Objectives: - Weeblyjustinabbotteducator.weebly.com/.../1/0/9/...plan.docx · Web viewIf the letter of a single person will persuade my senators or my representative in ... Resolution

4-5 Week Unit Plan

AP U.S. History

Designed by: Justin Abbott

Course Description

This class is an Advanced Placement U.S. History/Geography class created by Justin Abbott. Learners in this class will be advanced placement 11th or 12th grader students. Naturally, this class will be filled with diverse students with multiple ethnicities and class characteristics. Realistically though, this class will most likely be primarily middle to upper class white students as they are typically the dominant groups in the advanced classes. Since this is an advanced class, I expect us to cover 1-2 subjects per week in a 4-5 day a week class; meaning it will be relatively high paced.

Population

I am basing the population of this class as if I were teaching in Phoenix, AZ. Therefore, I expect there to be a population of approximately 40% white, 30% Hispanic, 15% Native American, 10% Asian, and 5% making up all other minorities. Classroom sizes will range from 25-40 students, most likely on the lower end (approximately 30) because it is an Advanced Placement class and population sizes are far less. The disparity between girls and boys will be relatively equal, 50% girls and 50% boys.

Characteristics

This class will have a large Spanish speaking population as a large percentage of the class is Hispanic and we are located in Phoenix, therefore I expect many students to be speaking Spanish in class and I should be able to at least speak some Spanish with them as well. Since this is an Advanced Placement class, grade level maturity and education should be met. Reading, writing, and understanding should be up to Eleventh and Twelfth grade standards. Considering the large amount of Spanish speakers, there will likely be a high population of ELL/special needs students. Unfortunately, or fortunately for some teachers, these ELL students are most likely not going to be placed in Advanced Placement classes. I will expect to still cooperate and deal with ELL students though and will be sure to meet their every need to better their education.

Another important characteristic, and possibly the most important in my opinion, will be the diverse perspectives and beliefs that will be in my class. Because of the diversity of my class, I expect immense amounts of conversations with students based on their personal opinion, beliefs, and perspectives. This will help guide the class in the direction of enduring understandings to have students understand different perspectives and respect those perspectives.

Environment

I will create a learning environment that is open, non-judgmental, and comforting for students. I will ensure that students do not feel judged by their peers or pressured to do things they are not comfortable with. I will take action when I see bullying or improper students’ judgment as both of those are completely unacceptable in my class room. Personally for myself, I will start as a stricter teacher who follows all of my rules closely to ensure students understand the rules and respect their teaching, self, and others. As the year progresses, the strictness can loosen and the classroom can become more relaxed and humorous as long as the students continue to follow the classroom rules. This is a process I learned from one of my cooperating teachers in college and it worked very well. This class will have a lot of maps, posters, flags, etc. on the on the walls. I want students to visual experience history, not just orally. Classrooms with little or no visuals make learning boring and unattractive to students. Visuals help hold students’ attention much better and help with learn better as well.

Enduring Understandings

Through this unit, students will understand and analyze perspectives/differences between Americans, Soviets, and other nations involved in the Cold War while also gaining geographical knowledge of the regions most impacted by the Cold War.

To make this enduring understanding possible, I will need multiple perspectives and ethnicities in my classroom. Having different perspectives will help students understand thought process and opinions of other countries, along with people, and better increase their learning ability in my classroom. If I am unable to bring multiple perspectives in my classroom, I will play as the instigator who takes on multiple perspectives and help my students understand that during the Cold War era, there were technically no wrong or right perspectives.

Essential Questions

1. How and why did the Cold War begin? Did it really begin following WWII, or could it be argued that it started earlier?

2. How did the Cold War affect U.S. foreign policy? How did it change from each president?

3. How did the Cold War impact U.S. civilians and promote movements such as war protests, civil rights, and the feminist movement?

4. Why was the U.S. so interested in being involved in Asia and third world countries during the Cold War?

Knowledge Objectives

1. Students will know that reasons for why the Cold War started.

2. Students will understand how the Cold War impacted domestic and foreign policy of American and how it enlightened or tainted our image.

3. Students will be able to analyze and elaborate on the causes/events that ended the Cold War.

Skills Objectives

1. Students will be able to analyze and detect bias during the Cold War by reading and discussing primary/secondary resources.

2. Students will understand how to determine and accept different perspectives by learning about multiple perspectives and nations involved in the Cold War and by discussing perspectives with fellow students in class.

3. Students will be able to analyze and understand how to read maps through extensive map analysis and use of locating countries.

Assessment

Pre-assessment

There are two pre-assessment activities I would use. First, a pre-test with basic questions of the Cold War that is not graded. This will allow me to see what students know about the Cold War and what I need to teach during the unit. Secondly, we will have a Socratic discussion of the Cold War with students discussing what they know on the Cold War.

Formative assessment

We will do bell work three times a week (Mon, Wed, Fri) that is based on a previous lesson from the day or two days before. This will check for understanding and help me ensure that I am teaching well. There will also be small quizzes (1 or 2) through the unit to check for understanding and teaching ability. The last formative assessment I will perform will be a review prior to the final. This review will be something like a Socratic discussion, Jeopardy, debate, etc.

Summative assessment

The summative assessment will be a unit test and paper/essay. The essay will be due the day of the test but will be distributed approximately a week in advanced.

Rubric (Will be used throughout course but primarily for the debate)

KNOWLEDGE: 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0

Shows an understanding of the material Able to answer questions

PARTICIPATION: 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0

Does their “fair share” in presenting the material Participates in each part of the presentation

LENGTH: 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

Long enough to adequately cover assigned material

CONTENT: 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0

Topic covered thoroughly Enough information given to understand topic Did not exclude any important information or include any unnecessary information

DESIGN: 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

Very creative Easy to see and follow Did not include any unncessary graphics

HANDS-ON ACTIVITY: 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0

Included class in the learning process Did more than lecture to the class

TOTAL ________

90-100 A

80-89 B

75-79 C

70-74 D

0-69 F

Source: http://www.myhistoryclass.net/cold_war_internet.htm#Rubric

Adaptation

If I notice that bell work is not being fully answered or being analyzed completely, I will reinforce and elaborate more on the subjects for future classes and clarify to my current class through more explanation. Also, following the pre-test, I will see what students know most and least about the Cold War and therefore teach to their weaknesses while leaving out areas that students are more understanding in.

Standards

Concept 9: Postwar United States

PO 1. Analyze aspects of America’s post World War II foreign policy:

a. international activism (e.g., Marshall Plan, United Nations, NATO)b. Cold War (e.g., domino theory, containment, Korea, Vietnam)c. Arms Race (e.g., Cuban Missile Crisis, SALT)d. United States as a superpower (e.g., political intervention and humanitarian efforts)PO 2. Describe aspects of American post-World War II domestic policy:

a. McCarthyismb. Civil Rights (e.g., Birmingham, 1964 Civil Rights Act, Voting Rights Act, Constitutional

Amendments)c. Supreme Court Decisions (e.g., the Warren and Burger Courts)d. Executive Power (e.g., War Powers Act, Watergate)e. social reforms Great Society and War on Poverty f. Space Race and technological developmentsPO 3. Describe aspects of post World War II American society:

a. postwar prosperity (e.g., growth of suburbs, baby boom, GI Bill)b. popular culture (e.g., conformity v. counter-culture, mass-media)c. protest movements (e.g., anti-war, women’s rights, civil rights, farm workers, César Chavez)d. assassinations (e.g., John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Jr., Robert F. Kennedy, Malcolm

X)e. shift to increased immigration from Latin America and Asia

NCSS Thematic Standards

1.1: Culture and Cultural Diversity – Shows multiple perspectives (beyond the majority culture/perspective). For example, a variety of primary sources could be used to represent how different groups approached the Civil Rights Movement.

1.2: Time and Continuity and Change – Shows how causal events led to an outcome of change or continuity. For example, the development of the President’s role in America or women’s rights could be traced over time.

1.3: People, Places, and Environment – Shows the relationship between people, places and environment. For example, people’s effect of the environment could be traced by examining how people have changed the environment by trying to make water more accessible. Similarly, the effect of the environment on people could be traced by examining how environmental characteristics have caused people to move or to change their lifestyle.

1.4: Individual Development and Identity – This examines influential individuals in society, as well as individuals who help students understand specific themes and topics. This showed be approached in a culturally sensitive manner, providing culturally diverse examples of important individuals. For example, when teaching about Japanese Internment Camps, you could provide primary sources from both sides – those ordering internment and those who experienced internment.

1.5: Individuals, Groups, and Institutions – Examines the actions of individuals, groups, and institutions, as well as the relationship between them. For example, this can be shown by examining the role of special interest groups in promoting certain issues to the government and to specific members of the government.

1.6: Power, Authority, and Governance – Shows both how the government functions and how power and authority affect government’s actions and responsibilities. This could also examine how non-governmental groups and institutions use power and authority to pursue their goals. For example, this could examine how factory owners used their power and authority to marginalize their employees.

1.7: Production, Distribution, and Consumption – Shows the development and effects of these forces. For example, this could be shown by examining how, in the 1950s, greater expendable income allowed for the development of a middle class that purchase a larger variety of luxury items. This could also look at how labor was organized in a particular time period (artisans, industrialized labor, outsourcing).

1.8: Science, Technology, and Society – Shows the development of science and technology and how these developments have affected society. For example, this could be shown how the creation of the railroad changed how and where people lived and worked.

1.9: Global Connections – Shows both similarities that occur across the globe and global interconnectedness. For example, this could be shown by examining outsourcing or immigration and border issues.

1.10: Civic Ideals and Practices – Teaches responsible and appropriate civic behavior. For example, when teaching the Civil Rights Movement, this can be shown by examining what people during this time did to enact change and apply this by discussing what students can do to encourage change.

Outline:

Day 1:

Pre-test and Socratic discussion

Day 2:

Lecture on Soviet and American idealism.

Differences between capitalism and communism

Talk about Germany and splitting of Berlin between Eastern and Western powers.

Berlin Airlift

Day 3:

Beginnings of Korean War

Read text book excerpts and discuss the perspectives of how the Korean War started.

Discuss as a class why the Korean War began

Day 4

Continue Korean War

Truman firing MacArthur

Day 5:

Finish up Korean War

Begin discussing Eisenhower and nuclear weapons build up

Day 6:

Finish up discussion on nuclear weapons build up

Start Kennedy days

Day 7:

Bay of Pigs lesson

Day 8:

Cuban Missile Crisis

Missile Crisis activity

Day 9:

Watch video: 13 Days

Day 10:

Finish watching 13 Days

Finish up Kennedy - Assassination

Discuss CIA in Guatemala

Day 11:

Quiz over 13 Days film

Events leading to Gulf of Tonkin Resolution

French defeat in Vietnam

U.S. diplomats and advisors into Vietnam

Day 12:

Gulf of Tonkin Resolution

Lyndon B. Johnson

Controversy of the Resolution

Day 13:

First troops into Vietnam

Destruction, casualties, and war tactics

Vietnam War Memorial activity

Day 14:

Finish up Vietnam War

Nixon election and removing of troops

Continued bombing of Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia

Day 15:

Quiz on Vietnam War

Discussing domestic problems

Women during Cold War lesson

Day 16:

Finish up discussing women during cold war lesson

Begin Civil Rights movement – Montgomery Boycott

Day 17:

Impacts of Montgomery Boycott

Hand out presentation guidelines for Civil Rights Act debate

Day 18:

Civil Rights Act discussion

Lecture on MLK Jr.

Day 19:

Continue on Civil Rights Act discussion

Impacts, persuasion, etc.

Passing of the Civil Rights Act

Day 20:

Computer lab – research for Civil Rights Movement debate

Hand out essay questions for unit test

Day 21:

In class, work with partners on preparing for debate

Ask teacher any questions

Ensure that all students know their position (debaters, audience, jury, etc.)

Day 22:

Debate

Day 23:

Debate

Day 24:

Discuss Debate

Hand out study guide

Day 25:

Jeopardy activity for review

Day 26:

Turn in essay and take test.

Lessons

Korean War

Materials: • Copies of Textbook Excerpts A and B • Copies of Korean War Guiding Questions • Korean War Powerpoint Slides • Optional: Classroom Textbook Excerpt on the Korean War

Plan of Instruction:

1. Do Now: Why might textbooks from different countries offer different versions of the same historical events? When textbooks offer conflicting accounts, how do you decide which textbook to believe?

• Establish that textbooks, like other historical documents we have looked at, have a bias and often offer only one perspective on the past.

• History textbooks are often influenced by a country’s national perspective and geographic and geo-political relationship to other countries.

2. Transition: Today we are going to look at two different textbook accounts of the start of the Korean War and try to figure out where they come from, and which one offers the most trustworthy account. Before we do this, we need some background information.

3. Mini-lecture to establish context for the Korean War. Project map of Korean War while lecturing (PPT slide):

• Korean War was the first hot war of the Cold War: 1950-1953. • During Second World War, the Allies decided to divide Korea at the 38th parallel. The North was under the trusteeship of the Soviet Union, the South under the trusteeship of the Americans. Two different countries developed: the North became a communist country, the South a non- communist, democratic country.

• Both sides wanted to re-unify the country under their own rule. • In 1950, after a number of small skirmishes at the border, war broke out between North and South Korea. The US backed and fought with the South, and China fought with a backed the North.

Korean War

• Initially, American and United Nations forces pushed deep into North Korea; however, China entered the war and pushed the Americans backed into the South.

• After three years, the two sides fought to a stalemate and kept the country divided at the 38th parrarell

• Our job today is think about the question: Who started the Korean War?

4. Explain to students that they are going to read two textbook accounts of the Korean War, one from North Korea and the other from South Korea. Pass out Textbook Excerpts A and B and Guiding Questions.

5. In pairs, students read textbook excerpts and answer questions.

6. Discussion: Students share out answers to questions:

• According to each textbook, how did the Korean War start? • Which of these textbooks do you find more trustworthy? Why? • Where else would you look in order to figure out how the Korean War started? • Which textbook comes from North Korea? Which comes from South Korea?

7. If time remains, have students compare these accounts to the account of the start of the Korean War in their classroom textbooks.

Citations:

History of the Revolution of our Great Leader Kim Il-sun: High School. (Pongyang, North Korea: Textbook Publishing Co., 1999), 125-127.

Doojin Kim, Korean History: Senior High. (Seoul, South Korea: Dae Han Textbook Co., 2001), 199.

© Copyright 2009, Avishag Reisman and Bradley Fogo.

Korean War

Textbook A

Upset by the fast and astonishing growth of the power of the Republic, the American invaders hastened the preparation of an aggressive war in order to destroy it in its infancy....The American imperialists furiously carried out the war project in 1950....The American invaders who had been preparing the war for a long time, alongside their puppets, finally initiated the war on June 25th of the 39th year of the Juche calendar. That dawn, the enemies unexpectedly attacked the North half of the Republic, and the war clouds hung over the once peaceful country, accompanied by the echoing roar of cannons.

Having passed the 38th parallel, the enemies crawled deeper and deeper into the North half of the Republic...the invading forces of the enemies had to be eliminated and the threatened fate of our country and our people had to be saved.

Textbook B

When the overthrow of the South Korean government through social confusion became too difficult, the North Korean communists switched to a stick-and-carrot strategy: seeming to offer peaceful negotiations, they were instead analyzing the right moment of attack and preparing themselves for it. The North Korean communists prepared themselves for war. Kim Il-sung secretly visited the Soviet Union and was promised the alliance of the Soviets and China in case of war. Finally, at dawn on June 25th, 1950 the North began their southward aggression along the 38th parallel. Taken by surprise at these unexpected attacks, the army of the Republic of Korea (South Korea) fought courageously to defend the liberty of the country....The armed provocation of the North Korean communists brought the UN Security Council around the table. A decree denounced the North Korean military action as illegal and as a threat to peace, and a decision was made to help the South. The UN army constituted the armies of 16 countries—among them, the United States, Great Britain and France—joined the South Korean forces in the battle against the North.

Korean War

Guiding Questions Name___________

1) According to each textbook, how did the Korean War start?

Textbook A Textbook B

2) Which of these textbooks do you find more trustworthy? Why? (Use specific examples from each text to support your answer).

3) Where else would you look in order to figure out how the Korean War started?

Korean War

Which of these sources is for Textbook A and which is for Textbook B?

Kim, Doojin. Korean History: Senior High. (Seoul, South Korea: Dae HanTextbook Co.), 2001.

Textbook _______

Provide language from the textbook excerpt to support your answer:

History of the Revolution of our Great Leader Kim Il-sun: High School. (Pongyang, North Korea: Textbook Publishing Co., 1999).

Textbook _______

Provide language from the textbook excerpt to support your answer

Truman fires MacArthur

Materials: • Korean War Map (PPT from Korean War Lesson Plan) • Copies of Truman and MacArthur Documents A–C • Copies of Truman and MacArthur Graphic Organizer


1. Introduction: Project map of Korean War and lecture on General MacArthur in the Korean War:

• General MacArthur led the UN forces in Korea. At first, he had major success and pushed North Korean troops north past the 38th parallel. • In response to UN troops crossing the 38th parallel, China sent troops to help the North Koreans. With Chinese help, the North Koreans pushed the UN troops back south. • For a long time, the war remained a stalemate at the 38th parallel. • Tensions mounted between President Truman and

General MacArthur: MacArthur wanted to push past the 38th parallel and even invade mainland China. Truman wanted to use diplomacy and avoid a major war with China. • MacArthur tried to go over Truman’s head by using the media to get public support, and Truman fired him for insubordination on April 11, 1951.

The central historical question for today is: How did Americans respond to President Truman’s decision to fire General MacArthur?

2. Warm-up discussion:

• How do you predict the public will respond to Truman’s decision to fire MacArthur? • Is it a big deal to fire a General? Why or why not? • Based on what you know about the Cold War and the 1950s, do you think the public sided with Truman (who wanted diplomacy) or with MacArthur (who wanted to invade mainland China)? Why?

3. Hand out Document A. Discuss as a class:

Truman and MacArthur

• What does this say about how the American public felt about Truman’s decision to fire MacArthur? • Did more people support or oppose Truman? How did this change over time?

4. Hand out Documents B and C and Graphic Organizer. Have students complete the Graphic Organizer in groups.

5. Debrief: • How did people feel about Truman’s decision? • What were some of the reasons that people gave for supporting or not supporting Truman? • What does this say about how people felt during the early years of the Cold War?

6. Wrap-up: • The Korean War ended in 1953 as a stalemate, with the country still split at the 38th parallel. • Truman’s decision to fight a limited war (and not invade China, as General MacArthur wanted to do) cost him popularity at home. • The “loss” of China to Communism and the stalemate in the Korean War led many Americans to become increasingly paranoid about the spread of Communism.

Citations:

Memorandum from the President, April 8, 1951. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/macarthur/sfeature/misc06.html

AMVETS, Letter to President Truman, April 11, 1951. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/macarthur/filmmore/reference/primary/letters01.html

Elizabeth Wood, Letter to President Truman, April 12, 1951. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/macarthur/sfeature/letters06.html



Document A

May 8, 1951

MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT:

The following is a tabulation of the correspondence – including telegrams, letters, cards, etc. – relative to your action in relieving (firing) General MacArthur of his commands [on April 11, 1951]:

Week ending April 13th Telegrams PRO CON Letters, cards, etc. 4,322 8,677 Week ending April 20th Telegrams PRO CON Letters, cards, etc. 14,501 18,873 Week ending April 27th Telegrams PRO CON Letters, cards, etc. 10,448 10,617 Week ending May 4th Telegrams PRO CON Letters, cards etc. 7,524 7,912 Present week through noon May 7th Telegrams PRO CON Letters, cards etc. 913 310

Total Correspondence received: 84,097


Document B

April 11, 1951

The Honorable Harry S. Truman The White House Washington, D.C.

Dear Mr. President:

AMVETS (American Veterans) support your painful decision to relieve General Douglas MacArthur of his command on obvious grounds of repeated insubordination in violation of basic American principles governing civil versus military authority.

AMVETS recognize, and believe the overwhelming majority of Americans recognize, that the issue here is not whether General MacArthur is right or wrong or whether administration policies are right or wrong. The issue clearly and simply is whether the ultimate civil authority of the United States can tolerate, no matter what the motives, actions in contempt of constitutional lines of authority. Any lessening of civil power over military power must inevitably lead away from democracy.

AMVETS are keenly aware of General MacArthur's greatness and his immense contributions to his country as a military leader. But constitutional principles are greater than any one individual.

We know your decision demanded coverage because of the many emotional factors involved. We believe you had no other choice.

We hope, however, that you will speedily re-enunciate (re-state) and re-affirm our overall and long-range policies in the Far East to help unify America and to stabilize political opinion throughout the world. We pledge you our continued support as Commander in Chief in the prosecution of the Korean war while praying for the success of your efforts to achieve peace.

Sincerely yours,

Harold Russell National Commander


Document C

P. O. Box 6615 AH 220 Allen Street San Antonio, Texas

April 12, 1951

The Hon. Harry S. Truman President of the United States The White House Washington, D. C.

Dear Mr. President:

Our far-eastern policy must protect either the rights of free nations or Communists interests. Without regard to the preferences of most Americans, you have chosen to support the latter.

You have thrown into the trash-pile all that has been accomplished in Japan in the last five years.

You have sold us out and the Kremlin (Soviet government) should give you a 21- gun salute. They probably will – aimed right at our bewildered forces in Korea.

If the letter of a single person will persuade my senators or my representative in Congress to support a motion for your impeachment, that letter is in the mail.

Your dismissal of Douglas MacArthur confirms your devotion to Communist Russia. You have kicked out, with insults, the most brilliant, courageous and successful man representing our country abroad.

You have fired a man whose first and whole devotion has been to the best interest of our country. (He didn't think about the Democratic vote in Missouri.) He has done a top job, but he couldn't be red-taped. So he got fired, and the hell with U.S.A. Harry is top-boy, and he has to prove it. Why stop with Formosa? Let's give them Japan, and Hawaii, and Alaska - and why not the Panama Canal?

Yours sincerely, (and don't bother with the form letter reply)

Elizabeth Wood


Name_____________

Truman and MacArthur Graphic Organizer

Source: Who wrote this?

When was this written (a long time or short time after Truman fired MacArthur)?

Does this person support President Truman’s decision to fire General MacArthur?

What are TWO reasons this person gives for either supporting or not supporting President Truman?

Document B

Document C

In the space below, write one paragraph explaining what these two letters tell you about the historical context of the early 1950s in the United States.


Materials: • United Streaming Video Segment: The “Hour of Maximum Danger” (from Freedom: A History of the US: Let Freedom Ring) http://player.discoveryeducation.com/index.cfm?guidAssetId=29DCDDD5- 57CA-4660-96AC-E34EBCEEA4E5&blnFromSearch=1&productcode=US • Cuban Missile Crisis Documents A-C • Cuban Missile Crisis Guiding Questions • Classroom Textbook Excerpt on Cuban Missile Crisis

SPOILER ALERT: DON’T MENTION U.S. MISSILES IN TURKEY. THE WHOLE POINT OF THE LESSON IS FOR STUDENTS TO DISCOVER THAT THE REMOVAL OF THOSE MISSILES WAS PART OF THE DEAL.


1. Introduction: Review what students have already learned about the Cold War and explain that it continued for decades.

In 1959, Cuba became a Communist country, led by Fidel Castro. This development brought the Cold War close to home because Cuba is 90 miles off the coast of Florida (you might want to point this out on a map).

John F. Kennedy was elected president in 1960 and oversaw two major events that involved Cuba: 1) the Bay of Pigs invasion; 2) the Cuban Missile Crisis.

2. Play United Streaming Video Segment: The “Hour of Maximum Danger”- http://player.discoveryeducation.com/index.cfm?guidAssetId=29DCDDD5- 57CA-4660-96AC-E34EBCEEA4E5&blnFromSearch=1&productcode=US

Have students answer the following questions:

• According to the video, why did the Russians pull the missiles out of Cuba? • What do you think they mean by “delicate, behind-the-scenes negotiations?”

Today we’re going to look at some of those “delicate” negotiations.


3. Hand out Cuban Missile Crisis Documents A-C and Guiding Questions. Students should answer the questions in pairs.

4. Debrief: • According to these documents, what deal did the U.S. strike with the U.S.S.R.? • Why was this deal kept secret? • Is this deal mentioned in the classroom textbook? • Why might the textbook not have mentioned this deal? • Who seems more scared or on the defensive in this documents? • What does this event show you about how people felt during the Cold War?

Citations:

Soviet Chairman Kruschev, Letter to President Kennedy. U.S., Department of State, FOREIGN RELATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES, 1961-1963, Volume XI, Cuban Missile Crisis and Aftermath.

John F. Kennedy, Letter to Chairman Kruschev, New York Times, Oct 27, 1962, pg. 30.

Russian Ambassador cable to Foreign Ministry, October 27, 1962. Russian Foreign Ministry archives, translation from copy provided by NHK, in Richard Ned Lebow and Janice Gross Stein, We All Lost the Cold War (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1994), appendix, pp. 523-526, with minor revisions. http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/cuba_mis_cri/moment.htm



Document A: Letter From Chairman Khrushchev to President Kennedy (Modified)

Moscow, October 27, 1962.

DEAR MR. PRESIDENT,

I understand your concern for the security of the United States…

You wish to ensure the security of your country, and this is understandable. But Cuba, too, wants the same thing; all countries want to maintain their security. But how are we, the Soviet Union, to [understand] the fact that you have surrounded the Soviet Union with military bases; surrounded our allies with military bases; placed military bases literally around our country; and stationed your missile armaments there? This is no secret. . . .Your missiles are located in Britain, are located in Italy, and are aimed against us. Your missiles are located in Turkey.

You are disturbed over Cuba. You say that this disturbs you because it is 90 miles by sea from the coast of the United States of America. But you have placed destructive missile weapons, which you call offensive, in Turkey, literally next to us.

I therefore make this proposal: We are willing to remove from Cuba the [missiles] which you regard as offensive. Your representatives will make a declaration to the effect that the United States, for its part, . . . will remove its [missiles] from Turkey.

We, in making this pledge, will promise not to invade Turkey. . .The United States Government will promise not to invade Cuba . . .

The greatest joy for all peoples would be the announcement of our agreement.

These are my proposals, Mr. President.

Respectfully yours,

N. Khrushchev

Source: Letter from Soviet Chairman Kruschev to President Kennedy. U.S., Department of State, FOREIGN RELATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES, 1961- 1963, Volume XI, Cuban Missile Crisis and Aftermath.


Document B: Letter from President Kennedy to Chairman Khrushchev (Modified)

Washington, October 27, 1962

Dear Mr. Chairman: I have read your letter of Oct. 26th with great care and welcomed the statement of your desire to seek a prompt solution to the problem. As I read your letter, the key elements of your proposals…are as follows: 1) You would agree to remove these weapons from Cuba under appropriate United Nations observation and supervision; and halt the further introduction of such weapons systems into Cuba. 2) We, on our part, would agree…a) to remove promptly the [blockade] now in effect and (b) to give assurances against an invasion of Cuba, I am confident that other nations of the Western Hemisphere would be prepared to do likewise.

There is no reason why we should not be able to complete these arrangements and announce them to the world within a couple of days. The effect of such a settlement on easing world tensions would enable us to work toward a more general arrangement regarding "other armaments", as proposed in your letter.

But the first step, let me emphasize, is the cessation (end) of work on missile sites in Cuba . . . . The continuation of this threat by linking these problems to the broader questions of European and world security, would surely [be] a grave risk to the peace of the world. For this reason I hope we can quickly agree along the lines outlined in this letter and in your letter of October 26.

John F. Kennedy

Source: Letter from President Kennedy to Chairman Kruschev. New York Times, Oct 27, 1962, pg. 30.


Document C: Russian Ambassador Cable to Soviet Foreign Ministry (Modified)

Dobrynin’s (Russia’s Ambassador to the United States) cable to the Soviet Foreign Ministry, October 27, 1962.

Late tonight Robert Kennedy (President Kennedy’s Attorney General) invited me to come see him. We talked alone.

Kennedy stated that, “The US government is determined to get rid of those bases [in Cuba]—up to, in the extreme case, of bombing them, since, I repeat, they pose a great threat to the security of the USA. In response I am sure the Soviets will respond and a real war will begin, in which millions of Americans and Russians will die. We want to avoid that in any way we can, I’m sure that the government of the USSR has the same wish.”

“The most important thing for us is to get an agreement as soon as possible with the Soviet government to halt further work on the construction of the missile bases in Cuba and take measures under international control that would make it impossible to use these weapons.”

“And what about Turkey?” I asked R. Kennedy

“If that is the only obstacle to achieving the rules I mentioned earlier, then the president doesn’t see any difficulties in resolving this issue” replied R. Kennedy. “The greatest difficulty for the president is the public discussion of the issue of Turkey. The deployment of missile bases in Turkey was officially done by special decision of the NATO Council. To announce now a unilateral (one-sided) decision by the president of the USA to withdraw missile bases from Turkey—this would damage the entire structure of NATO and the US position as the leader of NATO. However, President Kennedy is ready to come to agreement on that question with Khrushchev. I think that in order to withdraw these bases from Turkey we need 4-5 months. However, the president can’t say anything public in this regard about Turkey.”

R. Kennedy then warned that his comments about Turkey are extremely confidential; besides him and his brother, only 2-3 people know about it in Washington.

“The president also asked Khrushchev to give him an answer within the next day,” Kennedy said in conclusion.

Source: Russian Ambassador Dobrynin cable to Foreign Ministry, October 27, 1962. Russian Foreign Ministry archives; publicly released in the early 1990s.


Guiding Questions Name___________

Document A: Letter From Chairman Khrushchev to President Kennedy

1. What deal does Khrushchev propose to Kennedy?

2. What is the tone of this letter? Provide a quote to support your claim.

3. Do you think Khrushchev has the upper hand? Why or why not?

Document B: Letter from President Kennedy to Chairman Khrushchev

4. In this letter Kennedy restates Khrushchev’s proposals. Does Kennedy include everything Khrushchev proposed? If not, why might have he left something out?

5. What is the tone of this letter? Provide a quote to support your claim.

6. Do you think Kennedy has the upper hand? Why or why not?

Document C: Russian Ambassador Cable to Soviet Foreign Ministry 7. What new information do you learn from Robert Kennedy?

8. Why do you think this exchange happened in a private meeting (rather than in an official letter)? [Remember, Document B was published in the New York Times].

9. How do you think Robert Kennedy felt during this meeting? Provide evidence.

Conflict in Guatemala

Materials: • Copies of Two Textbook Accounts Worksheet • Copies of CIA Declassified Document • OPTIONAL: Copies of Original CIA Documents (PDF)


1. Introduction: As we’ve learned, the Cold War started heating up after WWII. The United States passed policies—the Marshall Plan and the Truman Doctrine—to prevent the spread of Communism in Europe. We’ve also learned that the United States sent troops to Korea to fight Communist North Korea.

Throughout the Cold War, the United States also engaged in covert (or underground/hidden) action.

Today, we’re going to look at what happened in Guatemala.

2. Hand out Two Textbook Accounts and have students complete in pairs. 3. Debrief: What happened in Guatemala?

Whole class discussion: • Why did the United States get involved in Guatemala? • What are some differences between Textbook A and Textbook B? What details appear in only one of the textbooks and not the other? • How do the details affect the overall story? • Why do you think one textbook found these details important to include but the other did not? • What more do you want to know about what happened in Guatemala?

4. Hand out declassified CIA document. (Explain what ‘declassified’ means).

Write the following questions on the board. Students should answer in pairs:

• What type of document is this? • What does it say about the U.S. involvement in Guatemala? • What else was happening in 1954 that would have influenced the United States’s decision to use covert methods in Guatemala?

Guatemala

• Does this document challenge the textbook accounts? Why or why not?

5. Debrief as whole class. Discussion:

• Why is this event in Guatemala considered part of the Cold War? • How does this event help you understand the United States’ behavior during the Cold War? • Are you surprised by this story? Why or why not?

Citations:

"Guatemalan Communist Personnel to be disposed of during Military Operations of Calligeris", Origin deleted, Undated. http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB4/


Guatemala

Name_______________

Two Textbook Accounts

Textbook A Textbook B

In 1954, the CIA also took covert actions in Guatemala, a Central American country just south of Mexico. Eisenhower believed that Guatemala’s government, headed by Jacobo Arbenz Guzman, had Communist sympathies because it had given more than 200,000 acres of American-owned land to peasants. In response, the CIA trained an army, which

invaded Guatemala and captured Arbenz Guzman and his forces. The army’s leader, Carlos Castillo Armas, became dictator of the country.

Source: The Americans, 2002, p. 626.

[In 1954] the CIA acted to protect American- owned property in Guatemala. In 1951 Jacobo Arbenz Guzman won election as president of Guatemala with Communist support. His land reform program took over large estates, including those of the American-owned United Fruit Company. In May 1954, Communist Czechoslovakia delivered arms to Guatemala. The CIA responded by arming the Guatemalan opposition and training them at secret camps in Nicaragua and Honduras. Shortly after these CIA-trained forces invaded Guatemala, Arbenz Guzman left office.

Source: American Vision, 2006, p. 655.

What happened in Guatemala?

Answer the questions below. Write (A) if the answer appears in textbook A; write (B) if the answer appears in textbook B; and write (A + B) if the answer appears in both textbooks.

1. Who was the leader of Guatemala in 1954? Which textbook contains this answer? _____

2. Why did the United States oppose this leader? Which textbook contains this answer? _____

3. What did the U.S. do to overthrow this leader? Which textbook contains this answer? _____

4. What was the result of the U.S.’s actions? Which textbook contains this answer? _____

Gulf Of Tonkin Resolution

Materials: • Gulf of Tonkin Powerpoint • Gulf of Tonkin Timeline • Gulf of Tonkin Documents A-D • Gulf of Tonkin Guiding Questions


1. Show map of Vietnam (PPT) and hand out Gulf of TonkinTimeline. Have students follow along as you lecture on background to Vietnam War:

• French colonialism in Vietnam: 1800s-1941. • Japan took over Vietnam during WWII, but when Japan was defeated in 1945, Ho Chi Minh declared Vietnamese independence. • But French came back in and tried to take over again; U.S. supported French. The French lost in 1954. • 1954: Geneva Convention split the country into North and South, with the idea that there would be free elections in the near future. • (U.S. DID NOT sign Geneva Accords, for fear that Communists would win the general elections). • U.S. supported South Vietnam leader, Diem. But Diem turned out to be oppressive and unpopular. He canceled elections, repressed Buddhists; caused major discontent in South Vietnam. • U.S. feared that Diem’s unpopularity will push more South Vietnamese to support Communists. So they supported a coup and Diem was overthrown and assassinated—Nov. 1, 1963. • JFK assassinated only weeks later. LBJ inherited the problem in Vietnam. • Under new weak South Vietnam government, support for Communism grew; North Vietnam smuggled weapons into South Vietnam to support Communist insurgents through a network of trails through Laos and Cambodia (Ho Chi Minh trails). • Aug. 2, 1964- North Vietnamese attacked U.S.S. Maddox; Aug. 4. –another attack provided grounds for Gulf of Tonkin Resolution (second attack turned out to be fake—never happened). • President Johnson asked Congress to pass Gulf of Tonkin Resolution which gave him authorization to use military force in Vietnam (not a declaration of war).

Gulf of Tonkin

2. Inquiry: Was the U.S. planning to go to war with North Vietnam before the Gulf of Tonkin incident?

Hand out Gulf of Tonkin Documents A-D and Guiding Questions.

READ THE TOP OF THE GUIDING QUESTIONS SHEET TO THE CLASS.

Have students complete in their notebooks.

3. Discussion: • What types of documents are these? Do you think they’re reliable? • What evidence do the documents offer that the U.S. was planning to go to war with North Vietnam before the Gulf of Tonkin incident? • Is this strong evidence that the U.S. was planning an attack? • What were some of the reasons why the U.S. was hesitant about attacking North Vietnam? • Is there evidence that the U.S. was planning a full-scale war? • What additional evidence would you want to see before deciding? • What additional evidence would you want to see in order to determine whether the U.S. was planning a war with North Vietnam?

Citations:

Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, Joint Resolution of Congress: H.J. RES 1145 August 7, 1964. http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?doc=98&page=transcript

Johnson Library, National Security File, Aides File, McGeorge Bundy, Luncheon with the President, Vol. I, Part 1. Top Secret Sensitive. Also published in Declassified Documents, 2979, 473B. http://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1964- 68v01/d173

Department of State, Central Files, POL 27 VIET S. Top Secret: Priority; Nodis. Drafted by William Bundy, cleared by Sullivan, and approved by Rusk. http://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1964-68v01/d166#fn2

Johnson Library, Recordings and Transcripts, Recording of a telephone conversation between the President and McGeorge Bundy, Tape 64.28 PNO 111.U.S. Department of State, Foreign Relations of the United States, 1964-68, Volume XXVII, Mainland Southeast Asia: Regional Affairs, Washington, DC, Document Number 53. http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/vietnam/lbjbundy.htm


Gulf of Tonkin

Vietnam War Timeline

September 2, 1945 - Ho Chi Minh declares an independent Vietnam called the Democratic Republic of Vietnam.

July 1950 - The United States pledges $15 million worth of military aid to France to help them fight in Vietnam.

May 7, 1954 - The French are defeated at the Battle of Dien Bien Phu.

July 21, 1954 - The Geneva Accords declares a cease-fire for the withdrawal of the French from Vietnam and creates a temporary boundary between North and South Vietnam at the 17th parallel.

October 26, 1955 - South Vietnam declares itself the Republic of Vietnam (GVN).

December 20, 1960 - The National Liberation Front (NLF), a.k.a. the Viet Cong, is established in South Vietnam.

November 2, 1963 – During a coup, South Vietnamese President Ngo Dinh Diem is executed.

August 2 and 4, 1964 - North Vietnamese attack two U.S. destroyers in international waters, which becomes known as the Gulf of Tonkin Incident.

August 7, 1964 - The U.S. Congress passes the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution.

March 2, 1965 – The U.S. begins bombing campaign of North Vietnam - Operation Rolling Thunder.

March 8, 1965 - The first U.S. combat troops arrive in Vietnam.

Gulf of Tonkin

Document A (Modified)

Gulf of Tonkin Resolution Congressional Joint Resolution, August 7, 1964

The North Vietnamese Navy, in violation of the Charter of the United Nations and of international law, have deliberately and repeatedly attacked United States naval vessels lawfully present in international waters, and have thereby created a serious threat to international peace; and

These attacks are part of a deliberate and systematic campaign of aggression that the Communist regime in North Vietnam has been waging against its neighbors and other free the nations; and

The United States is assisting the peoples of Southeast Asia to protect their freedom and has no territorial, military or political ambitions in that area, but desires only that these peoples should be left in peace to work out their own destinies in their own way:

Therefore the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America have decided that we approve and support the determination of the President, as Commander in Chief, to take all necessary military actions to combat Communist forces and to prevent further aggression.

The United States is prepared, as the President determines, to take all necessary steps, including the use of armed force, to assist any member of the Southeast Asia Collective Defense Treaty requesting assistance in defense of its freedom.

Gulf of Tonkin

Document B (Modified)

Memorandum from Foreign Affairs Advisor (Bundy) to the President

Washington, May 25, 1964.

It is recommended that you make a Presidential decision that the U.S. will use selected and carefully graduated military force against North Vietnam. . .

This basic Presidential decision is recommended on these premises:

(1) that the U.S. cannot tolerate the loss of Southeast Asia to Communism;

(2) that without a decision to resort to military action if necessary the present prospect is not hopeful, in South Vietnam or in Laos;

(3) that a decision to use force if necessary, backed by resolute and extensive deployment, and conveyed by every possible means to our adversaries (enemies), gives the best present chance of avoiding the actual use of such force.

It is further recommended that our clear purpose in this decision should be to use all our influence to bring about a major reduction or elimination of North Vietnamese interference in Laos and in South Vietnam, and not to unroll a scenario aimed at the use of force as an end in itself.

Source: Johnson Library, National Security File, Aides File, McGeorge Bundy, Luncheon with the President, Vol. I, Part 1. Top Secret Sensitive.

Gulf of Tonkin

Document C (Modified)

Telegram From the Department of State (Rusk) to the Embassy in Vietnam (Lodge)

Washington, May 22, 1964—7:40 p.m.

On the other question, whether initial substantial attacks – [against North Vietnam] could proceed without notice, it is our present view here that this would simply not be possible. Even if Hanoi (North Vietnam) itself did not publicize them, there are enough observers in North Vietnam who might pick them up and there is also the major possibility of leakage at the South Vietnam end. Thus, publicity seems almost inevitable to us here for any attack that did significant damage. Once such publicity occurred, I think you can see that the finger would point straight at us and that the President would then be put in perhaps a far more difficult position toward the American public and the Congress.

Thus, we are using a GVN-or-U.S.-acknowledged plan at the present time, although we do recognize that something a little stronger than the present OPLAN 34-A* might be carried out on the basis you propose. *OPLAN 34-A was implemented in 1961. It was a covert or secret operation to collect information about North Vietnam.

Source: Department of State, Central Files, POL 27 VIET S. Top Secret: Priority; Nodis. Drafted by William Bundy, cleared by Sullivan, and approved by Rusk.

Gulf of Tonkin

Document D (Modified)

Telephone Conversation Between President Johnson and the President's Special Assistant for National Security Affairs (Bundy) Washington, May 27, 1964, 11:24 a.m.

Johnson: I will tell you the more, I just stayed awake last night thinking of this thing, and the more that I think of it I don't know what in the hell, it looks like to me that we're getting into another Korea. It just worries the hell out of me. I don't see what we can ever hope to get out of there with once we're committed. . . . I don't think it's worth fighting for and I don't think we can get out. And it's just the biggest damn mess that I ever saw.

Bundy: It is an awful mess.

Johnson: And we just got to think about it. . . I just thought about ordering all those kids in there. And what in the hell am I ordering them out there for? What in the hell is Vietnam worth to me? . . .

Bundy: Yeah, yeah.

Johnson: Of course, if you start running from the Communists, they may just chase you right into your own kitchen.

Bundy: Yeah, that's the trouble. And that is what the rest of that half of the world is going to think if this thing comes apart on us. That's the dilemma, that's exactly the dilemma.

. . .

Johnson: But this is a terrible thing that we're getting ready to do.

Bundy:. . . I think, also, Mr. President, you can do, what I think Kennedy did at least once which is to make the threat without having made your own internal decision that you would actually carry it through.

Source: Johnson Library, Recordings and Transcripts, Recording of a telephone conversation between the President and McGeorge Bundy, Tape 64.28 PNO 111.U.S. Department of State, Foreign Relations of the United States, 1964-68, Volume XXVII, Mainland Southeast Asia: Regional Affairs, Washington, DC, Document Number 53.

Gulf of Tonkin

Gulf of Tonkin Resolution Guiding Questions

Most history books say that the United States war in Vietnam began in 1964, after Congress passed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution. However, it’s no secret that the United States had been very involved in the region for at least a decade before. By the time JFK was assassinated in 1963, the United States had 16,000 military troops in Vietnam. Today we’re going to try to answer the question:

Was the U.S. planning to go to war in Vietnam before August 1964?

Document A 1. According to this document, what did the North Vietnamese do? 2. Why did the United States feel compelled to respond at this point? 3. According to this document, was the U.S. planning to go to war in Vietnam before August 1964? Explain your answer.

Document B 1. When was this document written? Who wrote it? 2. What did Bundy suggest to the President? 3. What are three reasons why Bundy made this recommendation? 4. According to this document, was the U.S. planning to go to war in Vietnam before August 1964? Explain your answer.

Document C 1. When was this document written? Who wrote it? 2. How did Rusk feel about the South Vietnamese government’s ability to fight the Communists? Support your answer with evidence. 3. Why did Rusk think attacking the North Vietnamese is not a smart idea? 4. According to this document, was the U.S. planning to go to war in Vietnam before August 1964? Explain your answer.

Document D 1. What type of document is this? How trustworthy do you think this type of document is? 2. What is the dilemma facing President Johnson? 3. According to this document, was the U.S. planning to go to war in Vietnam before August 1964? Explain your answer.

Using all four documents, write a paragraph in response the question:

Was the U.S. planning to go to war in Vietnam before August 1964?

Vietnam War

Objectives:1. Describe the Vietnam Wall Memorial2. Understand the anti-war movement of the late 1960’s. 3. Identify and analyze primary evidence relating to the Vietnam War.4. Form an opinion and write an editorial about the U.S. presence in Vietnam in 1968.

In-Class ActivitiesLesson OpenerAs the students enter the classroom, the teacher will hand them 2 names of Vietnam veterans whose names appear on the Vietnam Wall Memorial. The students will then write these names on the blackboard (that will represent the wall). The teacher will create a somber climate in the classroom by turning off the lights, light candles and have anti-war songs by Joan Baez playing in the background. With over 60 names on the board, it should leave an impact on the students concerning the number of men and women who died in the war.

Instructional Strategy

1. Lecture topic: The Vietnam War protest at home in late 1960’s.

2. Students will examine historical evidence relating to the war and draw conclusions about the attitudes of some Americans regarding the war. The students will be divided into five groups. Each group will answer questions about each (see attached). Each group will have five minutes to examine the following artifacts:3. POW/MIA bracelet4. protest bumper sticker5. rubbing from the Vietnam Wall6. lyrics to songs Fish Cheer by Country Joe McDonald and War by Edwin Starr7. diary entry of a soldier in Vietnam in 1968

Student Assessment

Students will write a letter to the editor, approximately 150 words, either defending America’s presence in Vietnam or showing protest to our presence.

Women during Cold War

Materials: • Women in the 1950s PowerPoint • Copies of Women in the 1950s Documents A-D • Copies of Women in the 1950s Graphic Organizer

Plan of Instruction: 1. Introductory lecture: PowerPoint Slide 1: Suburban communities exploded in the 1950s.

Slide 2-3: The first mass-produced suburb, Levittown, New York, was built in 1951. • These homes were affordable. • Many young couples were able to buy a home b/c of the GI Bill—a law that said the federal government would back loans to WWII veterans. • The homes were built quickly and cheaply; mass production resulted in uniformity of design and homogenous suburban neighborhoods.

Slides 4: Additionally, the decade after WWII included a “baby boom;” millions of Americans began having families.

Slide 5: Life in suburbia encouraged conformity; there was pressure to “keep up with the Joneses” with material purchases (e.g., cars, appliances, etc.).

New forms of media, in particular, the television, promoted consumer culture.

Slide 6-7: Media created a new suburban ideal. Leave it to Beaver: the white, nuclear family with specific gender roles.

2. Do Now: Look at these images (Slide 7) that were printed in popular magazines in the 1950s. According to these images, what do you think life was like for suburban women in the 1950s?

Share out responses.

Women in the 1950s

3. Transition: Today, we are going to continue investigating the question of what was life like for suburban women in the 1950s, specifically: Is the image of the happy 1950s housewife accurate? Why or why not? We are going to examine two rounds of documents in order to develop an historical claim.

4. Round 1: Hand out Documents A and B. Students complete Graphic Organizer in groups.

5. Individually, students write hypothesis #1.

6. Share out and discuss hypotheses.

7. Round 2: Hand out Documents C and D. Students complete Graphic Organizer in groups.

8. Share out final hypotheses and evidence to back final claims.

9. Discussion:

• Were housewives happy with their lives? • Were women in the 1950s just staying at home? • Documents A and B say women were staying at home; but Documents C and D say that women were politically involved and even working. Who should we believe? • Do you think African American, Latino, Asian American, and women from other minority groups had similar experiences to those depicted in these documents?

Citations:

Harry Henderson, “The Mass-Produced Suburbs: How People Live in America’s Newest Towns.” Harper’s Weekly, November 1953. http://harpers.org/archive/1953/11/0006495

Betty Friedan, The Feminine Mystique, 1963. Chapter 1.

Joanne Meyerowitz, “Beyond the Feminine Mystique: A Reassessment of Postwar Mass Culture, 1946-1958.” The Journal of American History, Vol. 79, No. 4 (Mar., 1993), pp. 1455-1482.

Alice Kessler-Harris, Out to Work, 2003, pp. 301-302.


Women in the 1950s

Document A: Harper’s Weekly, 1953 (Modified)

The daily pattern of household life is governed by the husband's commuting schedule. It is entirely a woman's day because virtually every male commutes. Usually the men must leave between 7:00 and 8:00 A.M.; therefore they rise between 6:00 and 7:00 A.M. In most cases the wife rises with her husband, makes his breakfast while he shaves, and has a cup of coffee with him. Then she often returns to bed until the children get up. The husband is not likely to be back before 7:00 or 7:30 P.M.

This leaves the woman alone all day to cope with the needs of the children, her house-keeping, and shopping. (Servants, needless to say, are unknown). When the husband returns, he is generally tired, both from his work and his traveling. . . . Often by the time the husband returns the children are ready for bed. Then he and his wife eat their supper and wash the dishes. By 10:00 P.M. most lights are out.

For the women this is a long, monotonous (boring) daily [routine]. Generally the men, once home, do not want to leave. They want to "relax" or "improve the property" -putter around the lawn or shrubbery. However, the women want a "change." Thus, groups of women often go to the movies together.

Source: Harry Henderson, “The Mass-Produced Suburbs: How People Live in America’s Newest Towns.” Harper’s Weekly, November 1953. Harry Henderson based his observations on extensive visits, observations, and interviews in 1950s suburbs.

Women in the 1950s

Document B: The Feminine Mystique by Betty Friedan (Modified)

The problem . . . was a strange stirring, a sense of dissatisfaction, a yearning that women suffered in the middle of the twentieth century in the United States. Each suburban wife struggled with it alone. As she made the beds, shopped for groceries, matched slipcover

material, ate peanut butter sandwiches with her children, . . . lay beside her husband at night--she was afraid to ask even of herself the silent question--"Is this all?" . . .

In the fifteen years after World War II, this mystique of feminine fulfillment became the cherished . . . core of contemporary American culture. Millions of women lived their lives in the image of those pretty pictures of the American suburban housewife, kissing their husbands goodbye in front of the picture window, depositing their station-wagons full of children at school, and smiling as they ran the new electric waxer over the spotless kitchen floor. They baked their own bread, sewed their own and their children's clothes, kept their new washing machines and dryers running all day. . . . Their only dream was to be perfect wives and mothers; their highest ambition to have five children and a beautiful house, their only fight to get and keep their husbands. They had no thought for the unfeminine problems of the world outside the home; they wanted the men to make the major decisions. . .

Source: Betty Friedan was one of the early leaders of the Women’s Rights movement that developed in the 1960s and 1970s. She published The Feminine Mystique in 1963. In the book, Friedan discusses how stifled and unsatisfied many suburban women were in the 1950s.

Women in the 1950s

Document C: Historian Joanne Meyerowitz (Modified)

The Woman’s Home Companion (a popular women’s magazine) conducted opinion polls in 1947 and 1949 in which readers named the women they most admired. In both years the top four women were [women involved in politics].

The postwar popular magazines were also positive about women’s participation in politics. The Ladies’ Home Journal had numerous articles that supported women as political and community leaders. One article in the Ladies’ Home Journal from 1947 encouraged women to “Make politics your business. Voting, office holding, raising your voice for new and better laws are just as important to your home and your family as the evening meal or spring house cleaning.”

[This shows that women at the time believed that individual achievement and public service were at least as important as devotion to home and family].

Source: Joanne Meyerowitz, “Beyond the Feminine Mystique: A Reassessment of Postwar Mass Culture, 1946-1958.” The Journal of American History, Vol. 79, No. 4 (Mar., 1993),

pp. 1455-1482. Meyerowitz examined 489 articles in eight monthly magazines from the 1950s.

Women in the 1950s

Document D: Historian Alice Kessler-Harris (Modified)

At first glance, the 1950s was a decade of the family… But already the family was flashing warning signals. . . . Homes and cars, refrigerators and washing machines, telephones and multiple televisions required higher incomes . . . The two-income family emerged. In 1950, wives earned wages in only 21.6 percent of all families. By 1960, 30.5 percent of wives worked for wages. And that figure would continue to increase. Full- and part-time working wives contributed about 26 percent of the total family income.

Source: Alice Kessler-Harris, Out to Work, 2003, pp. 301-302.

Civil Rights – Montgomery Bus Boycott

Materials: • Montgomery Bus Boycott Quicktime Movie: http://historicalthinkingmatters.org/rosaparks/ • Copies of Montgomery Bus Boycott Timeline • Montgomery Bus Boycott Document Packets: Documents A-E


1. Introduce Montgomery Inquiry by watching the video on HTM: http://historicalthinkingmatters.org/rosaparks/

Why did the Montgomery Bus Boycott succeed?

2. Round 1: Break into three groups. Hand out timelines and textbook account (Document A). Ask students to read account, fill out graphic organizer, and record their first claim. Before moving on, have students share their first claims.

3. Round 2: Hand out Robinson and Rustin documents (Documents B and C). Students read text, answer guiding questions (optional) and fill out graphic organizer. Students record second claim regarding the historical question. Share out claims.

4. Round 3: Hand out Highlander and MLK documents (Documents D and E). Students read text, answer guiding questions (optional) and fill out graphic. Students record second claim regarding the historical question. Share out claims.

5. Whole class discussion: • Why did the Montgomery Bus Boycott succeed? • To what extent was Rosa Parks responsible for its success? • Did your answer to the central historical question change? If so, how? • What evidence from the documents caused you to revise your hypotheses?

Montgomery Bus Boycott

Citations:

Buggey J., Danzer, G., Mitsakos, C., & Risinger C. (1984) America! America! (Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman & Co.) p. 653.

"A letter sent to Mayor Gayle," in Jo Ann Robinson’s The Montgomery Bus Boycott and the Women Who Started It, (Knoxville: The University of Tennessee Press, 1987), viii. http://historicalthinkingmatters.org/rosaparks/0/inquiry/main/resources/19/

Bayard Rustin, "Montgomery Diary," in Daybreak of Freedom: The Montgomery Bus Boycott, Stewart Burns, ed. (Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press, 1997), 164-170. http://historicalthinkingmatters.org/rosaparks/0/inquiry/main/resources/25/

Martin Luther King speech at the March 22 MIA meeting, as reported by Anna Holden, in Daybreak of Freedom: The Montgomery Bus Boycott, Stewart Burns, ed. (Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press, 1997), 212-219. [Burns found Holden’s report in the Preston Valien Collection, Amistad Research Center, Tulane University, New Orleans.] http://historicalthinkingmatters.org/rosaparks/0/inquiry/main/resources/24/



Montgomery Bus Boycott Timeline

Jan. 1863 Emancipation Proclamation

July 1868 Fourteenth Amendment

May 1896 Plessy v. Fergusen; 'Separate but Equal' ruled constitutional.

May 1909 Niagara Movement convenes (later becomes NAACP), pledging to promote racial equality.

1941 - 1945 U.S. involvement in WWII.

1949 Women’s Political Council in Montgomery, Alabama created.

June 1950 - U.S. involvement in the Korean War. July 1953

June 1953 African-Americans in Baton-Rouge, Louisiana boycott segregated city buses.

May 1954 Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas

Aug. 1955 Murder of Emmett Till.

Dec. 1, 1955 Rosa Parks refuses to give up her seat and is arrested.

Dec. 5, 1955 Montgomery Improvement Council formed, Martin Luther King, Jr. named President.

Nov. 1956 Supreme Court affirms decision in Browder v. Gayle which found bus segregation unconstitutional.

Dec. 1956 Supreme Court rejects city and state appeals on its decision. Buses are desegregated in Montgomery.


Document A: Textbook

The Montgomery Bus Boycott In 1955, just after the school desegregation decision, a black woman helped change American history. Like most southern cities (and many northern ones), Montgomery had a law that blacks had to sit in the back rows of the bus. One day, Rosa Parks boarded a city bus and sat down in the closest seat. It was one of the first rows of the section where blacks were not supposed to sit. The bus filled up and some white people were standing. The bus driver told Rosa Parks that she would have to give up her seat to a white person. She refused and was arrested.

The next evening, black leaders, many of them church ministers, met to decide if they should protest. A young minister who just moved to Montgomery from Atlanta, Martin Luther King Jr., soon became the leader of the group. King and the others called for a black boycott of the Montgomery bus system. The boycott meant blacks refused to ride the buses. For months, the buses were almost empty because most of the riders had been black. Then, the boycott spread to white businesses in downtown Montgomery.

King was arrested and jailed, but he continued to urge his followers to use a path of “non-violent resistance.” This meant that they would break laws that discriminated against blacks, but that they would not use violence…

By 1960, black Americans had made some progress toward equality. The Supreme Court and other government actions had opened the door. But most blacks still were forced to live a second-class type of life.

Source: Buggey J., Danzer, G., Mitsakos, C., & Risinger C. (1984). America! America! (Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman & Co.), p. 653.


Document B: Letter from Robinson to the Mayor

Jo Ann Robinson was the president of the Women’s Political Council, an organization of African American professional women in Montgomery, founded in 1949.

Dear Sir:

The Women’s Political Council is very grateful to you and the City Commissioners for hearing out our representative. . .

There were several things the Council asked for:

1. A city law that would make it possible for Negroes to sit from back toward front, and whites from front toward back until all the seats are taken.

2. That Negroes not be asked or forced to pay fare at front and go to the rear of the bus to enter.

3. That busses stop at every corner in residential sections occupied by Negroes as they do in communities where whites reside.

We are happy to report that busses have begun stopping at more corners now in some sections where Negroes live than previously. However, the same practices in seating and boarding the bus continue. Mayor Gayle, three-fourths of the riders of these public conveyances are Negroes. If Negroes did not patronize them, they could not possibly operate.

More and more of our people are already arranging with neighbors and friends to ride to keep from being insulted and humiliated by bus drivers.

There has been talk . . . of planning a city-wide boycott of busses. We, sir, do not feel that forceful measures are necessary in bargaining for a convenience which is right for all bus passengers. . . .

Respectfully yours, The Women’s Political Council Jo Ann Robinson, President

Source: Excerpt from a letter written by Jo Ann Robinson, May 21, 1954.


Document C: Bayard Rustin’s Diary

Bayard Rustin, an African American civil rights activist, traveled to Montgomery to advise Dr. King and support the bus boycott. Though he was eventually asked to leave Montgomery because leaders feared his reputation as a gay Communist would hurt the movement, he kept a diary of what he found.

February 24

42,000 Negroes have not ridden the busses since December 5. On December 6, the police began to harass, intimidate, and arrest Negro taxi drivers who were helping get these people to work. It thus became necessary for the Negro leaders to find an alternative—the car pool.

This morning Rufus Lewis, director of the pool…explained that there are three methods in addition to the car pool, for moving the Negro population:

1. Hitch-hiking. 2. The transportation of servants by white housewives. 3. Walking.

Later he introduced me to two men, one of whom has walked 7 miles and the other 14 miles, every day since December 5.

“The success of the car pool is at the heart of the movement,” Lewis said at the meeting. “It must not be stopped.”

I wondered what the response of the drivers would be, since 28 of them had just been arrested on charges of conspiring to destroy the bus company. One by one, they pledged that, if necessary, they would be arrested again and again.

Source: Excerpt from Bayard Rustin’s Montgomery Diary, February 24, 1956. Montgomery, Alabama.


Document D: Highlander School

Virginia Foster Durr was a white woman who supported civil rights for African Americans in Montgomery. Here, Durr writes the director of the Highlander Folk School and his wife. Highlander was a center for training civil rights activists and labor organizers.

January 30, 1956

Dear Myles and Zilphia:

I just received a newsletter from Highlander giving a summary of the past year’s activities. I think you should add how much you had to do with the Montgomery Bus Boycott which is really making history. LIFE, TIME, CBS, NBC, and countless other papers have been down here covering it. I think it is the first time that a whole Negro community has ever stuck together this way and for so long and I think they are going to win it.

But how your part comes in is through the effect the school had on Mrs. Rosa Parks. When she came back she was so happy and felt so liberated. She said the discrimination got worse and worse to bear AFTER having, for the first time in her life, been free of it at Highlander. I am sure that had a lot to do with her daring to risk arrest as she is naturally a very quiet person although she has a strong sense of pride and is, in my opinion, a really noble woman. But you and Zilphia should take pride in what you did for her and what she is doing.

Lots of love to all, come and see for yourself.

VA

Source: Excerpt from a letter written by Virginia Foster Durr to Myles and Zilphia Horton, January 30, 1956. Montgomery, Alabama.


Document E: MLK

At this Montgomery Improvement Association (MIA) weekly meeting, King speaks to the crowd.

Democracy gives us this right to protest and that is all we are doing. We can say honestly that we have not advocated violence, have not practiced it, and have gone courageously on with a Christian movement. Ours is a spiritual movement depending on moral and spiritual fortitude. The protest is still going on. (Great deal of applause here)

Freedom doesn’t come on a silver platter. With every great movement toward freedom there will inevitably be trials. Somebody will have to have the courage to sacrifice. You don’t get to the Promised Land without going through the Wilderness. You don’t get there without crossing over hills and mountains, but if you keep on keeping on, you can’t help but reach it. We won’t all see it, but it’s coming and it’s because God is for it.

We won’t back down. We are going on with our movement.

Let us continue with the same spirit, with the same orderliness, with the same discipline, with the same Christian approach. I believe that God is using Montgomery as his proving ground.

God be praised for you, for your loyalty, for your determination. God bless you and keep you, and may God be with us as we go on.

Source: Excerpts from a speech by Martin Luther King, Jr., as reported by Anna Holden, a teacher at Fisk University. March 22, 1956. Montgomery, Alabama.


Why did the Montgomery Bus Boycott succeed? Guiding Questions

Document B: Letter from Robinson to Mayor 1. (sourcing) How long before Rosa Parks’ arrest was this letter written?

2. (sourcing) What was Robinson’s purpose for writing to the mayor?

3. (contextualization) Identify one example of segregation that Robinson and the WPC opposed.

4. (sourcing) Why do you think Robinson reminds the mayor that three-fourths of the bus riders in Montgomery are African American? What is her intention?

5. (corroboration) How does this document either support or expand the textbook version of the Montgomery Bus Boycott?

Document C: Bayard Rustin’s Diary 1. (sourcing) How long after the bus boycott began was this document written?

2. (contextualization) How was it possible for African Americans to stay off the buses, but still get to work during the boycott?

3. (contextualization) Who does this document suggest were important to the success of the boycott?


Document D: Highlander School 1. (sourcing) What is the author’s skin color? Why might that be important?

2. (sourcing) When was this written? How long had the boycott been going on?

3. (contextualization) According to Durr, what did Myles and Zilphia Horton have to do with the Montgomery Bus Boycott?

4. (contextualization) According to this document, is the boycott succeeding? What evidence is there in the text to support your answer?

5. (corroboration) Most textbooks refer to Rosa Parks as a tired seamstress. What image of Rosa Parks does this letter convey?

Document E: MLK 1. (sourcing) Who was King’s audience? What does that imply about King’s intentions in this speech?

2. (contextualization) What does this document suggest are key factors in the success of the boycott?

3. (close reading and contextualization) Find and list four references to religion in this speech. How does King use religion in this speech? What does this suggest about the role of religion in the boycott?

Civil Rights Act

Materials • United Streaming Video Segment: Civil Rights (from American Experience: The Kennedys: Part 02a) http://player.discoveryeducation.com/index.cfm?guidAssetId=014ED17A- 20B2-4B81-9EC9-48F709292D38&blnFromSearch=1&productcode=US • Copies of JFK Speech • Transparency of JFK Speech • Copies John Lewis Speech • John Lewis’s Speech Guiding Questions • (Optional) United Streaming Video Segment: Civil Rights--President Signs Historic Bill: http://player.discoveryeducation.com/index.cfm?guidAssetId=D5ABECD0- 8113-4853-BC87-F84801128A45&blnFromSearch=1&productcode=US


1. Introduction: Show United Streaming Video Segment: Civil Rights: (from American Experience: The Kennedys: Part 02a) http://player.discoveryeducation.com/index.cfm?guidAssetId=014ED17A- 20B2-4B81-9EC9-48F709292D38&blnFromSearch=1&productcode=US

Students should answer these two questions as they watch: • What was the Civil Rights Act? • Do you believe that JFK was a strong supporter of civil rights? Why or why not?

2. Discuss student answers.

3. Hand out JFK speech and project speech on overhead. Whole class guided practice:

Sourcing Questions: BEFORE reading document • Who wrote this? When? Who is he addressing? • Is this televised? Who’s watching? What are they thinking? • What do we know about him? What have we learned so far? • Do we think this will be a trustworthy source? Why or why not? Contextualization Questions: BEFORE and WHILE reading document • What is JFK trying to do in this speech? • Why is Civil Rights a controversial issue?

Civil Rights Act

• What is the Civil Rights Act? • What was going on at this time? What was happening in the Civil Rights Movement by 1963?

Close reading: WHILE reading document • Does it sound like he’s addressing Congress or all Americans? • Does it sound like he’s addressing only white people or all Americans? Why? • Why does he keep saying this is a “moral” issue? • What does he want Congress to do? • Do you think this was an effective speech? • How do you think people felt listening to this?

Ask students: Based on this document, was JFK a strong supporter of civil rights? Why or why not?

4. Hand out John Lewis speech and guiding questions. Have students complete in pairs. 5. Final discussion:

• Why did John Lewis have to change his speech? • According to both documents, was JFK a strong supporter of civil rights? • What additional evidence would you need to make a case one way or the other?

6. If time remains, show United Streaming Video Segment: Civil Rights: President Signs Historic Bill (from Video Yearbook Collections: 1964): http://player.discoveryeducation.com/index.cfm?guidAssetId=D5ABECD0- 8113-4853-BC87-F84801128A45&blnFromSearch=1&productcode=US

• Explain that after JFK was assassinated, the passage of the Civil Rights Act fell to LBJ. • Southern Democrats almost completely opposed the bill. Many have argued that this was the big moment when Southern Democrats became Republicans.

Citations:

John F. Kennedy, Speech promoting the Civil Rights Act of 1964, June 11, 1963. http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/jfkcivilrights.htm

John Lewis, Speech at the March on Washington, August 1963. http://www.crmvet.org/info/mowjl2.htm


Civil Rights Act

John F. Kennedy Speech promoting the Civil Rights Act of 1964 June 11, 1963 (Modified)

Every American ought to have the right to be treated as he would wish to be treated, as one would wish his children to be treated. But this is not the case….

We are confronted primarily with a moral issue. It is as old as the Scriptures and is as clear as the American Constitution. The heart of the question is whether all Americans are to be afforded equal rights and equal opportunities, whether we are going to treat our fellow Americans as we want to be treated. If an American, because his skin is dark, cannot eat lunch in a restaurant open to the public, if he cannot send his children to the best public school available, if he cannot vote for the public officials who will represent him, if, in short, he cannot enjoy the full and free life which all of us want, then who among us would be content to have the color of his skin changed and stand in his place? …

One hundred years of delay have passed since President Lincoln freed the slaves, yet their heirs, their grandsons, are not fully free. They are not yet freed from the bonds of injustice. They are not yet freed from social and economic oppression. And this Nation, for all its hopes and all its boasts, will not be fully free until all its citizens are free.

We face, therefore, a moral crisis as a country and as a people…It cannot be left to increased demonstrations in the streets…It is time to act in the Congress, in your State and local legislative body and, above all, in all of our daily lives.

But there are other necessary measures which only the Congress can provide….In too many communities, in too many parts of the country, wrongs are inflicted on Negro citizens and there are no remedies at law. Unless the Congress acts, their only remedy is in the street.

I am, therefore, asking the Congress to enact legislation giving all Americans the right to be served in facilities which are open to the public— hotels, restaurants, theaters, retail stores, and similar establishments….

Civil Rights Act

SNCC Chairman John Lewis’s Speech March on Washington, August 1963 (Modified)

We march for jobs and freedom, but we have nothing to be proud of, for hundreds and thousands of our brothers are not here. They have no money for their transportation, for they are receiving starvation wages, or no wages at all.

In good conscience, we cannot support wholeheartedly the administration’s civil rights bill, for it is too little and too late. There’s not one thing in the bill that will protect our people from police brutality.…

I want to know, which side is the federal government on?...

To those who have said, "Be patient and wait," we must say that "patience" is a dirty and nasty word. We cannot be patient, we do not want to be free gradually. We want our freedom, and we want it now. We cannot depend on any political party, for both the Democrats and the Republicans have betrayed the basic principles of the Declaration of Independence.…

Mr. Kennedy is trying to take the revolution out of the streets and put it into the courts. Listen, Mr. Kennedy. Listen, Mr. Congressman. Listen, fellow citizens. The black masses are on the march for jobs and freedom, and we must say to the politicians that there won't be a "cooling-off" period.…

We won't stop now… The time will come when we will not confine our marching to Washington. We will march through the South, through the heart of Dixie, the way Sherman did. We shall pursue our own “scorched earth" policy and burn Jim Crow to the ground — nonviolently. We shall fragment the South into a thousand pieces and put them back together in the image of democracy. We will make the action of the past few months look petty. And I say to you, WAKE UP AMERICA!

[The Kennedy administration and some of the more conservative speakers objected to some of Lewis's language. Lewis agreed to modify some elements of the speech. He cut the words that criticized the President's bill as being "too little and too late,” as well as the call to march "through the heart of Dixie, the way Sherman did." He also didn’t ask, "which side is the federal government on?" The word "cheap" was removed to describe some political leaders].

Civil Rights Act

Name:_________________________

John Lewis’s Speech Guiding Questions

NOTE: SNCC stands for the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, a civil rights organization that played a critical role in the Freedom Rides of 1961 and the voter registration efforts of the 1960s.

1. Who wrote this document? Where was it delivered? Who was the audience? (You might need to look up the March on Washington to answer this question).

2. When was the speech delivered? Is this before or after Kennedy’s speech?

3. According to Lewis, what was the problem with Civil Rights Act? Explain.

4. Does Lewis think that JFK has been supportive of the Civil Rights Movement? Provide a quote to support your answer.

5. At the end of the document, what does Lewis say that those fighting for civil rights will do?

6. What was the overall tone of Lewis’ speech? What parts of Lewis’ speech were changed? Why?

7. Using BOTH documents, would you say that JFK was a strong supporter of civil rights? Why or why not?

Anti-War Movements

Materials: • Anti-War Images Powerpoint • Anti-War Timeline • Anti-War Documents A and B • Anti-War Documents Graphic Organizer


1. Project Anti-War Images Powerpoint and hand out Anti-War Timeline.

Explain that though the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution was passed in 1964, anti- war sentiment really grew after 1968.

Using the images and the timeline, ask students to fill in the graphic organizer with their initial hypothesis in response to the question: Why did many Americans oppose the Vietnam War? 2. Elicit student answers. They should draw on information in the Anti-War Timeline, but also draw inferences about the anti-war movement from the images of young students.

3. Hand out Documents A and B and Graphic Organizer. Have students complete Graphic Organizer for those two documents.

4. Class discussion:

• Why did MLK and John Kerry oppose the war? • Why did anti-war sentiment grow after 1968? • Based on what you read, who opposed the war in Vietnam? Was it mostly college kids? • Using all the documents, why did many Americans oppose the Vietnam War? • Considering the context, can you speculate what those Americans who supported the war said?

Citations:

Martin Luther King, Jr. “Beyond Vietnam,” April 4, 1967, Riverside Church in New York City. http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mlkatimetobreaksilence.htm

Anti-Vietnam War Movement

John Kerry, testimony to the U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, April 23, 1971. http://www2.iath.virginia.edu/sixties/HTML_docs/Resources/Primary/Manifestos/VVAW_ Kerry_Senate.html



Anti-Vietnam War Movement Timeline

1965 180,000 American forces in Vietnam

1967 500, 000 American forces in Vietnam

Oct. 1967 75,000 protest against the Vietnam War in Washington D.C.

Jan. 1968

Tet Offensive: Surprise attack on South Vietnamese cities by Vietcong and North Vietnamese forces. Ultimately, it was a military loss for the Communists. But Americans watched on TV and were shocked and horrified that the U.S. was caught off-guard. CBS news anchor, Walter Cronkite, famously said, “"We have been too often disappointed by the optimism of the American leaders, both in Vietnam and Washington,. . . [We] are mired in a stalemate that could only be ended by negotiation, not victory." Feb. 1968 60% of Americans disapprove of Johnson’s handling of the war

April 4, 1968 Martin Luther King, Jr. assassinated

June 4, 1968 Robert F. Kennedy assassinated. Many believe that RFK would have been the Democratic nominee for president.

Jan-June 1968 221 college protests against the Vietnam war

Aug. 1968

Democratic National Convention: 10,000 anti-war protesters clash with policemen and National Guardsmen. The violence is caught on television.

Nov. 1969 My Lai Massacre: Americans first hear of the My Lai massacre, which occurred in March 1968, when U.S. troops brutally attacked 300-500 Vietnamese, mostly women and children. Knowledge of the incident sparks public outrage.

April 1970 Cambodia: President Nixon announces that American forces have bombed parts of the Ho Chi Minh trail throughout Laos and Cambodia. This announcement angers Americans because Nixon campaigned on the promise of ending the war.

May 1970

Kent State: Student protest at Kent State University against Nixon’s invasion of Cambodia. National Guardsmen are brought in to break up the protest. They wound 9 students and kill 4 (2 of whom were not involved in the protest).

Jackson State: (June 1970) Student protest at an all-black college in Mississippi. National Guardsmen shoot and kill 2 students, wounding 12. June 1971 Pentagon Papers: Top-secret military report that was leaked to the New York Times and revealed that the U.S. had drawn up plans to go to war with Vietnam even when President Johnson claimed he wouldn’t send troops.


Document A: Martin Luther King, Jr.

I come to this platform tonight to make a passionate plea to my beloved nation.

There is at the outset a very obvious . . . connection between the war in Vietnam and the struggle I and others have been waging in America. A few years ago. . .it seemed as if there was a real promise of hope for the poor, both black and white, through the poverty program. There were experiments, hopes, new beginnings. Then came the buildup in Vietnam, and I watched this program broken and eviscerated [gutted] . . . . And I knew that America would never invest the necessary funds or energies in rehabilitation of its poor so long as adventures like Vietnam continued to draw men and skills and money like some demonic, destructive suction tube. So I was increasingly compelled to see the war as an enemy of the poor and to attack it as such.

Perhaps a more tragic recognition of reality took place when it became clear to me that the war was doing far more than devastating the hopes of the poor at home. . . . We were taking the black young men who had been crippled by our society and sending them eight thousand miles away to guarantee liberties in Southeast Asia which they had not found in southwest Georgia and East Harlem. So we have been repeatedly faced with the cruel irony of watching Negro and white boys on TV screens as they kill and die together for a nation that has been unable to seat them together in the same schools.. . .

As I have walked among the desperate, rejected, and angry young men, I have told them that Molotov cocktails and rifles would not solve their problems. . . .But they asked, and rightly so, "What about Vietnam?" . . . Their questions hit home, and I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor [supplier] of violence in the world today: my own government. For the sake of those boys, for the sake of this government, for the sake of the hundreds of thousands trembling under our violence, I cannot be silent.

Somehow this madness must cease. We must stop now. I speak as a child of God and brother to the suffering poor of Vietnam. I speak for those whose land is being laid waste, whose homes are being destroyed, whose culture is being subverted. I speak for the poor of America who are paying the double price of smashed hopes at home, and death and corruption in Vietnam. I speak as a citizen of the world, for the world as it stands aghast at the path we have taken. I speak as one who loves America, to the leaders of our own nation: The great initiative [power to take charge] in this war is ours; the initiative to stop it must be ours.

Source: Martin Luther King’s speech, “Beyond Vietnam,” delivered April 4, 1967, at a meeting of Clergy and Laity Concerned at Riverside Church in New York City.


Document B: John Kerry

I would like to talk on behalf of all those veterans. . .

In our opinion and from our experience, there is nothing in South Vietnam which could happen that realistically threatens the United States of America. And to attempt to justify the loss of one American life in Vietnam, Cambodia or Laos by linking such loss to the preservation of freedom. . .is to us the height of criminal hypocrisy, and it is that kind of hypocrisy which we feel has torn this country apart. . .

We found most people didn't even know the difference between communism and democracy. They only wanted to work in rice paddies without helicopters strafing [repeatedly attacking] them and bombs with napalm burning their villages and tearing their country apart. . . .

We rationalized destroying villages in order to save them. . . .We learned the meaning of free fire zones, shooting anything that moves, and we watched while America placed a cheapness on the lives of orientals. . .

Each day . . . someone has to give up his life so that the United States doesn't have to admit something that the entire world already knows, so that we can't say that we have made a mistake. Someone has to die so that President Nixon won't be, and these are his words, "the first President to lose a war."

We are asking Americans to think about that because how do you ask a man to be the last man to die in Vietnam? How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?. . .

We are here to ask, and we are here to ask vehemently, where are the leaders of our country? Where is the leadership? We're here to ask where are McNamara, Rostow, Bundy, Gilpatrick, and so many others? Where are they now that we, the men they sent off to war, have returned? These are the commanders who have deserted their troops. And there is no more serious crime in the laws of war.

We wish that a merciful God could wipe away our own memories of that service as easily as this administration has wiped away their memories of us. But all that they have done . . . is to make more clear than ever our own determination to undertake one last mission -- to search out and destroy . . .the hate and fear that have driven this country these last ten years and more.

Source: John Kerry, testimony to the U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, April 23, 1971. John Kerry was a veteran who returned from Vietnam in April 1969, having won early transfer out of the conflict because of his three Purple Hearts. He joined a group called Vietnam Veterans Against the War.

Lesson plans were found at: http://sheg.stanford.edu/node/43