“The problem with Truman… was that he ‘thought he could carry on the fight for civil rights and still keep almost everybody happy.’ ” Sullivan, p.359
The above quote really caught my eye in the middle of Chapter 9, and so I’d like to focus on this idea of a presidential ally within a movement. Everything up to this point seemed to be extolling President Truman; Charles Houston, Walter White, and the majority of the NAACP were all behind him. So how could having the President of the United States on your side actually become a problem?
This makes me think of the issue in a little different light. It seems to me that the NAACP had been pushing to get more and more elected officials on their side for a long time, and Truman is really seen as the first president who is strongly behind the NAACP. The chapter talks about how he gives special addresses to Congress on the issue of civil rights, he ranked civil rights among the top ten issues facing the United States in his presidential address, and was in nearly every way in favor of the NAACP and it’s civil rights movement.
So on what grounds is the opening quotation made? Could it be that at some point an “ideal ally” loses his touch? Or is it all politics that gets the better of him with the election coming closer? Or is it that he tried to move to fast, and that’s why his agenda for the civil rights movement stalled out?
For the sake of controversy and good discussion I have my own opinions. I think that President Truman tried to do too much; I think he took ownership of the civil rights movement in a way that made him move forward farther than the NAACP was prepared to do at the time, possibly even making them look worse because of his stalled agenda.
Thoughts?
Really interesting topic and I’m loving that picture! I agree somewhat with you Josiah that Truman took ownership of his role in the civil rights movement and truly believed in the cause. I disagree on your point that it was farther than the NAACP was prepared for at the time- I think it was more of the fragile coalition that made up the Democratic Party at the time that made it harder for Truman to move along his civil rights legislation. I think that one of the most fascinating aspects of this book is the way Sullivan tracks the history of the Democratic Party- and I think it was due to resistance from Southern Democrats that caused the stalling of civil rights legislation, not Truman’s overzealous actions.
It shocked me too that having the President of the United States on your side could actually be a bad thing. This is usually the opposite of what we think of, but in the context of the time, it makes sense. I feel bad for Truman and the difficult position that he was in. I think that it was a mistake to think “he could carry on the fight for civil rights and still keep almost everybody happy.’ Any leader in any position always struggles to keep as many people as possible happy, but it is impossible to please everyone. I think that this is something that leaders must acknowledge early on, and just do the best that they can. I think a good strategy is for leaders to do what they feel is right, and hope that it appeases enough people.
In regards to your proposed strategy for leaders, I think that this could be problematic for presidential leadership. 1st term presidents cannot afford to act in a manner that will offend the majority of their constituents due to the fact that they need them to be reelected. Furthermore, presidents cannot afford to act in a manner that will offend Congress because they need their support to get anything accomplished. As a result, it can often be political suicide for a president to do what “they feel is right” if it doesn’t appease the right people. Presidents must therefore try to find a way to walk the line between doing what they believe is the right thing to do and appeasing the individuals who control their fate as president. Given the precarious position that Truman was in, I think that he did a fairly good job at walking this line by advancing the civil rights movement and not completely alienating himself from the rest of the country.
I think Truman’s allegiance to the civil rights movement especially after his state of the union address had some level of genuine legitimacy, but I think it’s important to point out to some external factors that might have been pressuring him. By this time the NAACP’s efforts to address the United Nations to make the civil rights movement an international dilemma is starting to take hold. I think the foreign implications and international character of the United States was being tested which forced Truman to combat these allegations with support of the civil rights movement. I think Josiah’s quote can be applied in the case regarding Truman’s loyalty and support of the NAACP. In attempt to keep everyone happy, I think Truman allowed the NAACP some more autonomy in order for them to make more progress and spread more education about the civil rights movement so that any decision he made didn’t look like his decisions were being made from his own personal agenda. Taking action as a response to the civil rights movement and by slowly addressing the issue of civil rights helps a politician impede the criticism from the opposition about the loyalty to their race.