logo

60 pages 2 hours read

Howard Zinn

A People's History of the United States

Nonfiction | Book | Adult | Published in 1980

A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.

Chapters 17-20Chapter Summaries & Analyses

Chapter 17 Summary

Following World War II, issues of race began to take prominence thanks, in part, to the decline of other issues mentioned in the previous chapter. Race became especially important as the old European empires in Asia and Africa collapsed (448). In comparison to the egalitarian rhetoric of the Soviet Union, racially divided America seemed to be less hospitable to the decolonizing peoples. To reverse this perception, politicians like Presidents Harry Truman pushed to rapidly change the appearance of racial inequality (450). This top-down, government-led approach worked for the NAACP, which was dedicated to pursuing legal equality and elite recognition of Black rights. By 1954, this strategy had succeeded in producing a major win for the growing civil rights movement, the Supreme Court decision in favor of school desegregation. The language in that decision, however, undermined the accomplishment. School desegregation, the Supreme Court said, should proceed with “all deliberate speed.” What that meant was up for the courts to decide, and by 1965 only 25% of American schools were desegregated.

As early as the 1930s, the Communist Party welcomed Black activists into their ranks. These radicals worked together to sharpen the policy of direct action that the Communist Party had inherited. While Black activists were not, at least initially, as prepared to employ violence as the Wobblies had been, they were nevertheless willing to try to confront their oppression head-on. One of the first such examples was Rosa Park’s arrest in 1955. In one of the most famous examples of civil disobedience in American history, Parks decided to sit at the front of a segregated bus in Montgomery, Alabama. When she refused to give her seat to a white passenger, the bus driver had her arrested. Early the next month, the local Black community, then led by 27-year-old preacher Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., organized a boycott of the Montgomery bus company. Many leaders were arrested during the boycott, including King. Bombs damaged four separate Black churches. And gunfire was directed against the King household. The result, however, was not only that the Montgomery bus system was desegregated but, thanks to the Supreme Court, all bus systems would be desegregated (452). These tactics were so successful that white activists in the late-1950s moved to emulate the tactics of Black activists. The Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) was formed from a cadre of sit-in veterans. By 1964 the movement seemed unstoppable. Congress and President Lyndon Johnson passed voting and civil rights legislation. The goal, as Zinn describes it, was “to channel anger into the traditional cooling mechanism of the ballot box, the polite petition, the officially endorsed quiet gathering” (457).

But while the SNCC pivoted from civil rights to anti-Vietnam War agitation, a second wave of Black activists stepped forward. Best represented by Malcolm X, these activists were more militant and were cast in the role of the Wobblies of the previous generation. They favored confrontation, action, and violence in return for violence. Malcolm X saw the civil rights Act of 1964 as a half step: equality on paper but with nothing behind it to change the reality of most African Americans. The new slogan was “Black Power” (460). These factors combined to turn the mid-1960s into a time, ironically, of more violence and agitation. These violent protests and riots provoked harsh reactions from the government. For the remainder of the 1960s and much of the 1970s, the FBI was ordered to wage a campaign of subversion, propaganda, and allegedly murder against the radical movement (463). The campaign frequently crossed the line between legal and extralegal activity, but it ultimately succeeded in its goals. By the end of the 1970s, plans to force integration were permanently shelved. Black activism, which seemed so close to success in the early 1960s, had by the mid-1970s lost much of its force. An important component of this change was the war in Vietnam.  

Chapter 18 Summary

Repeating what came before, the Vietnam War began at almost the same time that the civil rights movement reached a boil. The origins of the conflict date back to 1945 when Vietnamese rebels, under the command of Communist leader Ho Chi Mihn, seized control of the country from retreating Japanese forces (470). Just weeks later, British troops landed in the South and Chinese forces occupied Hanoi and the North. Both turned their occupation zones over to the French, who tried to bring the area back into their colonial orbit. But by 1954 it was obvious that the French were losing and that they would negotiate a peace that allowed them a graceful exit (472). Many in Washington feared that if South Vietnam fell to Communism then the economy of Southeast Asia, including Japan, would be in danger. So, the United States intervened and took up the anti-communist cause. However, the new government in South Vietnam was not popular either in Saigon or Washington. By 1963, discontent with South Vietnam’s leader Ngo Dinh Diem had spilled over into a coup attempt (474). The position of the United States on the coup was ambiguous at best. But the generals who replaced Diem were no better able to solve South Vietnam’s problems than Diem had been, and so in 1964 the US seized on a flimsy pretext to become more directly involved in the conflict. But by 1968 the war had become incredibly unpopular. President Johnson announced he would not run for re-election. Republican Richard Nixon became president. Rather than end the war, Nixon transformed it from a ground war in South Vietnam to an air war stretching across the region and into neutral Laos and Cambodia (484).

Unlike the Spanish-American War, the Vietnam War dragged on year after year. And unlike the Second World War, America’s war effort looked increasingly ugly. As early as 1964, a small number of activists began to organize against the war. In 1966, the SNCC, which had been founded to aid the civil rights movement, transformed itself into an anti-war organization. From music to movies, American culture in the 1960s became part of the protest movement (487). This change caused something unique in the history of American activism: middle-class members of society, long supporters of the interests of elites, turned against the war. Daniel Ellsberg, a Harvard-trained economist working for the government-funded RAND Corporation, even stole documents from his work and distributed them to a friendly reporter. The Pentagon Papers revealed just how badly the war was going. This coalition of activists would eventually help bring an end to the war (503). But the coalition would last beyond the end of the war and would morph into an array of new movements and organizations.

Chapter 19 Summary

As the civil rights movement reached its peak in the mid-1960s, many of its members began to think about America in broader terms than race. All over the country, women began to organize and work for their equality. In 1966 an alliance of middle-class women, led by Betty Friedan, formed the National Organization for Women (NOW). Their goal was to open opportunities for women outside the home. NOW took a moderate, liberal approach. They ran women candidates, and leading NOW activist Shirley Chisholm became the first Black woman elected to Congress in 1968. And in the 1970s, NOW took a leading role in the debates over the Equal Rights Amendment. During the height of the anti-Vietnam protests, more radical organizations were formed including the satirically named WITCH (Women’s International Terrorist Conspiracy from Hell). WITCH linked the women’s struggle to struggles against imperialism and racism.

American prisons in the 1960s and 1970s became an unlikely center for activism and change. Zinn argues that “the prisons in the United States had long been an extreme reflection of the American system itself,” overcrowded with lower-class people, often of color (515). At Attica prison in New York State, a riot captured the attention of the nation. For much of the 1960s, the prison had become overcrowded with mostly Black offenders. The prison also imposed strict rules and limited outdoor time, confining prisoners into their cells most of the day. Making matters worse, the parole system was “streamlined” so that hearings would take on average less than six minutes and the decision handed out by the board would come with no explanation. Inmates were permitted to attend inmate-led classes, including a popular sociology course in which inmates discussed ways to reform the prison. On September 9, 1971, the inmates clashed with the prison’s all-white guards. By the end of the day, 40 guards had been taken hostage. Rather than abuse the guards, the prisoners worked to build a more humane order. Despite this, the governor of New York decided to liberate the guards by force. On September 14, the National Guard and local police assaulted the prison, freed the guards, and killed 31 unarmed prisoners (521). Nine guards were also killed, though the cause of death was hotly disputed after the raid. Attica caused prisoners across the US to organize.

Chapter 20 Summary

Watergate roiled the political situation in Washington. Vietnam had undermined people’s faith in government, but the shock of the Watergate scandal showed how deep America’s problems went. One night in 1972, five men broke into the Watergate hotel in Washington DC. They were caught attempting to steal materials and plant recording devices in the offices of the Democratic National Committee. Over the next two years, consistent investigation and reporting demonstrated that President Richard Nixon and his top advisors had operated a criminal conspiracy against opponents of the administration. This program, which included break-ins, sought to delegitimize and discredit opposition to Nixon’s policies. Making matters worse, Nixon and his advisors tried to cover up their program and push the FBI’s investigation off track (543). Zinn argues that, in resigning, Nixon avoided a national reckoning with the mechanisms which had allowed him to commit those crimes in the first place. Instead, he sacrificed his reputation to save the elite status quo (545). Once the establishment had saved itself from public recrimination, the penalties for wrongdoing disappeared. Nixon received a pardon protecting him from most consequences (547).

Once the twin crises of Watergate and Vietnam had cleared, the elite began to close ranks around the succeeding Ford Administration. In 1975 the S.S. Mayaguez was captured off the coast of Cambodia in waters disputed between Cambodia and Vietnam. The tanker had 39 American sailors aboard, and the White House moved rapidly to free them. The plan was to use the military to retake the ship and free the crew. In fact, the crew had already been moved to an inland airbase. Cambodia had also constructed defenses on Koh Tang Island. US Navy sailors succeeded in capturing the empty Mayaguez, but when Marines landed on the island they were met by heavy fire and suffered casualties. Only the intervention of bombers allowed the battered US force the space to withdraw. By the end of the operation, more US combatants had been killed attempting the rescue than there were crewmen to be rescued. Once the force had been recalled, the commander learned that the crew had been ransomed back to the US before his operation even began (552). Despite this catastrophic failure, the secretary of defense declared the operation a smashing success. Congress had passed the War Powers Act in 1973 but had in the Mayaguez operation refused to see the provisions of that law implemented. And American newspapers praised Ford’s resolve in showing the world that America could still lead (554). But by the time of the bicentennial celebration in 1976, just 29% of Americans reported that they were hopeful for the future (557).

Chapters 17-20 Analysis

The 1950s and 1960s were a period of intense activism and social change. For Zinn, this activity crested during the election of 1968 and the anti-war protests. But unlike in the early 20th century, this activism was not driven by economic inequality or working conditions. Thanks to the economic miracle of the 1950s and 1960s, the United States was enjoying the greatest period of growth and prosperity in its history. Rather, the two causes Americans organized for were civil rights and peace. The first two chapters focus on how the two movements were able to achieve lasting success where the previous labor movements had struggled.

These chapters also highlight how these efforts transformed from moderate, liberal-dominated movements into movements characterized by greater radicalism and more ambitious objectives. Importantly, the civil rights movement developed the tactics of non-violent, which enabled it to establish middle-class respectability. Sit-ins and non-violent protests, such as Rosa Park’s refusal to change seats in Montgomery, were successful in modifying public opinion, leading ultimately to the passage of the civil rights and Voting Rights Acts of 1964 and 1965. Soon afterward, many white-led civil rights groups, including the SNCC, refocused their energy on opposing the war in Vietnam. Meanwhile, the Civil Right Movement began to radicalize after 1965. Leaders like Malcolm X argued that aggressive action, the same kind of action pioneered by the IWW, was necessary to force real change in the US. This message was ultimately unpalatable to many Americans, who preferred gradual change.

Like the civil rights movement, the anti-war movement began to fragment soon after it reached its crescendo. Women who had built the civil rights movement and had been active in protesting the Vietnam War turned to gender-based activism, creating women’s organizations including NOW. Likewise, prisoners attempted to reform the US carceral system and ensure greater protection and respect for imprisoned people. Native American groups demanded equality and recognition of the crimes perpetrated against them. And as the reality of the Watergate break-in was revealed to the American people, many organized and demonstrated against Nixon, eventually causing him to resign. But while these movements seemed to succeed initially, in almost every case the results were less than even moderates hoped for. The women’s movement pushed for an Equal Rights Amendment, but it fell short of ratification. And Richard Nixon, once a pariah, was quickly pardoned by his successor. It seemed that neither Nixon, nor his associates, nor the party that had supported him paid a price criminally or politically for the affair. In 1980, many Nixonites helped Ronald Reagan win the presidency, and it seemed that Watergate was all but forgotten.

While Zinn does not explicitly make this case, his argument seems clear. In comparing the 1960s and 1970s to the 1910s, both periods have a considerable amount of activism. In 1910, the IWW pushed for worker unionization and rights, whereas in the 1960s activists challenged racism and war. On the surface, it seems the movements of the 1960s and 1970s were more successful. Yet the more these movements diversified in their interests, the less successful each successive iteration became. The civil rights movement lost most of its support to the peace movement. While Zinn argues the peace movement was needed, and indeed unusual in its success, it came at the cost of its parent movement. And the peace movement itself fragmented into many smaller sub-movements that met with even less success. The IWW, on the other hand, was successful because it attempted to unify Americans under one union. It argued that all Americans had a common cause and that the root of America’s ailments was economic inequality. Once that problem was solved, racism, sexism, and war would go away. By focusing on one problem, the IWW produced tremendous success and, as Zinn argues, had it survived it would have enjoyed even greater successes. By dividing in the 1960s and 1970s, the working class lost its most powerful assets: strength in numbers and class unity.

blurred text
blurred text
blurred text
blurred text