam War protests (which the has been specifically highlighted in this particular image) - along with political activists involved in politics, as giving strength and encouragement to the enemies of the USA: especially North Vietnam and the Viet Cong (the South Vietnamese guerrilla force that was conducting the war against the South Vietnamese government).

It's the other side of the argument - and 'Chronicles' is all about fair discussion... 🤔

(I found this posting if this cartoon online. My acknowledgement and thanks to whoever posted it (identity unknown to me.) 🙂) (M).

POLITICS and THE COLD WAR: 1967

THE POLITICIAN WHOSE MIDDLE NAME WAS STRANGE...

The 1961 – 1968 U.S Secretary for Defence was Mr. Robert S. McNamara. This was a politician whose middle name was Strange…

I’m not making this up. I’m completely serious; his full name was Robert Strange McNamara. Yes folks, he could quite literally say: ‘my middle name is Strange…’ In the politics of the Cold War era, I guess we must give him credit for being the only politician to actually admit to that. – ‘Coz if you ask me, the same could have been said for all of ‘em… 😕

1967 justified McNamara's right to that appellation - in a quite literal sense... But then so did other politicians, and not for the first or last time in history... 😉

THE REALPOLITIK OF 1967...

1967 was a year that highlighted just how strange the realpolitik of the era was, and how confused and distorted ideologies and ‘loyalties’ in world politics had become… Please read on – and be amazed (and perhaps a little confused!) by it all…

THE SIX DAY WAR (5th. - 10th of JUNE)

The main story of the year was the renewed hostility between the Israeli state and their Arab neighbours, in what is recorded in history as ‘The Six Day War’. The outcome of this particular Israel - Arab conflict resonated down through the years and continues to be, perhaps, the biggest stumbling block to peace in the Middle East. By this I mean the Israeli’s capture of Jerusalem more than any other outcome of the conflict.

THE IMPORTANCE OF JERUSALEM AND THE POWER OF SYMBOLISM...

THE JEWISH PERSPECTIVE...

I’d call the city of Jerusalem a monument to the power of symbolism. For centuries it has been a war trophy for one conqueror or another in human history, yet its strategic significance is negligible. But, due to its being a centre of religious importance for Jews, Christians and Muslims, its symbolic significance, and its usefulness as a powerful rallying call by political rhetoricians, is immeasurable.

Allow me to give a very brief overview of how this plays out in the current situation in Israel / Palestine:

The Israeli state as we know it today was primarily a secularist creation, established, after many years of politically lobbying, and the buying and cultivating of land (the Kibbutzim), by the Zionist movement: who wanted only that Jews (as defined ethnically as well as religiously) would have a land of their own where they could live without fear of the persecution that the Jewish diaspora has suffered in countries all over the world for centuries. In 1948 this was achieved, but only after Britain had renounced its post WWII role as mandatory administrator and protector of Palestine, and pulled its troops out of Palestine in the middle of a terror war between Jewish immigrants to the country, most of whom had left Europe after the horrors of the WWII Holocaust, and the indigenous Palestinian Arabs, the great majority of whom are Muslim, supported by neighbouring Arab countries. A truce was brokered which left the land divided between what was thenceforth called Israel, and what remained Palestine: which was now under Jordanian jurisdiction. (To Palestinians, and to countries hostile to Israel, the whole land remains Palestine).

The holy city of Jerusalem remained within the boundaries of post-division Palestine – on the west bank of the river Jordan. This was a difficulty for the secular Zionist Jews who had established the Jewish homeland as, for one thing, Orthodox religious Jews (particularly those indigenous to Palestine) rejected this establishment of a Jewish homeland as ‘not the work, nor the will, of God’. Also, a great many Jews around the world were settled and long since integrated (if often 'uneasily') into the countries where they had lived for generations, and had no real interest in giving up their homes and all that was familiar, to go to a hostile land and start all over again.

Taking Jerusalem in 1967 had the effect of doing much to get the religious establishment ‘on side’ with the Zionist rulers of Israel, and also worked as a triumphalist rallying call to world Jewry. As Ukrainian Natan Sharansky stated:

‘We knew all too well the anti-Semitic stereotypes about greed, parasitism, and cowardice — but about what Judaism stood for, we knew nothing. That was before 1967…. The call that went up from Jerusalem, “The Temple Mount is in our hands,” penetrated the Iron Curtain and forged an almost mystic link with our people. And while we had no idea what the Temple Mount was, we did know that the fact that it was in our hands had won us respect. Like a cry from our distant past, it told us that we were no longer displaced and isolated. We belonged to something, even if we did not yet know what, or why… Instinctively, and without any real connection to Judaism, we became Zionists. We knew that somewhere there was a country that called us its children, and this knowledge filled us with pride'.

(See:[www.sixdaywar.org/contents/soviets.asp](http://www.sixdaywar.org/contents/soviets.asp?fbclid=IwAR07LTRsSqjd7U02Eqyumdjidy7WYSWksfw8JoncsDGmtrFDULY9tAnH7lw))

The capture of the old city of Jerusalem was, and is, therefore, of huge symbolic and propaganda importance to the secular authorities who govern the state if Israel, and to relinquish it would be unthinkable for them, as it could cause the unravelling of the tight bond of unity that it established between Israelis and the Jewish diaspora, and that could undermine the very security of the state.

THE ARAB / MUSLIM PERSPECTIVE...

For Muslims the importance of Jerusalem dates to the very origins of Islam. Originally it was towards Jerusalem, not Mecca, that Muslims were directed by the Prophet Mohammed (pbuh) to pray. Also, according to Islamic belief, it was from a rock on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem that the Prophet ascended into Heaven to consult with God (Allah), and to meet with the other major prophets: Jesus, John The Baptist, Moses and Abraham (pbut), and be instructed that he is the last and greatest of God’s prophets. (The Dome of the Rock is built around the site of the Prophet’s ascension).

In 637 the second Caliph of Islam, Umar, captured Jerusalem from the Christian Byzantine Empire. He built Al-Aqsa Mosque on the Temple Mount. It is the third holiest place in Islam: after Mecca and Medina.

The main thing to consider about Jerusalem from an Islamic perspective, is that any land that has been conquered (or, more accurately from an Islamic point of view, re-conquered) for Allah becomes a land of Islam: Dar al-Islam. Once conquered it cannot be conceded to any non-Muslim power. But Islam is a pragmatic faith; what can be done is to agree a lengthy truce with enemies, on honourable and reasonable terms; a truce which can be renewed again and again. In this way the land is not conceded, but conflict can be averted. (This was often the case during the Crusades). (See Israel – Palestine Journal: ‘Our Jerusalem’).

THE SIX DAY WAR AND THE CONNIVING POLITICS INVOLVED...

Now to the war, and the complex and conniving politics involved in this conflict…

The USSR had originally given loud vocal and political support to the state of Israel, after WWII. Its politicians made impassioned pleas on behalf of the need for the oppressed Jewish people to have a homeland. This rang somewhat disingenuous, as the Stalinist USSR, and Imperial Russia before that, had a notorious record of being among the worst offenders in the persecution of Jews. It is widely believed that the Soviet stance was a strategic ploy to gain a foothold in the Middle East region dominated by Great Britain and France. When Israel declined to ‘cozy up’ to its Soviet political supporter, the USSR changed sides in the 1950s, and armed and equipped the Arab nations against Israel. Israel meanwhile, got similar support from the USA.

Hostility between Israel and its Arab, Muslim neighbours was on-going since the terror conflict of 1947 -48, and the whole region was on a constant war footing, with the Cold War powers watching closely and playing a strategic, diplomatic and political game.

There is a strong case that in early May the USSR fed ‘misinformation’ (to use political speak: that’s plain LIES to you or I…) to Egypt that Israel was massing troops on the Syrian border in preparation for a surprise attack. Egypt, Jordan and Syria, with military contingents from Iraq and other Arab nations, massed their own troops on the borders. On May 22nd President Nasser of Egypt closed the Gulf of Aqaba to Israeli shipping – in spite of pressure from the USA and Great Britain that this was unacceptable.

It is believed by many that the USSR set out to provoke an Israeli pre-emptive assault against its Arab neighbours, thereby giving the Soviets just cause to aid their allies against Israeli aggression, and more or less occupy the Middle East. They gambled that the USA was overstretched by the war in Vietnam, and that Britain was in decline, and anyway, would be hesitant to get involved again in the Middle East after its humiliating withdrawal in 1948, and defeat by Nasser in the Suez crisis of 1956. They were probably right, as the U.S government was coming under increasing pressure at home over its involvement in Vietnam. The USA declined Israeli requests for increased military aid, but worked tirelessly to attempt a diplomatic solution to the problem in the Middle East, as did Britain.

If this was a Soviet strategy then it was paying off, and continued to do so when the Israeli’s did, indeed, launch a pre-emptive attack on all fronts against the Arab forces…

What the Soviets, nor anyone else, could not have foreseen was the devastating effectiveness of the Israeli attack – and its very rapid, and absolute victory… In just six days (June 5th – 10th) the Golan Heights on the Israel – Syria border fell, the Sinai desert and the Gaza Strip were taken from Egypt… and the West Bank and Jerusalem captured from Jordan…

The Sinai desert and the Golan Heights have since been returned to Egypt and Syria, and the West Bank and Gaza Strip Palestinians allowed a measure of autonomy – but Jerusalem remains in Israeli hands… A monument to the power of symbolism…

To add to the sense of confused loyalties and paranoia that permeated The Cold War: an incident took place on June 8th when Israeli jets and torpedo boats attacked the U.S technical research ship USS Liberty in international waters off the Sinai Peninsula. This cost the lives of 34 U.S crew, and injured 170. It also caused severe damage to the ship. Israel claimed it was accidental, and paid $3, 323,500 compensation. However, it remains controversial as there are those – including survivors of the attack – who express doubts as to how such a sustained and co-ordinated attack could have been an accident…

The world of deceit, subterfuge and international paranoia that was The Cold War era… :O

THE NIGERIA - BIAFRA WAR

The Nigeria - Biafra War which began in July 1967 highlighted this still further… This was a civil war when the south-eastern region of Nigeria attempted to break away and become The Republic of Biafra. Its causes were factional, tribal, cultural and religious; Nigeria had always simmered with tensions between these various mutually antagonistic groups, and in a continent that was rife with conflict civil war was no real surprise. What is more remarkable is the list of countries that allied with each side. On the Nigerian side were, for example, Great Britain and its far from obvious political and military bedfellows The People’s Republic of China – and the USSR (themselves on far from friendly terms with each other).. Add to these Syria and Algeria: recent allies against Israel in The Six Day War, but not on cordial terms with Britain.

Lining up with Biafra were the racist apartheid allies of Rhodesia and South Africa, along with Israel, and France: a NATO ally of Britain, and Portugal, which also enjoyed otherwise good diplomatic relations with Britain.

The nature and integrity of Cold War conflict, politics and diplomacy gets murkier the closer you look at it… :O

OPTIMISTICALLLY...

FREEDOM MOVEMENTS IN COMMUNIST EUROPE: CZECKOSLOVAKIA...

On the more optimistic side – 1967 saw the beginnings of a real movement for greater freedom and democracy in the Soviet Bloc, Warsaw Pact country Czechoslovakia. In June liberal politicians, students, and the Writers’ Union Congress were openly speaking out against the policies of Communist Party Leader Antonin Novotný. By September there was an organised movement against him, led by Alexander Dubček. These were the events that led to Dubček becoming leader of the country, and the Prague Spring ‘revolution’ of 1968. I will describe those events in the next ‘Chronicle’…

INDIAN ELECTS A MUSLIM LEADER. SRI LANKA ELECTS A FEMALE LEADER...   

Also optimistically, the Indian sub-continent had, in 1960, shown the West an example of real democracy when Ceylon (now Sri Lanka) elected the first female head of government. In 1967 Predominantly Hindu India demonstrated social harmony and acceptance in politics by electing Zakir Hussain as its third President, and first Muslim president.

BUT MORE ON THE DOWN SIDE: GEORGIA, USA, ELECTS A SEGREGATIONIST... :/

Not so optimistically, in the USA the Democratic Party’s Lester Maddox was elected Governor of Georgia. What’s odd about this is that the Democrats are supposed to be the more liberal of the two U.S political parties, but Maddox was an avowed segregationist, and promoted himself with a bold declaration that he’d willingly go to jail in support of his racist views. And he was a LIBERAL, huh..? Strange…

MORE ON THE STRANGE POLITICS OF MR 'STRANGE' MCNAMARA...

And speaking of Strange… Let’s return to Mr. Robert Strange McNamara…

In 1967 protests against the Vietnam War were getting to the U.S government; cracks were beginning to appear. Moreover, the strategy of mass troop deployment, and blanket bombing of North Vietnamese cities (encouraged by McNamara) was not paying off, and did not show any promise that it ever would. Add to this that the North Vietnamese and Viet Cong had secretly begun planning for 1968s Tet Offensive, and as part of that were intensifying military operations in South Vietnam, and inflicting heavy casualties on the U.S and its allies.

By the summer of 1967 McNamara had changed his thinking on U.S strategy in Vietnam and advocated a negotiated peace. He helped draft the San Antonio formula, a peace proposal offering to end the U.S. bombing of the north and inviting the North Vietnamese to hold discussions towards peace. The North Vietnamese felt confident that the regime in South Vietnam was weak and unpopular, and were aware that the U.S was losing its appetite for continued military involvement. They rejected the proposal in October.

In November, McNamara recommended to President Johnson that the U.S freeze its troop levels, call off its bombing campaign, and place the responsibility for ground fighting on the South Vietnamese. Johnson rejected this. McNamara submitted his resignation, and would leave office early in 1968.

His next job would be president of the World Bank. His previous job had been president of the Ford motor company… His job in-between was running the U.S military machine and directing U.S involvement in the Vietnam War… This man was a corporate executive and banker… He was in charge of U.S military affairs for most of the 1960s… Strange..? Not so strange..? Or - that explains absolutely everything…?

I suggest this was situation captured the essential message in Joseph Heller’s novel, ‘Catch 22': that really, war is just a business enterprise... 🤔

(M).

Textual content:

© Copyright. MLM Arts 25. 08. 2012 Edited and re-posted 09.11.2013; 19. 01. 2015; 08. 03. 2016. Edited and re-posted: 16. 09. 2017. Edited and re-posted: 26. 12. 2019. Edited and re-posted: 12. 11. 2022

THE SIX DAY WAR

This is a political cartoon by the American cartoonist, Greenberg, about The Six Day War: the major event in the world during the year that we are currently revisiting: 1967...

The Six Day War was the response by the state of Israel to the massing of troops on its borders by its hostile Arab neighbours: Syria; Jordan; and Egypt.

Expecting that an attack was imminent, Israel took pre-emptive action - and launched a massive attack against all three neighbours.

The war lasted just six days - and Israel captured the Golan Heights from Syria; The Sinai desert and the Gaza strip from Egypt...

It seemed a triumph for Israel - and a securing of its borders from hostility by the Arab countries sworn to destroy it...

Perhaps more importantly, the capture of Jerusalem was a very significant symbolic coup by the secular Jewish state of Israel - for two main reasons:

The orthodox religious Jewish community (especially those who lived and had always lived in Palestine / Israel) had opposed the establishing of the state of Israel in 1948, because they saw it as political - and not the act or Will of God. The capture of Jerusalem went a long way to persuading that (quite powerful and influential) community that the Jewish state was indeed God's Will...

Secondly, the Jewish diaspora - especially those in Eastern Europe - which was not inclined to move to Israel (they were long settled in their homelands - and even in spite of generations of pogroms, still considered those lands to be home; they had little knowledge or interest in the struggle of the Israeli state). When Israel took Jerusalem, the triumphant cry went out to the diaspora, that 'the Temple Mount was in our hands again...'. This ignited feelings of identification with the traditional, biblical Jewish homeland, and encouraged Jewish migration into an Israel that desperately needed to increase its population...

(Please see the 'Chronicles' article: 'Politics and The Cold War !967': last posted: 12. 11. 2022)

It was believed by many that the astounding military success of The Six Day War would achieve long lasting security for Israel...

This cartoon captures the irony of that confidence...

...Because history shows that The Six Day War (and its results) was to be be the catalyst for the escalating of tensions and conflict in the Middle East, between Israel and its neighbours, that continue to this day...

(I'm not sure if this image is by Greenberg - or if he just added captions to an existing image(?)

I found this image online; as is clear, it's from 'Cartoon Stock' - my acknowledgement and thanks to that company, and, of course, to the cartoonist, Greenberg. :)) (M).