Communism: You hear about it a lot in class, but what do we really know about communism?
We know that certain people like communism, certain people are afraid of communism, and certain people are sent to Siberia for saying that they don't support a certain communist leader.
Communism in its purest form is not the same as the communism that we see in the Soviet Union, China, North Korea, Vietnam or Cuba. To separate the applications of communism from communist theory, I will refer to the former as communism and the latter as marxism. The communist dictatorships are not representative of marxist theory for a few reasons.
Marx predicted that a communist regime would come to power through a proletariat revolution within the borders of the country. This means that the prerequisites for a textbook revolution are as follows: there must be a developed industrial economy, a significant amount of dissent within the context of the factory, and a leader to arise from the ranks of the proletariat to help establish a "dictatorship of the proletariat". The examples of communist dictatorships do not generally follow this piece of marxist theory.
In Russia, Lenin was the son of some middle class professionals, and Cuba, Fidel Castro was a lawyer, ruling them out of the proletariat category. None of the communist states were industrialized before their revolutions, which means that they had a very small proletariat class. The lack of industrial infrastructure in Russia and China gave the leaders of those countries an opportunity to revolutionize their industries and build up their nations' industrial capacities within the communist system. Effectively, the Soviet Union and China had the opportunity to industrialize the "right" way, or indeed the communist way, without ever having private ownership of factories. To an extent this was carried out, but ultimately it failed as seen in Stalin's numerous 5 year plans, and Mao's great leap forward.
Some would argue with Marx, saying that a revolution by peasants over a pre-industrial ruling class would be much simpler than a revolution of the proletariat, because private manufacturing companies gain control over their workers and the government. I assert that while a peasant revolution would theoretically be easier, the effect would not be as complete. The reason for this assertion boils down to labor economics. Essentially, it is in the interest of labor to keep the cost of production high, which means more man/hours per product. It is in the capitalist's, or in Stalin's case the government's, best interest to cheapen labor, or to decrease the ratio of man/hours to product. Ultimately, it turns out that the capitalist is more effective at cheapening labor, because he has only himself to work for. In the context of communist industrialization, there is a certain apathy, which is the product of man's inability to comprehend the scope of his work. Without the driving competition of capitalism, communist industrialism eventually fails, which eventually leads to the economic failure of communist regimes.
Returning to the original distinction between marxism and communism, we see that such a distinction is necessary for one simple reason: the so-called communist regimes of modern history do not follow the model of communism put forth by Marx. These regimes are in fact capitalist regimes where the government is the capitalist rather than a private entity. Rather than the communist utopia Marx asked for where workers own the means of production, the government owns the means of production, and uses its ownership to retain control over the population.
Sources:
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/11/prin-com.htm
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/communism
http://www.britannica.com/topic/communism
http://www.economist.com/node/1489165
Monday, March 7, 2016
Sunday, March 6, 2016
Fidel Castro
Fidel Castro was born August 13, 1926 in Cuba into a family of 6 children. Despite the poverty in Cuba Castro grew up wealthy and went to private boarding schools. He was interested in sports, but ended up going to law school at University of Havana and became interested with Cuban nationalism, and socialism. Surprisingly he in his earlier days he advocated for social justice and went to the Dominican Republic to help overthrow the dictator Rafael Trujillo in 1947. Once he returned he joined an anticommunist political party dedicated to economic independence, social reforms, and nationalism. The party's founder was who inspired Castro to become a ardent disciple. Castro gained wealth and connections once he married Mirta Diaz Balart the next year, yet the marriage was over just two years later. In 1953 Castro, and other attacked military barracks to try and overthrow the dictator, yet ended up with a 15 year prison sentence. However word travelled and Castro was famous throughout Cuba and started an opposition to the government. Castro was still determined to overthrow the dictator though, so after he was released from prison (early due to an amnesty deal,) he lead a two year guerrilla war against the government. In 1959 his efforts proved himself, as the dictator fled and later Castro was sworn in as prime minister. He imminently created a new government, which was recognized by the US. He wanted to end Cuba's economic dominance on the US, which lead to friction between the two. The whole time Castro denied being a communist, while the US citizens were very suspicious of his policies. Later that year in May, Castro limited the size of land holdings and prohibited foreign land ownership by signing the Agrarian Reform Law. By the end of the year, Castro had media suppression of opposition ideas, purges of military leaders, and a connection with the USSR. In 1960 Cuba signed a trade to buy Soviet Union oil, and establish diplomatic relations. A year later President Eisenhower broke off diplomatic relations with Cuba, and Castro declared Cuba a socialist state. The next day an invasion on the bay of pigs started the cuban missile crisis.
http://www.biography.com/people/fidel-castro-9241487#cuba-under-castro
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fidel_Castro
http://www.biography.com/people/fidel-castro-9241487#cuba-under-castro
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fidel_Castro
Secret Agents - Pesticides in Vietnam
Not only were thousands of tons of bombs dropped from the air by the United States onto North Vietnam, but the Vietnam War also saw the use of a new weapon: pesticides.
Britain was the first to pioneer the use of pesticides for war purposes in Southeast Asia. In order to deprive Malaysian rebels of resources, pesticide was sprayed from planes to destroy foliage used for cover and to kill crops that the rebels depended upon for food.
America upped the ante by orders of magnitude. The famous "Agent Orange", as the American combination of chemicals was named, was stored in 55-gallon barrels labeled with an orange stripe. In total, 11 million gallons were sprayed to contaminate food, water, and to strip bare trees in areas where Vietcong or North Vietnamese soldiers could be hiding under Operation Ranch Hand. 20 million total gallons were used.
Agent Orange infamously contained dioxins, the same chemicals mentioned by Rachel Carson in "Silent Spring" that were responsible for killing birds and other animals. Even today, some bases in Vietnam where Agent Orange was stored remain contaminated with dioxin "hot spots".
As with pesticides sprayed by the federal government in America, the government insisted that Agent Orange was safe to human life, but the number of Vietnam veterans and Vietnamese civilians who were affected proved that, in the field, dioxins were extremely detrimental to human health. Some experiments had shown that the chemicals created birth defects in mice, but many people the effects were clear and horrible.
In Vietnam and bordering Laos and Cambodia, the effects of Agent Orange and Operation Ranch Hand have been horrible disabilities resulting from birth defects, stemming from civilians who were exposed to pesticide in large quantities. According to the Red Cross, about 3 million civilians were affected, with 150,000 children being born with birth defects. Only recently, in 2013, has the US government taken responsibility and begun to clean up certain areas by sterilizing the soil.
The response from US veterans has also been overwhelmingly negative. After a class action lawsuit and hundreds of individual court cases brought against the government, President Bush passed the Agent Orange Act in 1991, which set up treatment and aid for some 2.4 million veterans who were exposed to Agent Orange. Many have claimed that their exposure to pesticide led to early-onset disease, like cancer, which was inherited by their children.
Although the US government has acknowledged the problems of pesticide use in Vietnam, such tactics have not been stopped entirely. For example, during the "war on drugs", Colombian coca fields were sprayed with US-sanctioned herbicide, causing many of the same harms as Agent Orange. Until the US government takes drastic action to ban pesticide use in populated areas, it seems that such treatment will be the norm.
Sources:
"Agent Orange," HISTORY, http://www.history.com/topics/vietnam-war/agent-orange
Clyde Haberman, 5-11-2014, "Agent Orange’s Long Legacy, for Vietnam and Veterans," New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/12/us/agent-oranges-long-legacy-for-vietnam-and-veterans.html?_r=0
Drew Brown, 1-5-2013, "4 decades after war ended, Agent Orange still ravaging Vietnamese," mcclatchydc, http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/world/article24751351.html
Britain was the first to pioneer the use of pesticides for war purposes in Southeast Asia. In order to deprive Malaysian rebels of resources, pesticide was sprayed from planes to destroy foliage used for cover and to kill crops that the rebels depended upon for food.
America upped the ante by orders of magnitude. The famous "Agent Orange", as the American combination of chemicals was named, was stored in 55-gallon barrels labeled with an orange stripe. In total, 11 million gallons were sprayed to contaminate food, water, and to strip bare trees in areas where Vietcong or North Vietnamese soldiers could be hiding under Operation Ranch Hand. 20 million total gallons were used.
Agent Orange infamously contained dioxins, the same chemicals mentioned by Rachel Carson in "Silent Spring" that were responsible for killing birds and other animals. Even today, some bases in Vietnam where Agent Orange was stored remain contaminated with dioxin "hot spots".
As with pesticides sprayed by the federal government in America, the government insisted that Agent Orange was safe to human life, but the number of Vietnam veterans and Vietnamese civilians who were affected proved that, in the field, dioxins were extremely detrimental to human health. Some experiments had shown that the chemicals created birth defects in mice, but many people the effects were clear and horrible.
In Vietnam and bordering Laos and Cambodia, the effects of Agent Orange and Operation Ranch Hand have been horrible disabilities resulting from birth defects, stemming from civilians who were exposed to pesticide in large quantities. According to the Red Cross, about 3 million civilians were affected, with 150,000 children being born with birth defects. Only recently, in 2013, has the US government taken responsibility and begun to clean up certain areas by sterilizing the soil.
The response from US veterans has also been overwhelmingly negative. After a class action lawsuit and hundreds of individual court cases brought against the government, President Bush passed the Agent Orange Act in 1991, which set up treatment and aid for some 2.4 million veterans who were exposed to Agent Orange. Many have claimed that their exposure to pesticide led to early-onset disease, like cancer, which was inherited by their children.
Although the US government has acknowledged the problems of pesticide use in Vietnam, such tactics have not been stopped entirely. For example, during the "war on drugs", Colombian coca fields were sprayed with US-sanctioned herbicide, causing many of the same harms as Agent Orange. Until the US government takes drastic action to ban pesticide use in populated areas, it seems that such treatment will be the norm.
Sources:
"Agent Orange," HISTORY, http://www.history.com/topics/vietnam-war/agent-orange
Clyde Haberman, 5-11-2014, "Agent Orange’s Long Legacy, for Vietnam and Veterans," New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/12/us/agent-oranges-long-legacy-for-vietnam-and-veterans.html?_r=0
Drew Brown, 1-5-2013, "4 decades after war ended, Agent Orange still ravaging Vietnamese," mcclatchydc, http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/world/article24751351.html
Saturday, March 5, 2016
Labor struggles in the 1960s (&70s)
In the late sixties, American industry began do de-unionize. While labor leaders such as George Meany accomplished things like bans on age discrimination and mine safety regulation, union membership was stagnant at best and leadership was becoming complacent with management. Essentially, union leaders were pulling in massive salaries from dues and were not fighting for any new labor rights. Unions therefore had become the bureaucracy that they had originally opposed.
Conditions had changed since the 40s and 50s, when unions had enjoyed a boom in membership and power. As the rest of the world began to rebuild from World War 2, American manufacturing began to lose its dominance in the world market. Benefits such as health insurance, pensions and wage hikes which had been enjoyed by workers and their unions during the postwar years had begun to harm American business. Effectively, American manufacturing couldn't compete with international manufacturing because of American unions; foreign business was just beginning to rebuild itself and did not have the added cost of health benefits or pensions, nor did it have to pay its workers a much as workers were paid in America.
Unlike the 40s and 50s, unions were beginning to lose their grip on the American manufacturing industry in the 60s and 70s. Trying to unionize the South, the AFL-CIO launched what they called "Operation Dixie" which failed not only because of southerners' individualistic natures, but because white southerners did not want to join the same union as blacks. Union efforts in the South were further thwarted by several state legislatures' decisions to pass "right to work" laws, whereby union membership could not be required by employers.
Much as American manufacturing moved to other countries, it also moved from North to South. Because of the pro-labor attitude of the North, and the relatively pro-business attitude of the South, it was ultimately cheaper to produce goods in the South.
The late 60s was more than just a time of change for manufacturing, the time period was also home to the civil rights movement. Young people of all races were accustomed to striking and protesting for civil rights, and it follows that the rise in organized protest would also lead to a rise in worker's rights. An example of this is a phenomenon that happened within the auto industry. The leaders of the UAW (united auto workers) worked alongside industrial management to increase wages at the cost of conditions and benefits. The workers were so frustrated that their own union leaders had turned on them that a third of all local UAW presidents were ousted from office.
Workers of all industries had one weapon that they could use against their employers: the wildcat strike. Wildcat strikes are protests that are unauthorized by union leaders and therefore are not protected by union contracts. Normally, these kinds of strikes don't happen because unions ensure that the striking workers aren't replaced and that no rights are violated, but because the union leaders were cooperating with management, workers were forced to stage unprotected strikes. The fact that workers were able to stage unorganized strikes shows not only that workers were more organized independently from unions, but that unions were in declining strength, they were no longer serving the purposes for which they were initially intended.
Today, American industry is largely without unions, with a few unions such as the prison gaurd's union dominating their respective industries. The work of unions, however, is still felt, as many jobs do not require employees to work more than 5-6 days a week, and sick leave and vacation time are often provided. Additionally, the government has contributed partially on the behalf of workers in the establishment of a national minimum wage and social security.
The de-unionization of America leaves us with an important question: "Have business and government done enough to help workers, or does America still need unions to protect workers?"
Sources:
http://www.shmoop.com/history-labor-unions/ideology.html
http://socialistworker.org/2011/08/26/workers-rebellion-of-the-1960s
http://www.aflcio.org/About/Our-History/Labor-History-Timeline
Conditions had changed since the 40s and 50s, when unions had enjoyed a boom in membership and power. As the rest of the world began to rebuild from World War 2, American manufacturing began to lose its dominance in the world market. Benefits such as health insurance, pensions and wage hikes which had been enjoyed by workers and their unions during the postwar years had begun to harm American business. Effectively, American manufacturing couldn't compete with international manufacturing because of American unions; foreign business was just beginning to rebuild itself and did not have the added cost of health benefits or pensions, nor did it have to pay its workers a much as workers were paid in America.
Unlike the 40s and 50s, unions were beginning to lose their grip on the American manufacturing industry in the 60s and 70s. Trying to unionize the South, the AFL-CIO launched what they called "Operation Dixie" which failed not only because of southerners' individualistic natures, but because white southerners did not want to join the same union as blacks. Union efforts in the South were further thwarted by several state legislatures' decisions to pass "right to work" laws, whereby union membership could not be required by employers.
The late 60s was more than just a time of change for manufacturing, the time period was also home to the civil rights movement. Young people of all races were accustomed to striking and protesting for civil rights, and it follows that the rise in organized protest would also lead to a rise in worker's rights. An example of this is a phenomenon that happened within the auto industry. The leaders of the UAW (united auto workers) worked alongside industrial management to increase wages at the cost of conditions and benefits. The workers were so frustrated that their own union leaders had turned on them that a third of all local UAW presidents were ousted from office.
Workers of all industries had one weapon that they could use against their employers: the wildcat strike. Wildcat strikes are protests that are unauthorized by union leaders and therefore are not protected by union contracts. Normally, these kinds of strikes don't happen because unions ensure that the striking workers aren't replaced and that no rights are violated, but because the union leaders were cooperating with management, workers were forced to stage unprotected strikes. The fact that workers were able to stage unorganized strikes shows not only that workers were more organized independently from unions, but that unions were in declining strength, they were no longer serving the purposes for which they were initially intended.
Today, American industry is largely without unions, with a few unions such as the prison gaurd's union dominating their respective industries. The work of unions, however, is still felt, as many jobs do not require employees to work more than 5-6 days a week, and sick leave and vacation time are often provided. Additionally, the government has contributed partially on the behalf of workers in the establishment of a national minimum wage and social security.
The de-unionization of America leaves us with an important question: "Have business and government done enough to help workers, or does America still need unions to protect workers?"
Sources:
http://www.shmoop.com/history-labor-unions/ideology.html
http://socialistworker.org/2011/08/26/workers-rebellion-of-the-1960s
http://www.aflcio.org/About/Our-History/Labor-History-Timeline
The Warsaw Pact
The Warsaw Pact was an agreement signed by the USSR and seven of its European satellite states, on May 14, 1955, only 6 years after the creation of NATO, its western equivalent. The Warsaw Pact was created in order to call on all member states to combine in the unified defence of any member states that may be attacked by an outside force. It also unified the military forces of all member states into one command, lead by Marshal Ivan S. Konev, a Soviet military commander. However the official statement regarding its creation put the US and NATO as the aggressor, forcing the USSR to act in self defence, and defend itself and its allies, stating, “Western Germany, which is being remilitarized, and her inclusion in the North Atlantic bloc, which increases the danger of a new war and creates a threat to the national security of peace-loving states.” The Warsaw Pact remain relatively unified until in 1990 East Germany left to reunite with West Germany and join NATO, this began its inevitable decline, until finally in March of 1991 the military alliance component was dissolved.
Resources:
Thursday, March 3, 2016
The Face of the US Military (Part 2- Vietnam)
Vietnam, a nation divided and locked in a bitter war between the Communist North and the Capitalist South. With international crises in Berlin, Cuba, and in the world of nuclear technology, Kennedy was faced with yet another offshoot of the Cold War, Vietnam. The conflict between the two Vietnams occurred after Southern Vietnamese leader, Diem, with United States backing, refused to accept a reunification referendum. The National Liberation Front rose up with North Vietnamese backing and starting to attack South Vietnamese villages. As a result of increasing discord, Eisenhower stationed 900 American advisors in South Vietnam. Kennedy would increase this to 9,000 by the time of his assassination.1
Following the Gulf of Tonkin crisis and the subsequent Tonkin Resolution, President Lyndon B. Johnson authorized air strikes. These air strikes grew as thousands and thousands more American soldiers were committed to the fight. This was the first war in which a fully desegregated American military would fight with all combat branches. At the height of American involvement, Caucasians and Hispanics made up 88.% of the United States armed forces. African Americans were 10.6% of the American forces and Asian Americans and other races made up the remaining 1% of all forces.2
The Selective Service System provided deferments and legal draft avoidances for college attendance and professional occupation, two things that favored upper-class white Americans in the 1960's. As a result, poorer, less educated, and unemployed Whites and Blacks were drafted. Although many enlisted voluntarily, their lack of other opportunities helped them decide to join the military. The armed forces offered pay, job stability, and an alternative to unemployment which drew many more recruits.3 However, as a result of their upbringing, many of these Americans were less educated and were thus placed into front line units and firing platoons which bore a disproportionate amount of the casualties. In 1965, African Americans were roughly 10% of the Army's racial make up, but nearly a quarter of its casualties.4
This harsh reality began to make itself clear to the Civil Rights movement in the United States and began to rally many against the war. Martin Luther King Junior decried the war as, "a white man's war, a black man's fight." In 1966, Project 100,000 was initiated to lower the standards of the draft to allow for more men to be drafted. Despite only making up at most, 12% of the nation's population, African Americans made up nearly 40% of those who were now eligible to draft.4 Their protests came amidst growing racial tension and violent riots in areas with large urban Black populations.
While the American military in Vietnam was one of the finest modern forces ever fielded by any nation in the world at that point, it was being internally torn by the events back home. At the front lines, racism was dormant as soldiers relied on each other to survive,5 but in the reserve camps and American bases, racism ran wild. At Cam Ranh Bay, White sailors donned KKK hoods, confederate flags, and burning crosses. At Long Binh, jailed African Americans rioted against White soldiers. Riots and armed confrontations erupted across Vietnamese bases as African Americans formed semi-militant self defense groups to defend themselves and retaliate to racist, militant Whites. African American soldiers would don black accessories to show solidarity with their race. The spreading race riots led to a serious effort to resolve this by US high command. Mandatory Watch and Action Committees were formed and further investigations were conducted to resolve racial issues, racial barriers, and unfair punishments handed to Black soldiers.6
Asian Americans also suffered while serving in Vietnam. In Vietnam, Whites and Blacks were clearly foreigners and thus Americans, but Asian Americans could share no such privilege.
The Vietnam War was the first American war to have a fully integrated armed forces with no segregated units. However, due to problems back in the states and between forcibly mixed units, racial tensions were at all time highs during the fighting. These veterans would come back to an American public tired of the Vietnam War, wary of racial tensions, and increasingly discontent with the affairs of the world. Nevertheless, the defining test of the United States desegregated military showed no inherent inabilities to fight. While it did remind the American public that the fight for racial equality was never going to be easy, African Americans and other minorities once more reminded the American people they could and would lay down their lives for their nation.
1. http://www.history.com/topics/vietnam-war/vietnam-war-history
2. http://history-world.org/vietnam_war_statistics.htm
3. The Vietnam War
4. http://www.english.illinois.edu/maps/poets/s_z/stevens/africanamer.htm
5. http://www.palmcenter.org/publications/dadt/a_history_of_the_service_of_ethnic_minorites_in_the_u_s_armed_forces
6. http://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2001/sep/15/weekend7.weekend3
7. http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Asian-American-vets-can-t-forget-Vietnam-War-3090545.php
8. Photo: http://media-2.web.britannica.com/eb-media/23/78423-004-E599C5CE.jpg
9. Photo: http://www.psywarrior.com/NLFLeaf09F.jpg
10. Photo: http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/jfkviet1.jpg
 |
| President Kennedy at a Laotian press conference, 1961 |
The Selective Service System provided deferments and legal draft avoidances for college attendance and professional occupation, two things that favored upper-class white Americans in the 1960's. As a result, poorer, less educated, and unemployed Whites and Blacks were drafted. Although many enlisted voluntarily, their lack of other opportunities helped them decide to join the military. The armed forces offered pay, job stability, and an alternative to unemployment which drew many more recruits.3 However, as a result of their upbringing, many of these Americans were less educated and were thus placed into front line units and firing platoons which bore a disproportionate amount of the casualties. In 1965, African Americans were roughly 10% of the Army's racial make up, but nearly a quarter of its casualties.4
 |
| US Soldiers in Phuoc Tuy, 1966 |
 |
| A National Liberation Front leaflet created to exploit racial tensions amongst Americans |
 |
| An American soldier in an unknown Vietnamese jungle |
"I had to whip out my dog tag and say, "I'm an American,' " he said. "They'll get all the black and white guys before they get the Asians out." - David Oshiro, Special Forces Veteran7Black and Asian soldiers tended to befriend each other in Vietnam as a result of alienation and blatant racism from their White counterparts. Americans, who could not tell them apart, lumped them into a generic Asian category and used the same racial slurs against them as they would against the actual enemy.7
The Vietnam War was the first American war to have a fully integrated armed forces with no segregated units. However, due to problems back in the states and between forcibly mixed units, racial tensions were at all time highs during the fighting. These veterans would come back to an American public tired of the Vietnam War, wary of racial tensions, and increasingly discontent with the affairs of the world. Nevertheless, the defining test of the United States desegregated military showed no inherent inabilities to fight. While it did remind the American public that the fight for racial equality was never going to be easy, African Americans and other minorities once more reminded the American people they could and would lay down their lives for their nation.
1. http://www.history.com/topics/vietnam-war/vietnam-war-history
2. http://history-world.org/vietnam_war_statistics.htm
3. The Vietnam War
4. http://www.english.illinois.edu/maps/poets/s_z/stevens/africanamer.htm
5. http://www.palmcenter.org/publications/dadt/a_history_of_the_service_of_ethnic_minorites_in_the_u_s_armed_forces
6. http://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2001/sep/15/weekend7.weekend3
7. http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Asian-American-vets-can-t-forget-Vietnam-War-3090545.php
8. Photo: http://media-2.web.britannica.com/eb-media/23/78423-004-E599C5CE.jpg
9. Photo: http://www.psywarrior.com/NLFLeaf09F.jpg
10. Photo: http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/jfkviet1.jpg
The Face of the US Military (Part 1- Korea)
Every single conflict of the United States, from the War of Independence to the Civil War, and from WW1 to WW2, has had colored units and servicemen from all ethnic and racial backgrounds. It is the sad fact that these brave soldiers were often segregated, relegated, and ignored despite fighting just as well, if not better, than their Caucasian counterparts. The honored 54th Massachusetts that fought so bravely for the North in the Civil War did not earn a desegregated armed forces. The bravery of the 369th Infantry Regiment of WW1 did not convince the American people of the merits of colored soldiers.
Only after the outstanding heroism of massive numbers of minorities during WW2, the 92nd Infantry, the 442nd Infantry Regiment, the tens of thousands of Latino-Americans, and the thousands of Native Americans did a desegregated army truly begin to take hold. Finally, on July 26, 1948, President Truman passed Executive Order 9981 which stated that, "there shall be equality of treatment and opportunity for all persons in the armed forces without regard to race, color, religion, or national origin."1 The United States Navy and Air Force integrated within two years, but there was significantly more resistance in the army.
Despite all of this, heavy prejudices still floated around amongst the soldiers serving in the armed forces. There would often be two reactions from the soldiers to this process ranging from KKK sympathizers who fought against a desegregated military. The other group had often seen Blacks in combat alongside themselves and were in full support of a desegregated military because they no longer saw them as inferior soldiers.
The Korean War was also a test for all other groups of minority soldiers serving in the armed forces. The Japanese Americans who proved themselves in the 442nd just 6 years before in the mountains of Italy proved themselves once more in Korea. Thousands were sent over as translators and served in largely Asian-American units despite officially segregated units no longer existing. Native Americans provided the largest group as a percentage of their population in the United States. The Navajo communicators were crucial to an American victory and the fighting units saw the bravery of Native American soldiers. These soldiers knew that the United States was their home as well and would send large portions of their tribal members to enlist, and sometimes nearly 10% of their tribe would be sent overseas.5 Hispanics, particularly the Puerto Ricans in the 65th infantry, fought hard and were fully integrated into the US army in 1953. Latinos had been in integrated units in WW2, and had proven their fighting ability in both Europe and the Philippines.6 Asian Americans, Latino Americans, and native Americans all faced massive discrimination back home and proved their loyalty and dedication to the United States in yet another war.
Truman's executive order and the Korean War established the creation of a fully desegregated United States Armed Forces for the first time in the history of the United States military. Groups that proved themselves consistently in WW1, WW2, and the Korean War finally won the victories they were striving for. Though some minority groups, namely the Latino Americans, did not serve in segregated units, they still fought for racial equality in the armed forces. This new multi-racial force was not the first in the world, but it was the first the United States had ever had. It would be the armed forces the United States would eventually bring to Vietnam in the mid 1960's.
1. http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=true&doc=84
2. The Double V: How Wars, Protest, and Harry Truman Desegregated America's Military
3. http://www.english.illinois.edu/maps/poets/s_z/stevens/africanamer.htm
4. http://www.history.army.mil/html/faq/diversity.html
5. http://www.shsu.edu/his_ncp/NAWWII.html
6. http://www.nps.gov/history/heritageinitiatives/latino/latinothemestudy/military.htm
7. Photo: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/07/Warkorea_American_Soldiers.jpg
Only after the outstanding heroism of massive numbers of minorities during WW2, the 92nd Infantry, the 442nd Infantry Regiment, the tens of thousands of Latino-Americans, and the thousands of Native Americans did a desegregated army truly begin to take hold. Finally, on July 26, 1948, President Truman passed Executive Order 9981 which stated that, "there shall be equality of treatment and opportunity for all persons in the armed forces without regard to race, color, religion, or national origin."1 The United States Navy and Air Force integrated within two years, but there was significantly more resistance in the army.
The Army is "not an instrument for social evolution... It follows that in the interest of efficient national defense, certain types of units should be entirely or largely confined to white troops" -Kenneth Royall, Secretary of the Army, 19492Despite the obstructionist actions of much of the Southern wing of Congress as well as many U.S. Army generals, the executive order went through. The largest group that would be effected by this decree were African Americans who made up nearly 10% of the United States Army.3 The Army used quotas and racial discrimination to prevent the promotion of African Americans and to limit the amount of African Americans that fought in each unit. The Korean was the first test of this process of desegregation. With the failure of the 24th Infantry Unit to minimize its casualties, more and more inexperienced Caucasian officers and troops were being assigned to fill in roles they did not have the experience for. With a lack of any other options, US high command began to unofficially replenish the 24th Infantry with African Americans, who were often serving on garrison duty only. With no decrease in combat efficiency despite a desegregated unit, it was finally seen that African Americans were equally powerful soldiers who could fight just as well as anyone else. In 1951, the quota cap of the number of African Americans per unit was abolished. In 1954 the last segregated unit was desegregated and the entirety of the United States Armed Forces was no longer racially split.4
 |
| American soldiers of the U.S. Second Infantry, 19507 |
Despite all of this, heavy prejudices still floated around amongst the soldiers serving in the armed forces. There would often be two reactions from the soldiers to this process ranging from KKK sympathizers who fought against a desegregated military. The other group had often seen Blacks in combat alongside themselves and were in full support of a desegregated military because they no longer saw them as inferior soldiers.
The Korean War was also a test for all other groups of minority soldiers serving in the armed forces. The Japanese Americans who proved themselves in the 442nd just 6 years before in the mountains of Italy proved themselves once more in Korea. Thousands were sent over as translators and served in largely Asian-American units despite officially segregated units no longer existing. Native Americans provided the largest group as a percentage of their population in the United States. The Navajo communicators were crucial to an American victory and the fighting units saw the bravery of Native American soldiers. These soldiers knew that the United States was their home as well and would send large portions of their tribal members to enlist, and sometimes nearly 10% of their tribe would be sent overseas.5 Hispanics, particularly the Puerto Ricans in the 65th infantry, fought hard and were fully integrated into the US army in 1953. Latinos had been in integrated units in WW2, and had proven their fighting ability in both Europe and the Philippines.6 Asian Americans, Latino Americans, and native Americans all faced massive discrimination back home and proved their loyalty and dedication to the United States in yet another war.
Truman's executive order and the Korean War established the creation of a fully desegregated United States Armed Forces for the first time in the history of the United States military. Groups that proved themselves consistently in WW1, WW2, and the Korean War finally won the victories they were striving for. Though some minority groups, namely the Latino Americans, did not serve in segregated units, they still fought for racial equality in the armed forces. This new multi-racial force was not the first in the world, but it was the first the United States had ever had. It would be the armed forces the United States would eventually bring to Vietnam in the mid 1960's.
1. http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=true&doc=84
2. The Double V: How Wars, Protest, and Harry Truman Desegregated America's Military
3. http://www.english.illinois.edu/maps/poets/s_z/stevens/africanamer.htm
4. http://www.history.army.mil/html/faq/diversity.html
5. http://www.shsu.edu/his_ncp/NAWWII.html
6. http://www.nps.gov/history/heritageinitiatives/latino/latinothemestudy/military.htm
7. Photo: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/07/Warkorea_American_Soldiers.jpg
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)