NY Times Op-Ed August 27, 2013
What Happened to Jobs and Justice?
By WILLIAM P. JONES

MADISON, Wis. — ON Aug. 28, 1963, nearly a quarter of a million people 
thronged the nation’s capital for the March on Washington for Jobs and 
Freedom, the largest civil rights demonstration in American history. Its 
impact on American politics was tremendous: in addition to building 
support to pass the civil rights bill that President John F. Kennedy had 
recently proposed, marchers succeeded in strengthening and expanding the 
scope of the bill far beyond what the president had envisioned.

For many, the most important addition was Title VII, which prohibited 
employers and unions from discriminating on the basis of race, color, 
religion, national origin and sex. The ban on sex discrimination was 
itself a further amendment, introduced in January 1964 by Southern 
Democrats who hoped it would impede the bill’s progress through 
Congress. Their plan backfired: not only did they fail to scuttle the 
bill, but their amendment also provided a critical legal tool in the 
fight for women’s equality.

The message of the march still resonated in 1965, when Congress passed 
the Voting Rights Act, Medicare and Medicaid, key features of President 
Lyndon B. Johnson’s proposal to bring “an end to poverty and racial 
injustice.”

The march was so successful that we often forget that it occurred in a 
political environment not so different from our own. Kennedy’s victory 
over Richard M. Nixon in 1960 signaled a break from the conservatism of 
the 1950s. But like the election of Barack Obama in 2008, hope for a 
return to the liberalism of the 1930s was dampened by an administration 
that rejected “old slogans” like wage increases and public works in 
favor of tax cuts and free trade to stimulate growth.

That disillusionment gave rise to sit-ins and freedom rides against 
segregation in the South, but those protests proved powerless in the 
face of entrenched conservative power. In contrast, the grass-roots 
movements that gained political influence in the Kennedy years were 
White Citizens Councils, the John Birch Society and other forces that, 
much like today’s Tea Party movement, shifted the political spectrum to 
the right.

Given those obstacles, how did the March on Washington help drive 
support for such sweeping civil rights and domestic policy measures?

First, it linked the protest movements of the 1960s to institutions with 
longstanding roots in working-class communities. The initial call for 
the 1963 demonstration came from the Negro American Labor Council, an 
organization of black trade unionists that used local networks to plan 
for the march months before it was officially announced.

The Southern Christian Leadership Conference and the Student Nonviolent 
Coordinating Committee played similar roles in the South, mobilizing 
local civil rights groups, black churches and students. Support also 
came from the National Council of Negro Women and other elements of the 
black women’s movement that had battled poverty and discrimination since 
the 19th century.

At the same time, organizers rallied supporters around a broad and 
ambitious set of demands. A. Philip Randolph, the veteran trade unionist 
who had first called for a march on Washington to protest employment 
discrimination in 1941, wanted the demonstration to focus on the 
shortcomings of Kennedy’s economic policies. Pointing out that black 
workers were restricted to entry-level jobs that were most vulnerable to 
the automation and offshoring of manufacturing under way in the 1960s, 
he warned that without measures to end discrimination and create more 
jobs, blacks would be condemned to struggling for survival “within the 
grey shadows of a hopeless hope.”

Other black leaders shared that concern, but some worried that a “march 
for jobs” would compete with the movement that the Rev. Dr. Martin 
Luther King Jr. and others were leading against legalized discrimination 
and disfranchisement. Anna Arnold Hedgeman, a prominent leader of the 
black women’s movement, persuaded the men to plan a demonstration that 
would address “both the economic problems and civil rights.”

Finally, while Randolph, King, Hedgeman and others expanded the 
mobilization to include a broad and multiracial coalition, they resisted 
pressure to moderate their tactics or demands.

Both black and white liberals worried that an angry protest would turn 
moderates in Congress against Kennedy’s civil rights bill, but Randolph 
and King convinced the leaders of the N.A.A.C.P., the United Auto 
Workers and the National Urban League that the demonstration would be 
peaceful and effective.

It was the combination of these stalwart positions and rich 
institutional networks with the sheer number of peaceful black and white 
marchers that persuaded so many Americans of the rightness of civil 
rights and antipoverty legislation.

As we celebrate the 50th anniversary of the march, however, its central 
achievements are more imperiled than ever. This summer the Supreme Court 
upheld the principles behind the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights 
Act while severely weakening authority to enforce them. We have a 
charismatic liberal president and inspiring protest movements dedicated 
to racial equality and economic justice — but, as in the Kennedy years, 
they have proved no match for well-organized conservatives.

The solution may not be another march on Washington. But real changes in 
policy, and the defense of previous victories, require the combination 
of institutional backing, coalition building and ambitious demands that 
brought so many people to the National Mall in 1963.

William P. Jones is a professor of history at the University of 
Wisconsin and the author of “The March on Washington: Jobs, Freedom and 
the Forgotten History of Civil Rights.”
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to