First, a quick shout out to Rich for the good food and good times at the Skellig! Good looking out.
Again - another day of thoughtful lecture and discussion. I appreciated Prof. Kryder's defense of the role of the "white authority structure" in the Civil Rights movement. I must admit that I tend to negate this role when I approach the topic and emphasize more of the fact that the government only seemed to act when pushed by social movement actors. I thought about this role again when Sen. Clinton made her comments earlier this year about the success of the civil rights movement being incumbent upon the actions of the executive branch (the statement that Prof. Baldwin brought up early in the day). I was forced to reconsider how I approach the role of the power structure, because it is obviously clear that there would not have been the legislative successes of the movement without the assistance of the President and the Congress. However, I have always contended, and will continue to contend, that the only reason why the actions were taken by the white power structure was because of the idea that the actions / feelings / ideas in the civil rights movement had hit that critical juncture, a tipping point if you will, that forced the hand of the legislature and the executive. From the constant agitation by African-Americans in the North and South throughout the 20th century, the actions of sympathetic whites, the fact that the US had played an important role in two wars to make the overseas world "safe for democracy" and was currently engaged in a "cold war" against an "oppressive" empire, there was really no way that anybody in official capacity at the federal level could make a cogent argument to support America's separate and unequal racial situation any longer, especially as the agitation increased in the 1950s and 1960s. Take all of this with the post-colonial independence movements of the 1950s and 1960s and there was really no other direction that the leaders of the country could legitimately take. So, I agree with Cindy when she said that President Kennedy didn't have to pound Gov. Barnett with the idea that the case for James Meredith was about bringing about a situation of racial equality and Barnett would have to take it or leave it, but if he did truly believe in the issue of racial equality that was at the heart of Meredith's claims, they would have found there way, in some way, in his discussion with Gov. Barnett, if not in word, at least in spirit. That being said, the fact that Pres. Kennedy wasn't a very strong advocate for African-Americans should come as no surprise, because as a good politician, African-Americans still did not make up the Democratic base that later Democratic candidates would need to appeal to. In the end, I guess all I am trying to say is that I will have to be better at trying to acknowledge the role of the power structure in the civil rights movement, as Prof. Kryder did a nice job of laying out the difficulty in making what could be considered revolutionary changes in a still hostile environment, but I will still contend that the only way that these actions were taken were because there was no other reasonable choice for the president to take. One of the things I consider to support this is the lukewarm support the civil rights legislation has received since it has been passed and how steps have been taken, especially after 1980 to dismantle these advances. I am not saying that things haven't gotten better since the 1960s, but, as I believe someone stated earlier, things aren't over yet. I really appreciated the discussions today, especially because people had some very different interpretations of Kennedy's actions and motives - I liked hearning the different ideas. Have a good long weekend!
Chris Kurhajetz
High School History
Winchester High School