|
|
|
Need a Term Paper for College?
Our very best writers will produce any essay or term paper you are looking for! We offer reasonable prices and deliver top quality papers on virtually any topic. Our service is available 24/7. Be sure that we are reliable and consistent.
Order your custom term paper for only $12.95 a page!
Campus Unrest
In response to great opposition to United States’ involvement in the Vietnam War, the antiwar movement of the 1960s sprung forth. A vast majority of involvement in this movement was represented on college campuses across the nation. Many college students wholeheartedly believed that the war in Vietnam served no point. America was simply once again sticking its nose in business that was not our own. As a result of the war, universities nationwide in the sixties were in uproar as students attempted to express their opinions through both violent and nonviolent means.
Anti-Vietnam protests were first displayed through teach-ins that took
place during the fall and spring semesters (“Campus Unrest” 1). These events were large discussions held on college campuses where students, faculty and administration met to openly learn about and discuss issues relating to the war. Teach-ins were efforts for Americans in relation to universities to voice their opinions and get the attention of government officials with the prayer that United States involvement in the war would not continue to increase at such a rapid rate. They stressed the importance of peace, not violence. Such teach-ins first took place in March of 1965 at the University of Michigan. This set a precedent for other colleges and universities as these rallies began to take place more and more frequently (“Campus Unrest 1).
One example of a teach-in that occurred during the anti-Vietnam war movement was discussed in the Rutgers Daily TARGUM. In April of 1965, students and faculty at Rutgers in New Jersey staged a “Teach-in on Vietnam”. Professors William Fitzpatrick, Lloyd Gardner, and Warren Susman had taken the podium to debate their stances on the war in Vietnam. Gardner felt that “[w]estern civilization was greatest when isolated to the size of Greek city-states, and failed most miserable when it reached out to take lands it was not entitled to take” (Hochman 1). Fitzpatrick on the other hand expressed a very different opinion: “We are fighting in Vietnam not to save our ‘little brown brother,’ but to save ourselves...we live in a world today of civilizational struggle” (Hochman 1).The third professor, Susman, suddenly became extremely angry and bolted towards the two, banging on the podium when he approached. The crowd witnessing the event went wild and stood to applaud Susman, and the remainder of the teach-in proved to be just as out of control. Eleven speeches were given in all discussing U.S. involvement in Vietnam and other pertinent issues. This teach-in at Rutgers was similar to many others nationwide that took place on college campuses in opposition to the war (Hochman 2).
Another teach-in took place at the University of California Berkely. It was the largest teach-in yet and it lasted for thirty-six hours and over thirty thousand people participated in it. There were also marches on Washington Avenue in which twenty-five thousand people attended. These marches became popular when the college students went home for the summer (Wells 25).
Also, in the early 1960s drastic social change was being pushed from another direction at universities. An organization known as Students for a Democratic Society sprung forth in order to instigate this type of reform (“Vietnam” 2). Leaders of the SDS realized that many college students were becoming restless with the way many aspects of society were operating, especially the United States’ action in the Vietnam War. They were sick of sitting back indifferently while the aspects of society they valued were falling apart (“Port” 8). The SDS believed that colleges and universities were the ideal places to initiate such social transitions in America. There were four main reasons these students felt convicted in this way. One was because these schools were places of education that had great influences on the opinions of students attending. A second reason was because colleges were the most principal establishments for utilizing information.
Another was the way skills of persuasion and exploitation learned in classes could be used. A fourth reason was the great socioeconomic diversity present on every college campus. Universities were optimal locations for nearly every thought and opinion from across the country to be expressed (“Port” 12).
For these grounds, Students for a Democratic Society came together to ensure that universities stepped out of the shadows and straight into the political involvement they had for so long left up to their predecessors. They stated: As students for a democratic society, we are committed to stimulating this kind of social movement, this kind of visionand program in campus and community across the country. If we appear to seek the unattainable, as it has been said, then let it be known that we do so to avoid the unimaginable (“Port” 14).
The University of California at Berkeley is yet another example of a college campus in turmoil during the 1960s. Before the war in Vietnam, students had already begun to organize nonviolent demonstrations to protest the administration’s recent request for political activism on campus to end. Students saw this requirement as a violation of their freedom, and as a result they formed the “Free Speech Movement,” holding numerous public objections (“Berkeley” 1)
In 1969, the university planned to construct new dormitories on a recently purchased piece of property. Students saw this idea as yet another opportunity for them to rebel, and they soon flooded the area in order to prevent building from beginning. In the end, the head of the university saw that the only way to end this hazardous ordeal was to cancel the plans, and so he did (“Berkeley” 1-2).
Many American students were convinced that the colleges and universities they attended were failing to educate them on the world around them. Learning how to do industrial labor or desk work was hardly going to be effective in getting involved in political change. A group of students formed the May 2nd Movement which was a protest in 1964 organized by students who felt that their universities were not providing a proper education. They wanted to learn vital skills and information necessary to be active in the political aspects of their nation.
The main goal of the May 2nd Movement of 1964 was to form a way to
counteract the actions of the “imperialistic” United States government, but in order to do so they knew their claims had to be well researched and backed. Students suspected that the U.S. invasion of Vietnam served no purpose but to gain more power and repress the Vietnamese people (“What” 2-4).
In order to ensure that from this point forward students were no longer being poorly educated, they began to organize their own universities, the first being F.U.N.Y. (the Free University of New York). These schools were run and attended by those active in the May 2nd Movement. Efforts to spread their beliefs throughout the nation were made in two main ways. First was a publication known as the “Free Student” that documented student occurrences dealing with the war and the anti-war movement. This magazine was made readily available on nearly every college campus across the country. Second was through study groups where students met voluntarily to discuss and inform themselves about how to instigate political reform (“What” 5).
These young people expressed great opposition to the war in Vietnam because they believed that it was not what was best for the United States as it affected everyone in one way or another. Students were affected through their education, laborers in the steel mills were affected as the government prevented them from walking out on the job in order to maintain production, and the entire country was damaged as billions of dollars were removed from the national budget in order to fund the efforts overseas(“What” 4-5).
A turning point of the anti-war movement occurred in November of 1969. The New Mobilization to End the War, otherwise know as the “Mobe”, proved to have a turnout of nearly a 500,000 people, the biggest crowd ever to gather in the United States in order to “ignite a political shift” (Wells 334). In an article entitled “The Mobe: High Noon for the Anti-War Movement”, a student at the University of Chicago recounted his experience as an active participant in this infamous protest. His words represented the thoughts and actions of many young adults in the American home front during the Vietnam War (“Mobe” 3-4). He described his arrival, along with countless other students, on a bus to Washington D.C. as absolutely unbelievable. People packed the streets forming a crowd that appeared as if it went on for miles and miles. He soon learned that one group had recently been pacing back and forth at Arlington Cemetery, bearing candles and screaming out the names of United States soldiers who had lost their lives so far in battle (Wells 391).
A second group known as the Weathermen was a part of the Students for a Democratic Society. These protesters made the decision to incorporate acts of violence in their demonstrations. They illegally stampeded the embassy of South Vietnam and upon doing so were sprayed with tear gas by police officials. In response to the halt of their actions, the Weathermen suddenly became violently out of control, shattering glass and flaming trash cans (“Mobe” 3-4).
Hearing these reports, the author of this article said he claimed to be filled with excitement at the possibility of witnessing or even participating in such events. He then started off to join the march down Pennsylvania Avenue past the White House. Along with other protesters he proceeded to yell profane chants such as, “1 , 2, 3, 4, we don’t want your fu@#*@# war.” Nearing the final leg of their march, the protesters were said to have seen John Mitchell, the Attorney General, and attacked him, hurling trash and debris in his direction. Police responded to this sudden violence with the release of massive amounts of tear gas. The student recounting this event remembered thinking that surely the American government would be forced to react to this outrage of events; however, his hopes proved to be no more than that (“Mobe” 4-6).
The primary protest against the war in Vietnam occurred in April, 1965. This demonstration was organized by the Students for a Democratic Society. They advocated equality for all races and a breakdown of the nuclear inventions. This protest included 20,000 young adults that marched in order to show the government the viewpoints of the majority of their generation who were opposed to the Vietnam War (“Vietnam” 2).
Although collegiate opposition to the Vietnam War was first expressed through nonviolent manners as with the SDS, students soon realized that their voices, even though the government heard them, were not instigating the extreme change they had hoped for in what was going on overseas. Many decided that further action needed to be taken. They could not give up their efforts when their opinions had already been made known, so protests soon began to display much violence. What had once started as peaceful efforts soon took a turn for the worst (“Rise” 6).
One college in particular where opposition to the war in Vietnam was made very apparent was Kent State. On May 1, 1970, a group of students in a riot burned down the ROTC building on campus. After this, Governor John Rhodes of Ohio ordered the National Guard to the Campus. On May 4, The Ohio National Guard opened fire on the demonstrators. The National Guard had been ordered to leave two days earlier, but a large protest had begun about the United States’ invasion of Cambodia and about the guards being on the campus, so the guards stayed put. The guardsmen were ordered into riot formation and some of the demonstrators began throwing rocks at them. A pistol shot was heard, and the guards opened fire at the crowd. The shooting lasted for thirteen seconds, and in that time, four people were killed and nine others were wounded (Dunnigan 264). The Kent State killings sparked protests across the country. More than four hundred universities and colleges shut down as students and professors staged strikes, and nearly a hundred thousand demonstrators marched on Washington Avenue, encircling the White House and other government buildings (Karnow 89).
Another of the major demonstrations expressing unrest on college campuses during the Vietnam War took place in 1970 at Jackson State College. This Mississippi school was brought into the spotlight in May of that year as students held demonstrations protesting racial and civil inequalities and the recent killings of students at Kent State University. During this riot, fires were lit across campus and a truck was flipped over. When firefighters determined that they could not calm the riot alone, they phoned for police assistance. Around seventy-five officers were dispatched to the scene at Jackson State loaded with ammunition and ready to take any action necessary to put the violent protests to a halt (“Jackson”1-2).
The police made efforts to enter both male and female dormitories in order to help put out the fires, but students formed a blockade and refused to let them through. Within minutes police officers began firing shots into the crowd. In the end the lives of around fifteen students were taken that day as a result of police shootings, and many other young people were badly injured. Following this vicious incident, Mississippi state police refused to comment that they had in fact played a major role in the violent retaliation at Jackson State that day (“Jackson” 1-2).
The following June, President Nixon responded when he called for the Commission on Campus Unrest. Several hearings were held concerning the turmoil at Jackson State, but despite the testimonies of faculty and students at the school, no one was prosecuted for the damaged and lost lives. Since nothing was done to punish the police officers, the Jackson City Council decided they would block off Lynch Street to automobile traffic. A memorial plaza, the Gibbs-Green Plaza, was constructed in honor of the lives taken at the Jackson State riots (“Jackson” 1-2).
The unrest on college campuses during the 1960s was one of the drastic results of the United States getting involved in the war in Vietnam. Students held great opposition to the war because they believed that the U.S. was power hungry and greedy, looking out only for their best interest and forgetting the liberties of the Vietnamese people. This major aversion was expressed through changes in clothing and behavior, but much more importantly through both violent and nonviolent demonstrations. American universities nationwide reaped the effects of the Vietnam war as students decided they would not longer be indifferent but instead freely proclaim their viewpoints through words and actions.
Bibliography
“Berkeley in the 60s.” 9 May. 2001. .
“Campus Unrest.” 28 Apr. 2001. .
“Campus Unrest at Virginia Tech.” 28 Apr. 2001. .
Dunnigan, James F., and Albert A. Nofi. Dirty Little Secrets of the Vietnam War. New York: Thomas Dunne Books, 1999.
Hochman, Jerry. “Viet Policy is Blasted by Faculty During All-Night Teach-In Protest.” Rutgers Daily TARGUM. 9 May. 2001. .
“Jackson State 1970.” 28 May. 2001. .
Karnow, Stanley. Vietnam: A History. New York: Penguin Books, 1997.
“The Mobe: High Noon for the Anti-War Movement.” 6 May. 2001. .
“Port Huron Statement.” 9 May. 2001. .
“The Rise and Fall of the Anti-Vietnam War Movement in the U.S.” 28 Apr. 2001. .
“The Vietnam War: The Effects at Home.” 28 Apr. 2001. .
“What is the May 2nd Movement.” 9 May. 2001. .
Wells, Tom. The War Within. Berkeley: University of Ca. Press, 1994.
Works Cited
“Berkeley in the 60s.” 9 May. 2001. .
“Campus Unrest.” 28 Apr. 2001. .
“Campus Unrest at Virginia Tech.” 28 Apr. 2001. .
Dunnigan, James F., and Albert A. Nofi. Dirty Little Secrets of the Vietnam War. New York: Thomas Dunne Books, 1999.
Hochman, Jerry. “Viet Policy is Blasted by Faculty During All-Night Teach-In Protest.” Rutgers Daily TARGUM. 9 May. 2001. .
“Jackson State 1970.” 28 May. 2001. .
Karnow, Stanley. Vietnam: A History. New York: Penguin Books, 1997.
“The Mobe: High Noon for the Anti-War Movement.” 6 May. 2001. .
“Port Huron Statement.” 9 May. 2001. .
“The Rise and Fall of the Anti-Vietnam War Movement in the U.S.” 28 Apr. 2001. .
“The Vietnam War: The Effects at Home.” 28 Apr. 2001. .
“What is the May 2nd Movement.” 9 May. 2001. .
Wells, Tom. The War Within. Berkeley: University of Ca. Press, 1994.
Word Count: 2439
|
|
|
Copyright 1999-2004 Wow Essays, All Rights
Reserved
Design by Dream Net Studio
|
|
