Tag Archives: #JohnFKennedy

From the Lincoln Memorial to the White House: Civil Rights Leaders Press Kennedy for Action After the March on Washington, August 28, 1963.

The real historical significance of August 28, 1963, did not end with Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech or the March on Washington itself, but continued inside the White House during a 72-minute strategy session between President John F. Kennedy and civil rights leaders. The meeting was not merely ceremonial. It served as a critical discussion about political strategy, legislative priorities, jobs, education, urban poverty, and the future of the civil rights movement, helping shape the path toward the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Fig. 1. Hundreds of thousands descended on Washington, D.C.’s Lincoln Memorial, August 28, 1963. (U.S. Government Photo.) Public Domain. Sensing a national breakthrough for civil rights, Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. joined civil rights leaders to plan a March on Washington for Wednesday, August 28, 1963. The great march filled the VIP section at the Lincoln Memorial and the National Mall to past the Washington Monument, a distance of almost one mile. The March on Washington is remembered for King’s “I Have a Dream” speech and the massive crowd’s hopeful jubilation. The meeting with President John F. Kennedy afterwards was more than a polite courtesy call to the White House–it helped coordinate political strategy for the movement that would have concrete ramifications for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 following Kennedy’s death.

Kennedy’s Reaction to the March

President John F. Kennedy watched the March on Washington, including Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” address, on television from the White House. Though both men were relatively young, King at 34 and Kennedy at 46, they shared a maturity and sensitivity that often contrasted with their public images. King, in particular, was uncomfortable with the intense attention focused on him after his speech at the Lincoln Memorial.

When civil rights leaders arrived at the White House Cabinet Room later that day, Kennedy greeted King with a smile and the words, “I have a dream,” repeating the line that had so impressed him only hours earlier. King brushed aside the compliment and instead asked what the president thought of Walter Reuther’s speech, which had criticized America’s commitment to freedom abroad while failing to fully secure it at home. Kennedy answered dryly, “Oh, I’ve heard Walter plenty of times.”

Fig. 2. Civil Rights March on Washington, D.C. (Leaders of the march posing in front of the statue of Abraham Lincoln, Lincoln Memorial.) (Photograph by Rowland Scherman, U.S. Information Agency, National Archives and Records Administration.) Public Domain. Civil Rights leaders in this group photograph at the Lincoln Memorial followed up the March on Washington with a visit to the White House to meet President Kennedy. Seated left to right: National Urban League executive director Whitney Young (1921-1971); chairman of the Demonstration Committee Cleveland Robinson (1914-1995); labor union leader A. Philip Randolph (1889-1979); Dr. Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. (1929-1968); National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) leader Roy Wilkins (1901-1981). Standing left to right: director of the National Catholic Conference for Interracial Justice Matthew Ahmann (1931-2001); Rabbi Joachim Prinz (1902-1998); Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) leader John Lewis (1940-2020); Rev. Eugene Carson Blake (1906-1985); Floyd McKissick (1922-1991); labor union leader Walter Reuther (1907-1970).

Fig. 3. Martin Luther King, Jr., speaking from the Lincoln Memorial during the March on Washington. (Photograph by Rowland Scherman, U.S. Information Agency, National Archives and Records Administration.) Public Domain. Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., speaking at the March on Washington from the Lincoln Memorial on August 28, 1963. Following the successful march for jobs and freedom, civil rights leaders went to the White House to visit with President Kennedy and pushed measures to strengthen the Civil Rights bill.

Civil Rights Priorities

Although King and Kennedy spoke only briefly, the meeting quickly turned to policy. Kennedy and Roy Wilkins talked at length about strengthening the pending civil rights bill in light of the march’s peaceful success. Meanwhile, King moved down the line to stand near John Lewis, the 23-year-old chairman of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC).

Civil rights leaders pressed for stronger protections in the civil rights bill, including a ban on racial discrimination in employment. They also warned Kennedy about accelerating automation, which threatened to reduce job opportunities, and described worsening conditions in urban Black communities. Leaders highlighted soaring school dropout rates among Black teenagers and a growing sense of alienation among young African Americans.

A. Philip Randolph told the president that the entire current generation of young Blacks “had no faith” in whites. They also dismissed Black leadership, government and God. To them, he said, American society offered little beyond despair.

The Debate Over Federal Action

The activists also urged Kennedy to restore a provision removed from the 1957 Civil Rights Act that would give the Attorney General broader authority to investigate and pursue civil rights violations.

Kennedy replied that he and Attorney General Robert Kennedy had already examined unemployment and school dropout problems in cities such as Chicago and New York. He argued that community leadership also had a responsibility to encourage educational achievement.

“It seems to me,” Kennedy said, “with all the influence that all you gentlemen have in the Negro community that we could emphasize educating children, making them study, making them stay in school and all the rest.”

Despite the bill’s narrow prospects in Congress, Roy Wilkins countered that the Speaker of the House had assured him an even stronger civil rights bill could pass the House and help pressure the Senate to act. Wilkins urged President Kennedy to go over the heads of congressional opponents and lead a national crusade to win voter approval for the civil rights measures.

Kennedy rejected that strategy. He argued that civil rights had to remain a bipartisan cause and warned that a partisan campaign could undermine Democratic support in the South while allowing Republicans to claim credit for supporting civil rights. He also complained that both parties were engaging in “treacherous” political maneuvering that complicated passage of the legislation. Any add-ons now to the civil rights bill joined existing legislation that was already on the brink of defeat in the Democrat-controlled Senate and too close to call in a Democrat-controlled House.

In the tension between moral urgency and political pragmatism, civil rights leaders pressed Kennedy to act more boldly, while Kennedy focused on the difficult realities of congressional politics and bipartisan support.

White House, August 28, 1963, meeting with President Kennedy after the march.

Reuther Challenges the President

The sharpest exchange came from Walter Reuther.

“You can’t escape this problem,” the labor leader warned. “There are two ways of resolving it, either by reason or riots.”

Reuther argued that racial conflict would not be confined to historic battlefields like Gettysburg but would erupt in neighborhoods, workplaces, and communities across the country. He also criticized Kennedy’s governing style, calling it a “seminar” approach in which meetings produced too little action. Reuther contrasted Kennedy with Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson, whose governing style as Majority Leader he praised where he relentlessly pushed difficult legislation through Congress. by “jawbone[ing]” an issue until he got “difficult things done.”

Throughout much of the debate, King remained silent. When he finally spoke, he suggested that if Kennedy led a civil rights crusade, perhaps former Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower could join it, transforming the effort into the bipartisan movement Kennedy desired.

Kennedy immediately dismissed the idea.

“No, it won’t,” he replied.

King answered with a playful jab: “Doesn’t President Eisenhower happen to be in the other denomination?”

Rev. Eugene Blake and the Eisenhower Idea

King’s remark referred to Rev. Eugene Blake, Eisenhower’s pastor, who was present in the Cabinet Room. Blake had been the only white speaker at the March on Washington. He had previously been arrested during a civil rights demonstration in Baltimore and had spent time in jail for the cause.

Earlier that day Blake had declared from the march platform, “We come late, late we come, in the reconciling and repentant spirit.” The Protestant clergyman supported both civil rights and economic justice for African Americans while avoiding the more revolutionary language favored by some activists.

Blake told Kennedy that Eisenhower might indeed be willing to help. The president seized on the suggestion and encouraged Blake to visit the former president in Gettysburg to explore what role he might play in advancing the civil rights bill.

“And include a Catholic and maybe a businessman or two,” Kennedy advised.

Then, pointing toward Reuther, he added with a grin, “And leave Walter in the background.”

The room chuckled. Shortly afterward, before leaving the meeting, Kennedy assured the group he would remain in contact in the months ahead as the civil rights bill moved forward.

SOURCES:

Branch, Taylor. Parting the Waters: America in the King Years 1954–63. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1988.

Garrow, David J. Bearing the Cross: Martin Luther King, Jr., and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. New York: William Morrow and Company, 1986.

Fig. 4. Civil Rights March on Washington, D.C. (Aerial view of Washington Monument showing marchers.) (U.S. Information Agency photograph, National Archives and Records Administration.) Public Domain. On August 28, 1963, about 250,000 peaceful protesters descended on Washington, D.C. for the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom. The march was one of the largest political rallies for human rights in United States history.

Harry Belafonte and Hollywood at the March on Washington

A Life of Achievement and Activism

Harry Belafonte (1927-2023) was born in New York City and died there at the age of 96. Over a remarkable career that spanned more than seventy years, he earned a Tony Award, an Emmy Award, and three Grammy Awards as both a pioneering singer and accomplished film actor. Beyond his entertainment career, Belafonte devoted himself to the struggle for civil rights and became one of the movement’s most visible and influential supporters.

Bringing Hollywood to History

Belafonte used his celebrity and influence to help unite the entertainment industry behind the civil rights cause. As plans were finalized for the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom on August 28, 1963, he organized support from many of Hollywood’s biggest stars. To ensure a strong show of solidarity, Belafonte chartered a plane from Los Angeles to bring a group of prominent actors, entertainers, and artists to Washington, D.C.

Their presence highlighted the growing national support for the movement and demonstrated that the fight for equality extended well beyond political and civil rights circles into the highest levels of American popular culture.

The March on Washington

An estimated 200,000 to 250,000 people gathered in the nation’s capital for what became one of the most significant events in American history. The crowd filled the area around the Lincoln Memorial and stretched across the National Mall toward the Washington Monument, covering nearly a mile. Despite the enormous size of the gathering, the atmosphere was one of hope, optimism, and celebration.

It was from the steps of the Lincoln Memorial that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. delivered his immortal “I Have a Dream” speech, a defining moment of the civil rights movement and one of the most celebrated speeches in American history.

Hollywood Stars in Attendance

Among the many entertainers who joined Belafonte at the march were Marlon Brando, Rita Moreno, James Garner, Tony Franciosa, Sammy Davis Jr., Joanne Woodward, Paul Newman, Susan Strasberg, Burt Lancaster, Robert Ryan, Gregory Peck, Anthony Quinn, James Baldwin, Lena Horne, Ruby Dee, Sidney Poitier, Charlton Heston, and numerous others.

Many of these performers actively supported civil rights causes, while others used their public stature to bring national attention to the movement’s goals. Their participation underscored the broad coalition that had gathered in Washington to advocate for racial equality, voting rights, employment opportunities, and social justice.

Meeting with President Kennedy

Following the march, Dr. King and several prominent civil rights leaders traveled to the White House to meet with President John F. Kennedy. During their discussions, they reviewed the significance of the day’s events, examined the challenges still facing African Americans, and discussed the future direction of the civil rights movement.

The meeting also touched on the legislative efforts that would eventually culminate in the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Although President Kennedy would not live to see its passage, the momentum generated by the March on Washington helped build public support for the landmark legislation that became law under President Lyndon B. Johnson.

A Lasting Legacy

Harry Belafonte’s role in the March on Washington reflected his belief that artists had a responsibility to use their influence in the service of justice. By bringing some of Hollywood’s most recognizable faces to the nation’s capital, he helped amplify the message of the civil rights movement and demonstrated the power of cultural figures to support social change. His contributions as both an entertainer and activist remain an enduring part of American history.

REMARKS BY HARRY BELAFONTE:
“We are here to bear witness to what we know. We know that this country, America, to which we are committed, and which we love, aspires to become that country in which all men are free. We also know that freedom is not license. Everyone in a democracy ought to be free to vote. But no one has the license to oppress or demoralize another. We also know or we would not be here, that the American negro has endured for many generations in this country which he helped to build the most intolerable injustices. To be a negro in this country means several unpleasant things. In the Deep South it often means he is prevented from exercising his right to vote by all manner of intimidation up to and including death. This fact of intimidation is a great weight in the life of any negro and though it varies in degree it never varies in intent which is simply to limit, to demoralize and to keep in subservient status more than 20 million negro people. We are here, therefore, to protest this evil and make known our resolve to do everything we can possibly do to bring it to an end. As artists and as human beings we rejoice in the knowledge that human experience has no color and that excellence in any endeavor is the fruit of individual labor and love. We believe artists have a valuable function in any society since it is the artists who reveal society to itself. But any society that ceases to respect the human aspirations of all its citizens courts political chaos and artistic sterility. We need the energies of these people to whom we have for so long denied full humanity. We need their vigor, their joy, the authority which their pain has brought them and cutting ourselves off from them then we are punishing and diminishing ourselves. As long as we do so our society is in great danger. Our growth as artists is severely menaced and no American can boast of freedom since he cannot be considered an example of it. We are here then in an attempt to strike the chains of the ex-master no less than the ex-slave and to invest with reality that deep and universal longing which has sometimes been called the American Dream.”

Fig. 5. Leaders of the march leading marchers down the street. (U.S. Information Agency photograph, National Archives and Records Administration.) Public Domain.

The Kennedy Model: Avoiding War in an Age of Nuclear Threats.

While the North Korea nuclear confrontation of 2017 differed significantly from the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962, the successful lesson from John F. Kennedy’s leadership was the necessity of restraint, patience, diplomacy, and moral responsibility in avoiding catastrophic war. President Trump should emulate Kennedy’s ability to combine military strength with a commitment to peaceful resolution rather than provoke or initiate conflict.

By John P. Walsh, August 9, 2017

In addition to Twitter, the media tells us that U.S. President Donald J. Trump loves to watch a lot of TV. Has he seen the film: Virtual JFK (2008)?

“Does it matter,” the film’s narrator states, “who is president on issues of war and peace? Can a president make a decisive difference in matters of war and peace? Can a president decisively lead his country into war or keep his country out of war? Or are the forces that drive nations into conflict far more impersonal (and) out of the control of any human being, even a president?”

Nuclear crises remain among the greatest dangers facing humanity because several nations possess nuclear weapons, including North Korea.

Donald J. Trump and John F. Kennedy. Similar to JFK in the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, Trump in 2017 must use the military and moral strength of the U.S. to seek and find a conclusion so that North Korea changes course on their nuclear weapons peacefully. Fair use.

Nine nations stockpile around 16,300 nuclear weapons. The U.S. possesses less than half of them.

In 2014 nine nations around the world—including North Korea—have around 16,300 nuclear weapons. Estimates are that North Korea’s arsenal today may be about 20 warheads or higher. In descending order of warhead amounts, the other nuclear states are Russia (8,000 warheads), the U.S.A. (7,300), France (300), China (250), the UK (225), India and Pakistan (about 100 each) and Israel (80).

According to the National Security Archive, the last tactical nuclear weapons left Cuba in December 1962. For a rogue state such as North Korea to possess nuclear weapons is dangerous and unpredictable to the region and world.

Kennedy prepared for war but consistently avoided taking actions that would trigger either conventional or nuclear conflict.

Like JFK in the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, the U.S. must use its military and moral strength to seek and find a conclusion so that North Korea changes course on their nuclear weapons peacefully. Exactly what that change should look like is an important debate not explored here, but the U.S. must not or never start or provoke a nuclear war to achieve it.

Kennedy prepared for nuclear war during the Cuban Missile Crisis, but always carefully stayed away from pulling the trigger. There can be no close analogy between Cuba, 90 miles off American shores, in 1962 and North Korea, over 6,000 miles away, in 2017.

The Cold War by the early 1960’s had become a well-worn competitive geopolitical game that hadn’t completely played itself out. The Russians built a wall in Berlin in 1961; Kennedy quarantined Cuba in 1962. In the Cuban Missile Crisis, the missiles were clearly Russian nukes. In 2017 what sources can Trump hold accountable for the North Korean weapons deployment in addition to the rogue regime? China? Russia? Iran? If Pyongyang is as remote and obscure today as the Kremlin was in Kennedy’s time, today’s political and military equations appear to be more tangled and complicated.

Kennedy’s example demonstrates that strength can be expressed through successful conflict avoidance, not merely through military action.

JFK: “It will be worse before it gets better.”

Any calculations for war must include those who may or will get killed – and how many. Is American “hyper” power any good if its allies are casualties on a massive scale? No nuclear exchange must result with a hermit kingdom dictator who is not a friend of the U.S. or its allies in the region – especially if war may incalculably spread.

If the U.S. has allies in the true meaning of the word then an attack on them by North Korea (or China or Russia) is equal to an attack on the homeland – otherwise what’s the point of the U.S. having allies at all? The U.S. must protect its allies in the region to the highest degree so to defend and preserve its esteemed alliances. In this ongoing dangerous politico-military standoff there are ramifications with severe strong risk for the U.S. as a global superpower and markedly in East Asia. North Korea must somehow stand down for there to be success from the perspective of the U.S and its allies.

Effective leadership in a nuclear crisis depends on cool-headed judgment, patience, and a careful balance of “carrot and stick” diplomacy.

Similar to the Cuban Missile Crisis that endured for 13 straight days—the Korean crisis has gone on arguably for over 60 years — patience and cool-headed leadership joined to a calibration of carrot and stick (preferring the carrot) should serve as worthwhile qualities so to craft a necessarily peaceful and successful outcome.

“Because of the ingenuity of science and man’s own inability to control his relations one with another,” said JFK in 1961 in Virtual JFK, “we happen to live in the most dangerous time in the history of the human race.” The film states that experienced military advisers believed that whenever Americans committed military force – they won the conflict.

Kennedy avoided war –and was almost impeached for it.

But as frequent and strong pressure by many advisers is put on Kennedy to commit the U.S. to a war, the president time and again chose to avoid both conventional and nuclear war.

It may not be well remembered today but after the failure of the Bay of Pigs in 1961, there was talk of John Kennedy’s impeachment for incompetence. Many in his own Democratic party wouldn’t support him because they had convinced themselves he wasn’t a serious political leader.

JFK: “The United States as the world knows will never start a war.”

North Korea’s nuclear ambitions presented a challenge requiring both deterrence and diplomacy rather than reckless escalation. The United States has an obligation to protect its allies while preventing a wider regional or global catastrophe.

In 2017 the defeat of 33-year-old Kim Jong-un’s nuclear threat short of war will not be simply a victory for the status quo but a step forward in terms of American leadership in that part of the world.

An actual war –even if nonnuclear and limited which is improbable -– cannot be in any civilized people’s self-interest. Certainly if Kim started a nuclear war, which is very remote but possible, war would come. As Trump stated plainly, on August 8, 2017, the U.S. response would be with “fire and fury.”

In October 1962 Kennedy’s speech to the nation on the Cuban Missile Crisis included his own “fiery” rhetoric:

“Third: It shall be the policy of this nation to regard any nuclear missile launched from Cuba against any nation in the Western Hemisphere as an attack on the United States, requiring a full retaliatory response upon the Soviet Union.”

JFK concluded with the overall purpose of his actions: “Our goal is not the victory of might, but the vindication of right – not peace at the expense of freedom, but both peace and freedom, here in this hemisphere, and we hope, around the world. God willing, that goal will be achieved.”

Trump should aspire to Kennedy’s commitment to peace and responsible statesmanship in the nuclear age.

President Trump issues a stern warning to North Korea after the latest missile news, saying the nation “best not make any more threats to the United States.”

In 2017 we may look for a resolution to the North Korea crisis where history repeats itself.

All through the Cold War Kennedy looked into the face of strategic MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) without blinking and then chose to evoke the better angels of our nature. At the United Nations in his first year as president (September 25, 1961) Kennedy exhorted the world’s representatives: “Together we shall save our planet – or together we shall perish in its flames. Save it we can. Save it we must. Then shall we earn the eternal thanks of mankind and, as peacemakers, the eternal blessing of God.”

President Trump would do well to aspire to the same.

NOTES:

Nine nuclear nations – http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/nine-nations-have-nuclear-weapons-here-is-how-many-each-country-has-a6827916.html

about 20 warheads – http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/791436/north-korea-nuclear-weapons-kim-jong-un-how-many

Last Cuba warheads removed – http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB449/

Iran and North Korea – http://thediplomat.com/2016/04/the-iran-north-korea-connection/

fire and fury – https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/09/world/asia/north-korea-trump-threat-fire-and-fury.html?_r=0

United Nations speech – https://www.jfklibrary.org/Research/Research-Aids/JFK-Speeches/United-Nations_19610925.aspx

CORRIDORS│An Educational Website in the Arts and History. Featuring My Photography and Videos.

Content/Web Producer: John P. Walsh.

Tag Archives: #JohnFKennedy

From the Lincoln Memorial to the White House: Civil Rights Leaders Press Kennedy for Action After the March on Washington, August 28, 1963.

Kennedy’s Reaction to the March

Civil Rights Priorities

The Debate Over Federal Action

In the tension between moral urgency and political pragmatism, civil rights leaders pressed Kennedy to act more boldly, while Kennedy focused on the difficult realities of congressional politics and bipartisan support.

Reuther Challenges the President

Rev. Eugene Blake and the Eisenhower Idea

Harry Belafonte and Hollywood at the March on Washington

A Life of Achievement and Activism

Bringing Hollywood to History

The March on Washington

Hollywood Stars in Attendance

Meeting with President Kennedy

A Lasting Legacy

The Kennedy Model: Avoiding War in an Age of Nuclear Threats.

Nuclear crises remain among the greatest dangers facing humanity because several nations possess nuclear weapons, including North Korea.

Nine nations stockpile around 16,300 nuclear weapons. The U.S. possesses less than half of them.

Kennedy prepared for war but consistently avoided taking actions that would trigger either conventional or nuclear conflict.

Kennedy’s example demonstrates that strength can be expressed through successful conflict avoidance, not merely through military action.

Effective leadership in a nuclear crisis depends on cool-headed judgment, patience, and a careful balance of “carrot and stick” diplomacy.

Kennedy avoided war –and was almost impeached for it.

North Korea’s nuclear ambitions presented a challenge requiring both deterrence and diplomacy rather than reckless escalation. The United States has an obligation to protect its allies while preventing a wider regional or global catastrophe.

Trump should aspire to Kennedy’s commitment to peace and responsible statesmanship in the nuclear age.

Kennedy’s Reaction to the March

Civil Rights Priorities

The Debate Over Federal Action

In the tension between moral urgency and political pragmatism, civil rights leaders pressed Kennedy to act more boldly, while Kennedy focused on the difficult realities of congressional politics and bipartisan support.

Reuther Challenges the President

Rev. Eugene Blake and the Eisenhower Idea

Harry Belafonte and Hollywood at the March on Washington

A Life of Achievement and Activism

Bringing Hollywood to History

The March on Washington

Hollywood Stars in Attendance

Meeting with President Kennedy

A Lasting Legacy

Share this:

Nuclear crises remain among the greatest dangers facing humanity because several nations possess nuclear weapons, including North Korea.

Nine nations stockpile around 16,300 nuclear weapons. The U.S. possesses less than half of them.

Kennedy prepared for war but consistently avoided taking actions that would trigger either conventional or nuclear conflict.

Kennedy’s example demonstrates that strength can be expressed through successful conflict avoidance, not merely through military action.

Effective leadership in a nuclear crisis depends on cool-headed judgment, patience, and a careful balance of “carrot and stick” diplomacy.

Kennedy avoided war –and was almost impeached for it.

North Korea’s nuclear ambitions presented a challenge requiring both deterrence and diplomacy rather than reckless escalation. The United States has an obligation to protect its allies while preventing a wider regional or global catastrophe.

Trump should aspire to Kennedy’s commitment to peace and responsible statesmanship in the nuclear age.

Share this: