Johnson undertakes to build
        "democracy" both at home and abroad

Developments in the larger world during
        the 1960s

Nixon

European developments

Developments elsewhere in the 1970s

America was not a perfect country, but certainly understood what ‘perfection’ should look and feel like – and indeed sought growth toward that ideal.  The Cold War raging in the 1950s and early 1960s made this imperative.  To win the hearts of an emerging Third World, to keep the Third World nations from falling under the Communist program emanating from the Russian Kremlin, America needed to present to the world as positive a face as possible – in order to win these newly emerging nations over to the ‘Free World.’ A young President Kennedy who took office in 1961 challenged America, in particular its youth, to help spread the understanding of ‘The American Way’ by volunteering as a member of the Peace Corps to go and live among the people of the Third World – to show them personally how American ideals worked. This was not a massive, expensive government program.  No huge Washington bureaucracy provided the muscle for this program.  Instead it rested on the support of the thousands of young volunteers who answered the call (they did receive the equivalent of army basic pay – which indeed was truly ‘basic.’)   It was typical of the way that Americans felt at that time that the nation should go about its business – challenging the average American to do the ‘right thing,’ to volunteer to take up the national cause – just as the nation should inspire the world to do the right thing.  The government’s job was simply to organize the opportunities for Americans to do the right thing – nothing more.  The government itself wasn’t expected (yet) do the ‘right thing’ for the people.   That development would come later in that decade – under President Johnson.  JOHNSON UNDERTAKES TO BUILD "DEMOCRACY" BOTH AT HOME AND ABROAD Johnson dramatically shifts the idea of American government But President Johnson, previously a long-time Washington politician who eventually as Vice President rose to office as President when Kennedy was assassinated in 1963, held an entirely different definition of "American government."  To Johnson, the government was the state – and all its officers located in Washington, D.C.  This was a very different definition of American government than what the nation was used to.  But upon attaining the presidency at the end of 1963, he would soon use the powers of the presidency to shift the idea of American government very strongly in the direction of his own thinking. His "Great Society" Having grown up in the South in humble social circumstances, Johnson had a huge reformer’s heart.   He was very sensitive to the blemish of poverty still afflicting the supposedly prosperous nation.  Very importantly in how he viewed this issue, he had come into the world of politics as a young man deeply committed to Roosevelt’s New Deal program – and had a strongly ingrained sense that the national government was the best source of solid political reform.  Also as a Southerner, personally stung by the way fellow Southerners had dug in their heels against Black civil rights, he was by no means convinced that a mere appeal to the American conscience was sufficient to get Americans to do the ‘right thing.’  Thus to Johnson it seemed to make more sense to him, on a number of different political fronts, that real reform had to come to America by way of a strong central authority, namely the Washington government that Johnson had come to know quite well.  Thus he put forward his ‘Great Society’ idea – a set of government programs run out of Washington by political professionals – which he felt was the most effective way to bring America to perfection.  To Johnson’s way of thinking, professional economists, public administrators, lawyers, etc., seemed best suited to get the job done of improving America. The professionalization of the Southeast Asian conflict He also carried this notion over to the field of diplomacy and international relations.  He decided that America had to take a firm stand against Communist expansion, in particular in Southeast Asia, lest the Third World fall like dominoes – as one domino falling under Communism collapses its neighbors (the ‘Domino Theory’).   Thus Johnson decided to send in hundreds of thousands of American troops to take over the task for the Vietnamese who seemed unable to do this job themselves.  He had full confidence in his Department of Defense – leaving to the professionals in the Pentagon the task of winning this war for the Vietnamese (and the Americans). He attempted to pursue this war without involving the American citizens too much –  although he would be drafting their sons for Vietnam service.   But this “let the government fight this war for you,”  would prove to be the war’s undoing.  This war in Vietnam would truly be Johnson’s war, not the people’s war.  And Americans typically do not respond well to wars that the state dreams up, wars that are not their own. The cultural wars unleashed during same period Black Power - but also Black political dependency.  While this shift in governmental style was going on, there were also deep changes on a number of social-cultural fronts occurring at about the same time.  One front was found among young Blacks who grew more radicalized as shifts in the racial status quo began to occur.  They demanded their rights – not just rights to equal opportunity in the pursuit of their personal destinies, but rights to special advantages (‘affirmative action’) and compensations (public welfare)for past wrongs, in other words preferential treatment or ‘entitlements.’   Sadly this would lead only to a form of political dependency on political favors and hand outs – that would block a robust personal growth arising from self-help that was historically typical of how Americans were supposed to work their way to success.  This kind of political dependency would slow rather than speed up the advance of Blacks in American society economically and socially.  But it did serve conveniently to give the federal state in Washington, D.C. all the justification it needed to expand its social management programming ‘from above.’ The revenge of the American intellectuals.  Another front was among American intellectuals who had been under fire during the 1950s as being questionably "patriotic" because they did not adhere closely to the American middle class cultural system so dominant everywhere in the nation.  Now in the 1960s these alienated intellectuals saw their chance to retake what they thought was their natural position of national leadership with the newly emerging political culture – one directed not by middle class citizenry but by professionals from the upper ‘high brow’ reaches of American culture.  Not only did they remain detached from these middle class values – they were dedicatedly opposed to them and sought their removal from the central position in the American culture that they had occupied for centuries.   And the new federal state provided a particularly useful place for them, as trained social managers, to put their new cultural revolution into effect (the nation’s press and universities being additional platforms from which to conduct their revolution). The "heroic" antics of the Boomers.  Thirdly, both these two groups were joined by Boomers who were just reaching early adulthood in the late 1960s, anxious to become heros by challenging on all fronts conventional social ‘authority’ – something they had been prepared for since their early school years.  Unfortunately the authority at hand to challenge was not some conspiring Communist intruders into American life (that fear had proved groundless) – but the only authority that otherwise stood before them to be challenged:  their middle-class parents own highly patriotic political-cultural legacy.  And the growth of the new federal state also worked nicely to the Boomers’ advantage – because, despite their supposed distrust of public authority, the state’s takeover of the management of society allowed them to escape their own social responsibilities in order to give full attention to their own personal agendas (usually the advancement of their ‘careers’). Thus it was that Blacks, intellectuals and Boomers joined togther to  conduct cultural war on every front possible against what the older middle class Vet generation had assumed was the unquestionable moral-spiritual foundations of America.  Now these foundations would be profoundly shaken – and the social structures built on them would begin to crumble. DEVELOPMENTS IN THE LARGER WORLD DURING THE 1960s Western Europe is finally making a fast recovery economically thanks to the readiness to work together as a single unit through the European Common Market (later to become known as the European Union) Russia, under the leadership of Brezhnev (after 1964), is preoccupied with its own economic development and does not “meddle” in political hot-spots – including Vietnam, an event the Russians stay away from. Africa in the 1960s sees European colonialism come to an end – mostly peacefully – except in South Africa where the 300-year old Dutch Afrikaner community fights ruthlessly to keep its place at the head of a country where Blacks, Coloureds, Indians and even Englishmen are jockeying for their own political place in the life of the country The Middle East continues down the road of developing Arab Nationalism under the guidance of Egyptian President Nasser -- who however blunders grandly in 1967 when he and Arab allies decide to remove the “Zionist cancer” of Israel from their midst.  His rumblings of war are met instead by a surprise strike of the Israeli air force which destroys his own air force on the ground -- and from there his defeat, and the defeat of Jordan and Syria who foolishly come in at this point, becomes a certain thing.  As a result the Arab Palestinians lose all their ancestral land to the Israelis – though the rest of the world (including even the US) refuse to recognize Israel’s new territorial acquisitions. In China, Mao (who has been chastened by his Communist colleagues for the failures of his “Great Leap forward in 1958-1961) tries to make a comeback with another political extravaganza: his “Cultural Revolution” (1966-1968) in which he appeals to China’s youth – over the heads of their elders and even the Communist political organization – to rise up together as a new “Red Guard”and purge the land of “revisionist” thinking and (under his own guidance) set the country on a truly revolutionary course once again. The result is a total breakdown of social order – which after nearly devastating the country (and killing over 400,000 people) is brought back under order by the Red Army.  The surviving “pragmatists” in the Chinese Communist Party now force Mao to be merely a “reigning” rather than ruling national figure – away from the day-to-day decisions needed to return the country to economic growth. The example of American youth rising up in rebellion against their adult Establishments spreads to the youth of other countries: Mexico, France, Germany, Italy, Belgium. Governments topple and political chaos reigns for weeks in many countries.  In France, De Gaulle tries to tighten up on French politics as a result of these“events of May” – but the move backfires on him and in 1969 he once again stalks off into retirement, hoping to collapse the 5th Republic with his departure (in fact it survives his going quite nicely) In Czechoslovakia a reform group within the ruling Communist Party begins to permit more political freedom in the country (the “Prague Spring”).  But the Russians see these changes as a dangerous virus which might spread to the rest of the Soviet Block.  In August 650,000 Soviets troops are sent into Czechoslovakia to crush the reform movement. THE NIXON YEARS The "Political Realism" of Nixon and his foreign policy advisor Kissinger Nixon – a strong Establishment figure – was elected President in November of 1968 in the hope that he could restore some sense of order and "decency" to the country.  But this merely pushed the young Boomers (whose views moved in the opposite direction) into a deeper anti-Establishment, even anti-patriotic, reaction.                 Nixon had learned the art of diplomatic Realpolitik (Political Realism) in his 8 years out of office, traveling and visiting with different foreign government leaders.  He was the most diplomatically informed of all American presidents upon his arrival to the White House – and it showed in his choice of National Security Advisor (and eventually Secretary of State) Kissinger.  Nixon was not confused by the ideological title "Communist" attached to the Russians, Chinese and Vietnamese, knowing that they were three quite different (and often quite hostile) countries.  He planned to exploit these differences in order to correct America’s poor foreign relations (thanks to Vietnam) with the larger world.                 In the early 1970s, Nixon decided to wield a stick against North Vietnam in order to strengthen the American diplomatic hand at the meetings being held in Paris to work out the future of Vietnam.  In late April he sent U.S. troops into Cambodia ... to cut off North Vietnamese supplies to the Viet Cong along the Ho Chi Minh trail.                 Nixon's moves to "thaw" the Cold War                 Vietnam.  Meanwhile Nixon began his withdrawal of US troops from Vietnam.  By March of 1972 he had only 6,000 US troops in Vietnam.                 China.  At the same time, Nixon moved to end the diplomatic isolation of Communist or mainland China ... and used new relations with China to help stabilize his policy of "Vietnamizing" the conflict in Vietnam (turning the war over to South Vietnamese regular troops).  Thus he sent Kissinger on a secret diplomatic mission to China in 1971 and then he himself traveled to China in 1972 to open lines of communication with Beijing.                 Russia.  He also decided that it was time to defuse the nuclear overtones of the Cold War with Russia ... and work with the Soviets in bringing some kind of cooperative restraint to the arms race (a <i>détente</i> as it was called – or a "backing-down").  Improved relations with Russia would also keep the Chinese on their toes, just as improved relations with China would keep the Russian on their toes – and as improved relations with both China and Russia was carefully designed to keep North Vietnam on its toes!                 Most tragically for everyone involved, an anti-Nixon, "Liberal" or Idealist Congress (part of Johnson's legacy that did continue) tried very hard to block President Nixon's efforts to conduct a Realist foreign policy ... preferring to hang on to their own highly developed ideological views on foreign-policy matters.                 Watergate                 An incident during the summer 1972 presidential campaign – the break-in into the Watergate offices of the Democratic National Committee by enthusiastic political lieutenants – finally gave his opponents their chance to destroy him.  The issue blew up when two young reporters of the Washington Post followed up on the story – hoping to find a trail of intrigue that would lead to a prize-winning story. As the story came out of "high-up" officials being behind the break-in, Nixon "circled the wagons" to protect his staff.  Thus although there was no direct connection initially between Nixon and the Watergate break-in, his move to protect his staff with a post-event "cover-up" was a serious matter.  In the end, proof was brought forward that the Supreme Enforcer of the law of the land had broken the law himself in the cover-up effort, an impeachable offense.  Nixon, not willing to see what a hostile House of Representatives might do in an impeachment hearing, choose to resign (August 1974) rather than go through the process.                              Vice President Gerald Ford now became President – but possessed no power to lead the nation – as the Liberal Press, Congress and Judiciary did not intend to give up their status of "defenders of democracy" against "presidential tyranny."                 Congress undercuts the Saigon government (1975) ... bringing on the shame of the inglorious departure of the last Americans from Vietnam                 Swelled with a sense of the importance of a new"'power is evil" Liberal Idealism, Congress announced that it would no longer give financial assistance to the Saigon government in Vietnam – the one established by "tyranny" (that is, by American power).                 With this clear go-ahead signal to America’s former enemy, the Vietnamese Communists, the political situation which had been fairly stable in Vietnam for three years, declined rapidly ... and then simply collapsed tragically in April of 1975.  The world was forced to stand by in shock as the American political legacy in Vietnam (bought with so much American blood) simply vanished through the high moral intentions of America’s "new democracy."                 The chaos in Vietnam spills over cruelly into Cambodia                 While China was veering away from doctrinaire politics, the tiny country of Cambodia was plunging into a blood bath centered on ideological doctrine.  Following the collapse in 1975 of the pro-American South Vietnamese government next door, the Communist Khmer Rouge led by Pol Pot seized power in Cambodia, closed the country to the outside world, and – inspired by Mao's agrarian or rural radicalism – began a campaign of eradicating "capitalist, bourgeois" urban culture from the country.  Merchants, professionals, teachers, any educated Cambodians – and all urbanites – were moved to the countryside for ideological indoctrination as newly-converted "working-class Cambodians." The program became increasingly brutal as hundreds of thousands of "class (and ethnic) enemies" were liquidated.                 But Pol Pot’s alignment with China proved to be the undoing of his Khmer Rouge.  Vietnam, though Communist, was deeply hostile to China’s influence in the region and decided in December of 1978 to invade Cambodia – and install a pro-Vietnam government there.  This was when the rumors of the mass genocide by the Khmer Rouge finally came to light.  Eventually it was revealed that possibly a million Cambodians had died in the "Killing Fields" during the Khmer Rouge ascendancy.                 Sadly, America's "Idealist" Congress of the time had no serious understanding of power and its responsibilities. Even worse, Congress simply looked away from the mess it had created in Vietnam and Cambodia, refusing to acknowledge the role it had played in producing this huge tragedy. Consequently, American Idealism learned nothing from this event … and would continue forward unchanged.                 The American Republic at 200 years of age (1976)                 1976 was the year of America’s celebration of 200 years of its existence as a free democracy – the year of the Bicentennial.  But it was a whimpering, pathetic celebration.  The small group of Americans that did come out to celebrate their patriotic loyalties sensed that something was wrong with America.                 Crime and drugs were spreading through American society like a fast-moving cancer and nothing seemed to be able to slow it down, much less stop it.  There was an outbreak of divorce never seen before in American society – or any other – that was throwing the family foundations of the country into turmoil.  Public civility and politeness had also been replaced by a "me and my rights" spirit of belligerence ... setting American against American not only publicly but also privately.                 The ACLU and U.S. Supreme Court work together to move America off of its Christian roots                                  The ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) learned early on that the Supreme Court, not Congress, was the supreme legislative body in the U.S. government ... and went there to get the country to begin the replace America's Christian moral-spiritual foundations with Secular-Humanism's moral-spiritual foundations.  Thus in the early 1960s the ACLU got the Supreme Court to declare prayer and Bible reading to be forbidden as an activity within America's public schools (only Catholic schools stood outside the system at the time ... and were exempt from this restriction).  But the Supreme Court outdid itself when in 1971 in the Lemon v. Kurzman case, it declared very officially that only "Secular" – not "religious" (meaning "Christian") – purpose was to direct American schooling ... not realizing that Secularism is itself no less a religion.  A religion is, after all, the understanding as to what directs all life ... and what we humans are to do in order to put ourselves in harmony with that fundamental force.  And by officially establishing Secularism as the only perspective that education could work from, the Supreme Court itself violated the very clear terms of the first amendment ... which reads specifically:  Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.  But this would be only the beginning of this move to prohibit the free exercise of Christianity ... and most illegally establish Secularism as the country's foundational religion. EUROPEAN DEVELOPMENTS The "New Europe" on the economic rise In the meantime, in the larger world beyond America, peace and growth – even if slow at times – was the norm in the 70s.  This was particularly the case in Western Europe where the old nations pooled their economic resources to create a growing European Economic Community (to eventually become the European Community – and then the European Union).  With De Gaulle gone from the scene, French hostility to the joining of England to the Community then ended and England, along with Ireland and Denmark, joined the EEC (1973). Peaceful revolution in Spain In 1975 the 36-year old fascist regime in Spain finally came to an end when Franco died.  Young King Juan Carlos then began to move Spain carefully toward cultural freedom and democracy – and in 1977 the country had its first truly democratic election (even the Communists were allowed to participate).  But in 1981 disgruntled former fascist military officers staged a coup to return the country to Franco’s ways.  But the King stood firm in his support of the  democracy – and the coup withered.  Europe was so impressed by the King’s stand that Spain was finally invited to join NATO.  From this point on Spain then began a long period of strong economic growth and entry into the mainstream of European culture. But serious problems in Northern Ireland An exception to this picture of peace was Northern Ireland – part of the British Kingdom.  By 1972, Catholic-Protestant animosities in Northern Ireland (which first flared up in 1969 over economic hard times) turned into a bloody conflict when British soldiers fired on Catholic protesters, killing 12.  The fiercely Catholic Irish Republican Army - IRA (largely quiet since Irish independence from Britain after World War One) came back to life as a terrorist organization ... aiming to force the ceding of (largely Protestant) Northern Ireland (the Ulster Province) to the (largely Catholic) Irish Republic.  But Britain fought back at the IRA – and the battle continued its violent course throughout the rest of the 1970s. DEVELOPMENTS ELSEWHERE IN THE 1970s Curious political twists coming from Egypt In the Middle East, Nasser died (1970s) shortly after dedicating the Aswan High Dam on the Nile, and his Vice President and long-time friend Anwar al-Sadat replaced him as president of Egypt.  In 1972 Sadat expelled 15,000 Soviet military technicians from Egypt (they had become overbearing as advisors) – yet was very willing to receive new Soviet military aid. The October or Yom Kippur War In October of 1973 Egypt and Syria suddenly attacked Israel in an effort to unstick earlier efforts to get Israel to return Arab lands lost in 1967.  Initially the war moved to the Arabs' favor – but Israel regrouped and regained lost ground – and more.  But at this point Israel and the Arabs had both depleted their military arsenal – and the Soviets and Americans moved into the conflict to resupply their respective allies with replacement airplanes, tanks, etc.  Then the largely Arab OPEC (Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries) imposed an oil embargo on America and the West.  Fearing an escalation of the conflict into a collapse of Soviet-American détente – and feeling the pinch of a horrible energy crisis – America (through Kissinger’s "shuttle diplomacy") negotiated an Arab-Israeli cease-fire ... and an Israeli move toward granting some of the territorial concessions the Arabs had originally been seeking (spring of 1974). The struggles of a post-Maoist China In 1976 both the zany Mao Zedong and his more practical ally Zhou Enlai died – and a power struggle erupted between Mao’s radical widow Jiang Qing (leader of the "Gang of Four") and the leaders of the Chinese "pragmatists," Hua Guofeng and Deng Xiaoping.  By 1977 Jiang found herself in prison and Deng in charge of China (Hua had been eased to the sidelines of power).  This marked the beginning of China’s shift away from doctrinaire Maoism toward economic pragmatism (allowing limited capitalism into China and new trade relations with the Western world) Go on to the next section:  19a_A-Shift-in-the-Cold-War   Miles H. Hodges