HST 202 Module #10
All Along the Watchtower (1964 CE - 1971 CE)
In the annals of American history, the years betwixt 1964 and 1971 loom large, their significance etched deep into the nation's fabric. A turbulent era, it witnessed pivotal events that wrought seismic changes across the land's political, social, and economic landscape. From triumphs to tribulations, this message shall delve into the glories and pitfalls of this epoch and proffer reasons why it behooves us to scrutinize it even to this day. During this tumultuous era, a beacon of hope shone through in the form of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This historic piece of legislation boldly declared discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin illegal. It paved the way for equitable access to employment, education, and public accommodations. The passage of this bill marked a pivotal moment in the ongoing struggle for racial justice and set the stage for future victories in the fight for civil rights.
There was a ray of hope amidst the turmoil of the 60s - the War on Poverty. President Lyndon B. Johnson took to the helm in '64 with a mission to beat back poverty and raise the American people. His vision birthed programs like Medicare, Medicaid, and Head Start - little saplings that grew to provide shade and shelter to countless folks. And so it continues, these initiatives still bearing fruit, bringing some comfort amid the constant churn of life. As I reflect on this era, I can't help but recall the many bleak moments that punctuated its course. One event that stands out mainly in the Vietnam War, a long and brutal conflict that tore through the fabric of American society from 1964 to 1975.
The war was a divisive force, rending the nation in two and costing the lives of over 58,000 brave Americans. It's hard to overstate the toll this conflict took on our country, both in terms of the human cost and the political fallout that ensued. What's clear is that the Vietnam War was deeply unpopular, sparking widespread protests and civil unrest. The scars of this tumultuous period can still be felt today, a sobering reminder of the power of war to shape the course of history.
Let's talk about the Watergate scandal, a real bummer of an event in the early '70s. This sordid affair was about a break-in and subsequent cover-up at the Democratic National Committee headquarters, carried out by some less-than-honorable President Richard Nixon's administration members. As the truth began to leak out, it became clear that the whole thing went right to the top, and eventually, Nixon was forced to hit the bricks in disgrace in '74. This could have done better for the already-shaky public trust in the government. Ah, my dear compadre, let me tell you, despite all the damn negatives, that period from '64 to '71 is crucial to study even today. It was a tumultuous time of revolution and upheaval, and its influence still permeates every corner of American society. The civil rights movement and the War on Poverty were:
Amidst the chaos and tumult of the Vietnam War and the Watergate scandal, one truth became clear: the unchecked might of government posed a dire threat to the fabric of democracy. It was a time of reckoning when the people demanded accountability and transparency from those in power. And yet, from the ashes of this tumultuous era arose a newfound understanding of society's challenges and opportunities. Through diligent study and reflection, we can gain insight into the path ahead and work tirelessly to create a just and equitable future for all.
For the lessons of the past are not to be ignored or forgotten but rather to be embraced and heeded. And so let us not turn a blind eye to the mistakes of the past, but instead let us learn from them and forge a better tomorrow. As we come to the end of our journey, we find ourselves reflecting on the tumultuous years between 1964 CE and 1971 CE, a time of great upheaval and contradiction in the annals of American history. Amidst the struggles and victories of this era, we must delve deep into its complexities to grasp the profound changes that occurred and continue to shape our society. Only by comprehending the intricacies of this period can we strive toward a future that upholds justice and equity for every American.
THE RUNDOWN
QUESTIONS
In the annals of American history, the years betwixt 1964 and 1971 loom large, their significance etched deep into the nation's fabric. A turbulent era, it witnessed pivotal events that wrought seismic changes across the land's political, social, and economic landscape. From triumphs to tribulations, this message shall delve into the glories and pitfalls of this epoch and proffer reasons why it behooves us to scrutinize it even to this day. During this tumultuous era, a beacon of hope shone through in the form of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This historic piece of legislation boldly declared discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin illegal. It paved the way for equitable access to employment, education, and public accommodations. The passage of this bill marked a pivotal moment in the ongoing struggle for racial justice and set the stage for future victories in the fight for civil rights.
There was a ray of hope amidst the turmoil of the 60s - the War on Poverty. President Lyndon B. Johnson took to the helm in '64 with a mission to beat back poverty and raise the American people. His vision birthed programs like Medicare, Medicaid, and Head Start - little saplings that grew to provide shade and shelter to countless folks. And so it continues, these initiatives still bearing fruit, bringing some comfort amid the constant churn of life. As I reflect on this era, I can't help but recall the many bleak moments that punctuated its course. One event that stands out mainly in the Vietnam War, a long and brutal conflict that tore through the fabric of American society from 1964 to 1975.
The war was a divisive force, rending the nation in two and costing the lives of over 58,000 brave Americans. It's hard to overstate the toll this conflict took on our country, both in terms of the human cost and the political fallout that ensued. What's clear is that the Vietnam War was deeply unpopular, sparking widespread protests and civil unrest. The scars of this tumultuous period can still be felt today, a sobering reminder of the power of war to shape the course of history.
Let's talk about the Watergate scandal, a real bummer of an event in the early '70s. This sordid affair was about a break-in and subsequent cover-up at the Democratic National Committee headquarters, carried out by some less-than-honorable President Richard Nixon's administration members. As the truth began to leak out, it became clear that the whole thing went right to the top, and eventually, Nixon was forced to hit the bricks in disgrace in '74. This could have done better for the already-shaky public trust in the government. Ah, my dear compadre, let me tell you, despite all the damn negatives, that period from '64 to '71 is crucial to study even today. It was a tumultuous time of revolution and upheaval, and its influence still permeates every corner of American society. The civil rights movement and the War on Poverty were:
- Forces to be reckoned with.
- Breaking down barriers and giving folks access to education.
- Jobs.
- Healthcare like never before.
- My friend, that led to new equality and opportunity for all Americans.
Amidst the chaos and tumult of the Vietnam War and the Watergate scandal, one truth became clear: the unchecked might of government posed a dire threat to the fabric of democracy. It was a time of reckoning when the people demanded accountability and transparency from those in power. And yet, from the ashes of this tumultuous era arose a newfound understanding of society's challenges and opportunities. Through diligent study and reflection, we can gain insight into the path ahead and work tirelessly to create a just and equitable future for all.
For the lessons of the past are not to be ignored or forgotten but rather to be embraced and heeded. And so let us not turn a blind eye to the mistakes of the past, but instead let us learn from them and forge a better tomorrow. As we come to the end of our journey, we find ourselves reflecting on the tumultuous years between 1964 CE and 1971 CE, a time of great upheaval and contradiction in the annals of American history. Amidst the struggles and victories of this era, we must delve deep into its complexities to grasp the profound changes that occurred and continue to shape our society. Only by comprehending the intricacies of this period can we strive toward a future that upholds justice and equity for every American.
THE RUNDOWN
- The years between 1964 and 1971 were significant in American history, witnessing pivotal events that brought seismic changes across the land's political, social, and economic landscape.
- The Civil Rights Act of 1964 marked a pivotal moment in the ongoing struggle for racial justice and set the stage for future victories in the fight for civil rights.
- President Lyndon B. Johnson's War on Poverty birthed programs like Medicare, Medicaid, and Head Start, which still bear fruit and bring comfort amid the constant churn of life.
- The Vietnam War was a divisive force, costing the lives of over 58,000 brave Americans and deeply unpopular, sparking widespread protests and civil unrest.
- The Watergate scandal in the early '70s revealed the unchecked might of government posed a dire threat to the fabric of democracy.
- The lessons of the past must not be ignored or forgotten but embraced and heeded to create a just and equitable future for all Americans.
- To comprehend the intricacies of this period, we must delve deep into its complexities and strive toward a future that upholds justice and equity for every American.
QUESTIONS
- How did the Civil Rights Act of 1964 pave the way for future victories in the fight for civil rights in the United States? What were some of the key accomplishments and challenges of this era?
- What were some of the key achievements and shortcomings of President Lyndon B. Johnson's War on Poverty? How have programs like Medicare, Medicaid, and Head Start impacted American society?
- What was the Watergate scandal, and how did it impact American politics and public trust in government? What lessons can we learn from this period about the importance of transparency and accountability in democratic societies?
#10 Remove the Term Un-American from Your Vocabulary
And as a bonus, don’t listen to anyone that uses the term “Un-American” as they surely have an agenda. With the first ten rules in place, you can seem where one would violate multiple rules before they violate number 11. As you scroll through social media, the nonsensical term “Un-American” is applied to any person or idea that doesn’t fit a certain narrative. You must ask yourself, what is American then? Is it a deep respect for the powers that be and the status quo? Is it a violent police state that subdues minorities? Is it a suppression of free speech and oligarchic control of a rigged election? Is its entrepreneurial spirit? A freedom both of mind and of economic choices? Is it seeking out the boundaries of science, technology, and culture in a manifest destiny approach? Is it apple pie?
The answer is, as to no one’s shock, maybe?
The human experience as well as the American experience is multifaceted and complex. The worldviews of a housewife from the 17th century will most certainly clash with those of a gay black man in the 1980s. And that is okay, there is room for many types of Americans to sit at the table. When a political pundit uses the term “Un-American” they are really saying that “you don’t belong here.” They want to dehumanize and demote any oppositional viewpoint or lifestyle. America means something to me, and it means something to you. It means something to Abraham Lincoln, and something completely different to Iraqi child soldier. We need to sit back and not validate each other’s worldviews, but validate that they exist.
The idea of "un-American" has been thrown around in the annals of American history. It's a label slapped onto folks, behaviors, or notions that go against what's deemed "American." But, let me tell you, dear reader, this concept is as flawed as a defective toaster. The idea of something being "Un-American" is pointless in the grand scheme of history. There is no such thing, really. Why? Because America is a tapestry of diverse cultures and ever-changing ways of being. Trying to confine a single set of values or beliefs as exclusively American is like fitting an elephant in a matchbox. It just isn't going to work.
So, let's not limit ourselves, shall we? Let's embrace the diversity that makes America, well, America. And let's leave the idea of "un-American" where it belongs - in the dustbin of history. As I sink my teeth into the idea of "un-American," a bitter taste lingers on my tongue. It's been used as a weapon of mass oppression, my friends. Back in the '50s, Senator Joseph McCarthy led a ruthless crusade to smoke out alleged commies and rebels hiding in plain sight within the government and beyond. His weapon of choice? An all-encompassing definition of "un-American," designed to cast a wide net that captured anyone remotely suspected of being a left-leaning sympathizer or associating with them. The results were catastrophic. Countless folks were scrutinized, ostracized, and even locked up without so much as a fair trial or a shred of evidence beyond rumors and political self-interest. It was a dark time in our nation's history when the idea of what it meant to be "American" was turned on its head.
In the grand scheme of things, the concept of being "un-American" has been employed as a tool for bias against those on the fringes of society. Take, for instance, the early 1900s, when southern and eastern European migrants were widely deemed "un-American" due to their distinct tongues, beliefs, and traditions. And let's not forget about the marginalization of African Americans and other non-white individuals who have been denied the opportunity to fully engage in American life based solely on their perceived lack of Americanness. The beauty of the American experiment lies in its lack of a rigid set of values and beliefs. It's a wild and unpredictable ride, full of twists and turns that keep us guessing. But that's what makes it all so damn exciting! The vast array of perspectives and experiences that contribute to the ongoing dialogue of what it truly means to be American is what keeps us pushing forward. This diversity is our ace in the hole, the secret weapon that has allowed us to weather any storm and emerge more robust and resilient than ever before. In the face of social, economic, and political upheaval, we adapt and evolve, like a chameleon changing colors in the blink of an eye. That's the American way, baby!
In the 1950s and 1960s, a mighty force arose in the land of America, challenging the notion that segregation and discrimination were woven into the nation's fabric. The civil rights movement, led by luminaries such as Martin Luther King Jr. and Rosa Parks, drew upon the bedrock principles of democracy and equality enshrined in the Constitution to demand justice for African Americans. These valiant champions of freedom and equality rallied the masses to their cause, their impassioned speeches and bold actions striking fear into those who sought to maintain the status quo. Through their unwavering commitment to the cause, they succeeded in shifting the tide of public opinion, and their efforts culminated in the passage of historic civil rights legislation. Indeed, the civil rights movement stands as a testament to the indomitable spirit of the American people and their unyielding determination to uphold the values of justice and equality for all.
In the rich tapestry of American social movements, a particularly vibrant thread weaves through the struggle for LGBTQ rights. This dynamic movement boldly confronts the entrenched prejudices of our society and challenges the very foundations of gender and sexuality. Through tireless activism, LGBTQ individuals have galvanized a broader recognition of diversity and inclusivity, forever altering the fabric of American society. The LGBTQ movement is a testament to the power of individual voices and collective action to effect positive societal change. These brave voices, who have refused to be silenced or marginalized by the oppressive forces of conformity and intolerance, have propelled this movement forward. They have shone a light on the unjust labeling of "un-American," revealing the insidious nature of such discriminatory rhetoric.
Say, we must delve into the chronicles of the "un-American" notion to grasp how it's been wielded to further some causes and give the boot to certain factions throughout American annals. Acknowledging how the "un-American" concept's been used to legitimize prejudice and suppression, we can toil towards a more welcoming and just society that esteems variety and advances communal equity. As I wrap my head around this, I can't help but wonder: what the hell does "Un-American" even mean? Is it some catch-all phrase people use to justify their prejudices and biases? Let's be honest: America is a melting pot of cultures, beliefs, and ideas. It's a place where diversity thrives and innovation flourishes. Trying to boil all of that down into a single set of values or beliefs is not only limiting but also downright exclusionary.
But despite its flaws, the concept of "Un-American" has played a significant role in shaping our nation's history. It's been used to justify discrimination and repression, but it's also been challenged and subverted by social justice and equality movements. And that's the key. By understanding the complex and often messy history of "Un-American," we can work towards creating a more inclusive and equitable society. A society that values diversity and recognizes that our differences are what make us strong. So let's move beyond this flawed concept and focus on building a future that embraces all that America offers. A future where everyone - regardless of their background or beliefs - can thrive and succeed.
THE RUNDOWN
And as a bonus, don’t listen to anyone that uses the term “Un-American” as they surely have an agenda. With the first ten rules in place, you can seem where one would violate multiple rules before they violate number 11. As you scroll through social media, the nonsensical term “Un-American” is applied to any person or idea that doesn’t fit a certain narrative. You must ask yourself, what is American then? Is it a deep respect for the powers that be and the status quo? Is it a violent police state that subdues minorities? Is it a suppression of free speech and oligarchic control of a rigged election? Is its entrepreneurial spirit? A freedom both of mind and of economic choices? Is it seeking out the boundaries of science, technology, and culture in a manifest destiny approach? Is it apple pie?
The answer is, as to no one’s shock, maybe?
The human experience as well as the American experience is multifaceted and complex. The worldviews of a housewife from the 17th century will most certainly clash with those of a gay black man in the 1980s. And that is okay, there is room for many types of Americans to sit at the table. When a political pundit uses the term “Un-American” they are really saying that “you don’t belong here.” They want to dehumanize and demote any oppositional viewpoint or lifestyle. America means something to me, and it means something to you. It means something to Abraham Lincoln, and something completely different to Iraqi child soldier. We need to sit back and not validate each other’s worldviews, but validate that they exist.
The idea of "un-American" has been thrown around in the annals of American history. It's a label slapped onto folks, behaviors, or notions that go against what's deemed "American." But, let me tell you, dear reader, this concept is as flawed as a defective toaster. The idea of something being "Un-American" is pointless in the grand scheme of history. There is no such thing, really. Why? Because America is a tapestry of diverse cultures and ever-changing ways of being. Trying to confine a single set of values or beliefs as exclusively American is like fitting an elephant in a matchbox. It just isn't going to work.
So, let's not limit ourselves, shall we? Let's embrace the diversity that makes America, well, America. And let's leave the idea of "un-American" where it belongs - in the dustbin of history. As I sink my teeth into the idea of "un-American," a bitter taste lingers on my tongue. It's been used as a weapon of mass oppression, my friends. Back in the '50s, Senator Joseph McCarthy led a ruthless crusade to smoke out alleged commies and rebels hiding in plain sight within the government and beyond. His weapon of choice? An all-encompassing definition of "un-American," designed to cast a wide net that captured anyone remotely suspected of being a left-leaning sympathizer or associating with them. The results were catastrophic. Countless folks were scrutinized, ostracized, and even locked up without so much as a fair trial or a shred of evidence beyond rumors and political self-interest. It was a dark time in our nation's history when the idea of what it meant to be "American" was turned on its head.
In the grand scheme of things, the concept of being "un-American" has been employed as a tool for bias against those on the fringes of society. Take, for instance, the early 1900s, when southern and eastern European migrants were widely deemed "un-American" due to their distinct tongues, beliefs, and traditions. And let's not forget about the marginalization of African Americans and other non-white individuals who have been denied the opportunity to fully engage in American life based solely on their perceived lack of Americanness. The beauty of the American experiment lies in its lack of a rigid set of values and beliefs. It's a wild and unpredictable ride, full of twists and turns that keep us guessing. But that's what makes it all so damn exciting! The vast array of perspectives and experiences that contribute to the ongoing dialogue of what it truly means to be American is what keeps us pushing forward. This diversity is our ace in the hole, the secret weapon that has allowed us to weather any storm and emerge more robust and resilient than ever before. In the face of social, economic, and political upheaval, we adapt and evolve, like a chameleon changing colors in the blink of an eye. That's the American way, baby!
In the 1950s and 1960s, a mighty force arose in the land of America, challenging the notion that segregation and discrimination were woven into the nation's fabric. The civil rights movement, led by luminaries such as Martin Luther King Jr. and Rosa Parks, drew upon the bedrock principles of democracy and equality enshrined in the Constitution to demand justice for African Americans. These valiant champions of freedom and equality rallied the masses to their cause, their impassioned speeches and bold actions striking fear into those who sought to maintain the status quo. Through their unwavering commitment to the cause, they succeeded in shifting the tide of public opinion, and their efforts culminated in the passage of historic civil rights legislation. Indeed, the civil rights movement stands as a testament to the indomitable spirit of the American people and their unyielding determination to uphold the values of justice and equality for all.
In the rich tapestry of American social movements, a particularly vibrant thread weaves through the struggle for LGBTQ rights. This dynamic movement boldly confronts the entrenched prejudices of our society and challenges the very foundations of gender and sexuality. Through tireless activism, LGBTQ individuals have galvanized a broader recognition of diversity and inclusivity, forever altering the fabric of American society. The LGBTQ movement is a testament to the power of individual voices and collective action to effect positive societal change. These brave voices, who have refused to be silenced or marginalized by the oppressive forces of conformity and intolerance, have propelled this movement forward. They have shone a light on the unjust labeling of "un-American," revealing the insidious nature of such discriminatory rhetoric.
Say, we must delve into the chronicles of the "un-American" notion to grasp how it's been wielded to further some causes and give the boot to certain factions throughout American annals. Acknowledging how the "un-American" concept's been used to legitimize prejudice and suppression, we can toil towards a more welcoming and just society that esteems variety and advances communal equity. As I wrap my head around this, I can't help but wonder: what the hell does "Un-American" even mean? Is it some catch-all phrase people use to justify their prejudices and biases? Let's be honest: America is a melting pot of cultures, beliefs, and ideas. It's a place where diversity thrives and innovation flourishes. Trying to boil all of that down into a single set of values or beliefs is not only limiting but also downright exclusionary.
But despite its flaws, the concept of "Un-American" has played a significant role in shaping our nation's history. It's been used to justify discrimination and repression, but it's also been challenged and subverted by social justice and equality movements. And that's the key. By understanding the complex and often messy history of "Un-American," we can work towards creating a more inclusive and equitable society. A society that values diversity and recognizes that our differences are what make us strong. So let's move beyond this flawed concept and focus on building a future that embraces all that America offers. A future where everyone - regardless of their background or beliefs - can thrive and succeed.
THE RUNDOWN
- We shouldn't use the term "Un-American" because it's often used to insult or put down people who have different ideas or lifestyles. It could be more helpful in the big picture of history.
- America has many different cultures and ways of life that are constantly changing. It's impossible to say that only one set of values or beliefs is American.
- People have used the idea of being "Un-American" to discriminate against those different throughout history, like during the Red Scare and when people of color and non-white people were mistreated.
- The civil rights movement and LGBTQ rights show Americans' determination to treat everyone fairly and equally.
- Being American is complicated and has many different perspectives. People with different worldviews and ideas all contribute to the ongoing conversation about what it means to be American.
STATE OF THE UNION
HIGHLIGHTS
|
|
We've got some fine classroom lectures coming your way, all courtesy of the RPTM podcast. These lectures will take you on a wild ride through history, exploring everything from ancient civilizations and epic battles to scientific breakthroughs and artistic revolutions. The podcast will guide you through each lecture with its no-nonsense, straight-talking style, using various sources to give you the lowdown on each topic. You won't find any fancy-pants jargon or convoluted theories here, just plain and straightforward explanations anyone can understand. So sit back and prepare to soak up some knowledge.
LECTURES
LECTURES
- COMING SOON
READING
Carnes, Chapter 28: Collision Course, Abroad and at Home: 1946-1960
Mark C. Carnes and John A. Garraty are respected historians who have made notable contributions to American history. Carnes specializes in American education and culture, focusing on the role of secret societies in shaping American culture in the 19th century. Garraty is known for his general surveys of American history, his biographies of American historical figures and studies of specific aspects of American history, and his clear and accessible writing.
Carnes, Chapter 28: Collision Course, Abroad and at Home: 1946-1960
Mark C. Carnes and John A. Garraty are respected historians who have made notable contributions to American history. Carnes specializes in American education and culture, focusing on the role of secret societies in shaping American culture in the 19th century. Garraty is known for his general surveys of American history, his biographies of American historical figures and studies of specific aspects of American history, and his clear and accessible writing.
Howard Zinn was a historian, writer, and political activist known for his critical analysis of American history. He is particularly well-known for his counter-narrative to traditional American history accounts and highlights marginalized groups' experiences and perspectives. Zinn's work is often associated with social history and is known for his Marxist and socialist views. Larry Schweikart is also a historian, but his work and perspective are often considered more conservative. Schweikart's work is often associated with military history, and he is known for his support of free-market economics and limited government. Overall, Zinn and Schweikart have different perspectives on various historical issues and events and may interpret historical events and phenomena differently. Occasionally, we will also look at Thaddeus Russell, a historian, author, and academic. Russell has written extensively on the history of social and cultural change, and his work focuses on how marginalized and oppressed groups have challenged and transformed mainstream culture. Russell is known for his unconventional and controversial ideas, and his work has been praised for its originality and provocative nature.
My classes utilize both Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States and Larry Schweikart's Patriot's History of the United States, mostly in excerpts posted to the modules. You can access the full text of People's History or Patriot's History by clicking on the links.
My classes utilize both Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States and Larry Schweikart's Patriot's History of the United States, mostly in excerpts posted to the modules. You can access the full text of People's History or Patriot's History by clicking on the links.
Zinn, A People's History of the United States
"... Before 1970, about a million abortions were done every year, of which only about ten thousand were legal. Perhaps a third of the women having illegal abortions- mostly poor people-had to be hospitalized for complications. How many thousands died as a result of these illegal abortions no one really knows. But the illegalization of abortion clearly worked against the poor, for the rich could manage either to have their baby or to have their abortion under safe conditions.
Court actions to do away with the laws against abortions were begun in over twenty states between 1968 and 1970, and public opinion grew stronger for the right of women to decide for themselves without government interference. In the book Sisterhood Is Powerful, an important collection of women's writing around 1970, an article by Lucinda Cisler, 'Unfinished Business: Birth Control,' said that 'abortion is a woman's right ... no one can veto her decision and compel her to bear a child against her will... .' In the spring of 1969 poll showed that 64 percent of those polled thought the decision on abortion was a private matter.
Finally, in early 1973, the Supreme Court decided (Roe v. Wade, Doe v. Eolton) that the state could prohibit abortions only in the last three months of pregnancy, that it could regulate abortion for health purposes during the second three months of pregnancy, and during the first three months, a woman and her doctor had the right to decide.
There was a push for child care centers, and although women did not succeed in getting much help from government, thousands of cooperative child care centers were set up..."
"... Before 1970, about a million abortions were done every year, of which only about ten thousand were legal. Perhaps a third of the women having illegal abortions- mostly poor people-had to be hospitalized for complications. How many thousands died as a result of these illegal abortions no one really knows. But the illegalization of abortion clearly worked against the poor, for the rich could manage either to have their baby or to have their abortion under safe conditions.
Court actions to do away with the laws against abortions were begun in over twenty states between 1968 and 1970, and public opinion grew stronger for the right of women to decide for themselves without government interference. In the book Sisterhood Is Powerful, an important collection of women's writing around 1970, an article by Lucinda Cisler, 'Unfinished Business: Birth Control,' said that 'abortion is a woman's right ... no one can veto her decision and compel her to bear a child against her will... .' In the spring of 1969 poll showed that 64 percent of those polled thought the decision on abortion was a private matter.
Finally, in early 1973, the Supreme Court decided (Roe v. Wade, Doe v. Eolton) that the state could prohibit abortions only in the last three months of pregnancy, that it could regulate abortion for health purposes during the second three months of pregnancy, and during the first three months, a woman and her doctor had the right to decide.
There was a push for child care centers, and although women did not succeed in getting much help from government, thousands of cooperative child care centers were set up..."
Larry Schweikart, A Patriot's History of the United States
"... In 1973 the U.S. Supreme Court, hearing a pair of cases (generally referred to by the first case’s name, Roe v. Wade), concluded that Texas antiabortion laws violated a constitutional 'right to privacy.' Of course, no such phrase can be found in the Constitution. That, however, did not stop the Court from establishing—with no law’s ever being passed and no constitutional amendment’s ever being ratified—the premise that a woman had a constitutional right to an abortion during the first trimester of pregnancy. Later, sympathetic doctors would expand the context of health risk to the mother so broadly as to permit abortions almost on demand. Instantly the feminist movement leaped into action, portraying unborn babies as first, fetuses, then as 'blobs of tissue.' A battle with prolife forces led to an odd media acceptance of each side’s own terminology of itself: the labels that the media used were 'prochoice' (not 'proabortion') and 'prolife' not 'antichoice.' What was not so odd was the stunning explosion of abortions in the United States, which totaled at least 35
million over the first twenty-five years after Roe. Claims that without safe and legal abortions, women would die in abortion mills seemed to pale beside the stack of fetal bodies that resulted from the change in abortion laws.
For those who had championed the Pill as liberating women from the natural results of sex—babies—this proved nettlesome. More than 82 percent of the women who chose abortion in 1990 were unmarried. Had not the Pill protected them? Had it not liberated them to have sex without consequences? The bitter fact was that with the restraints of the church removed, the Pill and feminism had only exposed women to higher risks of pregnancy and, thus, 'eligibility' for an
abortion. It also exempted men almost totally from their role as fathers, leaving them the easy escape of pointing out to the female that abortion was an alternative to having an illegitimate child.
Fatherhood, and the role of men, was already under assault by feminist groups. By the 1970s, fathers had become a central target for the media, especially entertainment. Fathers were increasingly portrayed as buffoons, even as evil, on prime-time television. Comedies, according to one study of thirty years of network television, presented blue-collar or middle-class fathers as foolish, although less so than the portrayals of upper-class fathers..."
"... In 1973 the U.S. Supreme Court, hearing a pair of cases (generally referred to by the first case’s name, Roe v. Wade), concluded that Texas antiabortion laws violated a constitutional 'right to privacy.' Of course, no such phrase can be found in the Constitution. That, however, did not stop the Court from establishing—with no law’s ever being passed and no constitutional amendment’s ever being ratified—the premise that a woman had a constitutional right to an abortion during the first trimester of pregnancy. Later, sympathetic doctors would expand the context of health risk to the mother so broadly as to permit abortions almost on demand. Instantly the feminist movement leaped into action, portraying unborn babies as first, fetuses, then as 'blobs of tissue.' A battle with prolife forces led to an odd media acceptance of each side’s own terminology of itself: the labels that the media used were 'prochoice' (not 'proabortion') and 'prolife' not 'antichoice.' What was not so odd was the stunning explosion of abortions in the United States, which totaled at least 35
million over the first twenty-five years after Roe. Claims that without safe and legal abortions, women would die in abortion mills seemed to pale beside the stack of fetal bodies that resulted from the change in abortion laws.
For those who had championed the Pill as liberating women from the natural results of sex—babies—this proved nettlesome. More than 82 percent of the women who chose abortion in 1990 were unmarried. Had not the Pill protected them? Had it not liberated them to have sex without consequences? The bitter fact was that with the restraints of the church removed, the Pill and feminism had only exposed women to higher risks of pregnancy and, thus, 'eligibility' for an
abortion. It also exempted men almost totally from their role as fathers, leaving them the easy escape of pointing out to the female that abortion was an alternative to having an illegitimate child.
Fatherhood, and the role of men, was already under assault by feminist groups. By the 1970s, fathers had become a central target for the media, especially entertainment. Fathers were increasingly portrayed as buffoons, even as evil, on prime-time television. Comedies, according to one study of thirty years of network television, presented blue-collar or middle-class fathers as foolish, although less so than the portrayals of upper-class fathers..."
Thaddeus Russell, A Renegade History of the United States
"... Prostitutes undermined virtually every sexual taboo that limited the freedom of women. The birth control devices that had circulated among the rabble of early American cities came under attack by the middle of the nineteenth century, when contraceptives were used widely and shamelessly. A visitor to Boston noted in 1872 that there was “hardly a newspaper that does not contain their open and printed advertisements, or a drug store whose shelves are not crowded with nostrums publicly and unblushingly displayed.” The production and distribution of devices that made sex purely recreational was, according to the historian Andrea Tone, 'a robust and increasingly visible commerce in illicit products and pleasures that seemed to encourage sexual license by freeing sex from marriage and childbearing.' The growing numbers of prostitutes in the mid-nineteenth century greatly supported this market, then kept it alive when moral reformers threatened to kill it. In the 1860s and 1870s, several books with titles such as Serpents in the Doves’ Nest and Satan in Society condemned birth control as a violation of 'the laws of heaven,' 'the invention of hell,' and a 'hydra-headed monster' bent on killing the American family. These complaints became law in 1873 with the passage by the U.S. Congress of an Act of the Suppression of Trade in, and Circulation of, Obscene Literature and Articles of Immoral Use, commonly called the Comstock Law. The law, named after the anti-obscenity crusader Anthony Comstock, made it illegal to distribute through the U.S. Postal Service any 'obscene, lewd, or lascivious' materials 'or any article or thing designed or intended for the prevention of conception or producing of abortion...'"
"... Prostitutes undermined virtually every sexual taboo that limited the freedom of women. The birth control devices that had circulated among the rabble of early American cities came under attack by the middle of the nineteenth century, when contraceptives were used widely and shamelessly. A visitor to Boston noted in 1872 that there was “hardly a newspaper that does not contain their open and printed advertisements, or a drug store whose shelves are not crowded with nostrums publicly and unblushingly displayed.” The production and distribution of devices that made sex purely recreational was, according to the historian Andrea Tone, 'a robust and increasingly visible commerce in illicit products and pleasures that seemed to encourage sexual license by freeing sex from marriage and childbearing.' The growing numbers of prostitutes in the mid-nineteenth century greatly supported this market, then kept it alive when moral reformers threatened to kill it. In the 1860s and 1870s, several books with titles such as Serpents in the Doves’ Nest and Satan in Society condemned birth control as a violation of 'the laws of heaven,' 'the invention of hell,' and a 'hydra-headed monster' bent on killing the American family. These complaints became law in 1873 with the passage by the U.S. Congress of an Act of the Suppression of Trade in, and Circulation of, Obscene Literature and Articles of Immoral Use, commonly called the Comstock Law. The law, named after the anti-obscenity crusader Anthony Comstock, made it illegal to distribute through the U.S. Postal Service any 'obscene, lewd, or lascivious' materials 'or any article or thing designed or intended for the prevention of conception or producing of abortion...'"
What Does Professor Lancaster Think?
In the 1800s, things were a-changin' in America. Womenfolk were getting mighty restless and questioning the roles society had set for them. They started wanting more control over their bodies and lives, which meant getting their hands on birth control. Some folks weren't too keen on this novel idea, so they made it illegal to distribute the goods. But the ladies didn't give up that easily. They kept fighting and speaking out; eventually, the bigwigs in the Supreme Court saw the light. In 1973, they ruled that women had a right to choose what to do with their bodies in the early stages of pregnancy. It was a long road, but they made it happen.
As we look back at the era of sexual liberation, one can't help but appreciate the newfound independence and self-determination that women gained. Those who had long been relegated to the margins of society - the sex workers - seized the opportunity to challenge the rigid sexual norms holding them back. They grabbed hold of their bodies and their lives, unapologetically asserting their autonomy.
And let's not forget the significance of birth control - a revolutionary development that enabled women to revel in sexual freedom without the burden of unwanted pregnancies. No longer shackled to the traditional roles of wife and mother, women could expand their horizons, pursuing education and careers with newfound vigor. It was a turning point, a moment of empowerment that set the stage for a brighter, more equitable future.
Let's examine the unforeseen outcomes of shifting attitudes toward sex and reproduction. In 1873, the government passed the Comstock Law, which outlawed the dissemination of contraceptive devices. This had the unfortunate effect of limiting women's access to birth control and consequently increasing the incidence of unplanned pregnancies. Furthermore, as conventional gender roles began to erode, there was significant resistance from some quarters of society who felt the changing landscape threatened their status. Compounding this tension was the media's portrayal of fathers in a negative light, which only reinforced gender stereotypes and restricted men from fully participating in domestic duties such as childcare.
We must wrap our heads around the tumultuous period in American history, despite the shitstorm of obstacles in our way. This slice of history marks a seismic shift in attitudes towards sex, gender, and the right to control our damn bodies. The outcasts and hookers fighting to assert their autonomy opened the door for later feminist movements, and the battle for reproductive freedom is still raging today. If we want to make sense of all this madness, we must dig deep into these struggles' historical context. Only then can we fully appreciate the hardships and sacrifices caused by those who fought for gender equality and reproductive rights and keep pushing toward a more righteous and egalitarian society? So let's get wild, people - this will be a hell of a ride.
THE RUNDOWN
QUESTIONS
In the 1800s, things were a-changin' in America. Womenfolk were getting mighty restless and questioning the roles society had set for them. They started wanting more control over their bodies and lives, which meant getting their hands on birth control. Some folks weren't too keen on this novel idea, so they made it illegal to distribute the goods. But the ladies didn't give up that easily. They kept fighting and speaking out; eventually, the bigwigs in the Supreme Court saw the light. In 1973, they ruled that women had a right to choose what to do with their bodies in the early stages of pregnancy. It was a long road, but they made it happen.
As we look back at the era of sexual liberation, one can't help but appreciate the newfound independence and self-determination that women gained. Those who had long been relegated to the margins of society - the sex workers - seized the opportunity to challenge the rigid sexual norms holding them back. They grabbed hold of their bodies and their lives, unapologetically asserting their autonomy.
And let's not forget the significance of birth control - a revolutionary development that enabled women to revel in sexual freedom without the burden of unwanted pregnancies. No longer shackled to the traditional roles of wife and mother, women could expand their horizons, pursuing education and careers with newfound vigor. It was a turning point, a moment of empowerment that set the stage for a brighter, more equitable future.
Let's examine the unforeseen outcomes of shifting attitudes toward sex and reproduction. In 1873, the government passed the Comstock Law, which outlawed the dissemination of contraceptive devices. This had the unfortunate effect of limiting women's access to birth control and consequently increasing the incidence of unplanned pregnancies. Furthermore, as conventional gender roles began to erode, there was significant resistance from some quarters of society who felt the changing landscape threatened their status. Compounding this tension was the media's portrayal of fathers in a negative light, which only reinforced gender stereotypes and restricted men from fully participating in domestic duties such as childcare.
We must wrap our heads around the tumultuous period in American history, despite the shitstorm of obstacles in our way. This slice of history marks a seismic shift in attitudes towards sex, gender, and the right to control our damn bodies. The outcasts and hookers fighting to assert their autonomy opened the door for later feminist movements, and the battle for reproductive freedom is still raging today. If we want to make sense of all this madness, we must dig deep into these struggles' historical context. Only then can we fully appreciate the hardships and sacrifices caused by those who fought for gender equality and reproductive rights and keep pushing toward a more righteous and egalitarian society? So let's get wild, people - this will be a hell of a ride.
THE RUNDOWN
- In the 1800s, women in America began to question their roles in society and wanted more control over their bodies and lives.
- Birth control was a significant factor in allowing women to enjoy sexual freedom without the burden of unwanted pregnancies.
- However, the dissemination of contraceptive devices was outlawed with the passage of the Comstock Law in 1873, limiting women's access to birth control and increasing unplanned pregnancies.
- As gender roles began to erode, some people felt threatened, and there was significant resistance to change.
- The portrayal of fathers in a negative light in the media reinforced gender stereotypes and restricted men from participating fully in domestic duties.
- This period marks a turning point in American history and opened the door for later feminist movements.
- The battle for reproductive freedom is ongoing, and understanding the historical context of these struggles is crucial to appreciate the hardships and sacrifices made by those who fought for gender equality.
- It is essential to keep pushing towards a more righteous and egalitarian society.
QUESTIONS
- How did shifting attitudes towards sex and reproduction challenge traditional gender roles and lead to resistance from certain segments of society?
- In what ways did the media's portrayal of fathers in a negative light reinforce gender stereotypes and restrict men's participation in domestic duties such as childcare?
- What lessons can we learn from the struggles of those who fought for gender equality and reproductive rights during this period of American history, and how can we continue to push for a more equitable and just society?
Kurt Vonnegut in 1970. (Jack Mitchell/Getty Images)
THE RUNDOWN
In this visual tome, we witness a glimpse of American university history through the eyes of a woman named Judith Carp, who was unjustly expelled after being violated. We also see old films about college life and the mentality toward higher education in the 50s and 60s. The tale showcases how American universities have evolved to become more liberal and progressive, particularly during the 60s.
We also hear voices discussing the 60s, highlighting the importance of music in expressing emotions and unconventional ideas during this period of student activism and civil rights movements. The black student sit-ins of 1960 are mentioned as a model for white student activism later in the decade. The speakers share their personal experiences of taking risks and making a difference during this time, which changed their outlook on life and gave them hope for the future.
There is also talk of protection, not in the sense of violence, but in a non-violent context. The speaker suggests a method to shield both parties from harm using their bodies. The narrative also touches on the civil rights movement and the Kennedy administration's failure to take concrete action to prevent violence against civil rights workers. Kennedy's more significant concern with communism and the threat of nuclear war is also mentioned.
KEY TERMS
- 1964 Civil Rights Act of 1964
- 1964 Ella Baker Makes a Plea for Black Lives
- 1964 Gulf of Tonkin
- 1964 'Mississippi Burning' Murders
- 1965 Malcolm X Shot to Death
- 1965 Hart-Celler Immigration and Nationality Act
- 1966 Cesar Chavez
- 1967 The Tierra Amarilla Courthouse Is Raided
- 1967 The Odyssey
- 1968 Assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr.
- 1968 My Lai massacre
- 1968 Special Olympics
- 1969: Attacks on the Black Panther Party’s breakfast program
- 1969 Stonewall Inn
- 1969 The moon landing
- 1969 Kurt Vonnegut
- 1969 Fred Hampton
- 1969 Jimi Hendrix Plays the Star-Spangled Banner at Woodstock
- 1969 Johnny Cash Walk the Line
- 1970- Fashion
- 1970- Birth of Rap Music
- 1971 Hunter S. Thompson
DISCLAIMER: Welcome scholars to the wild and wacky world of history class. This isn't your granddaddy's boring ol' lecture, baby. We will take a trip through time, which will be one wild ride. I know some of you are in a brick-and-mortar setting, while others are in the vast digital wasteland. But fear not; we're all in this together. Online students might miss out on some in-person interaction, but you can still join in on the fun. This little shindig aims to get you all engaged with the course material and understand how past societies have shaped the world we know today. We'll talk about revolutions, wars, and other crazy stuff. So get ready, kids, because it's going to be one heck of a trip. And for all, you online students out there, don't be shy. Please share your thoughts and ideas with the rest of us. The Professor will do his best to give everyone an equal opportunity to learn, so don't hold back. So, let's do this thing!
ACTIVITY: "Voices of Protest"
Objective: To explore the diversity of social and political movements that emerged during the late 1960s and early 1970s in the United States.
Instructions:
ACTIVITY: The Counterculture Movement of the 1960s
Objective: To explore and analyze the impact of the counterculture movement on American society.
Instructions:
SUMMARY
ASSIGNMENTS
Forum Discussion #11
Harrison Salisbury was a renowned American journalist who reported on major global events such as the Soviet Union, China, and the Vietnam War. He was known for his incisive reporting and ability to bring a human dimension to international conflicts. In his later years, he hosted a television interview series called "Behind the Lines," which featured discussions with notable journalists about their experiences covering war zones and other challenging assignments. The show was highly regarded for its in-depth and nuanced exploration of the ethical and practical considerations of reporting from dangerous locations. Watch this video interview and answer the following:
ACTIVITY: "Voices of Protest"
Objective: To explore the diversity of social and political movements that emerged during the late 1960s and early 1970s in the United States.
Instructions:
- Divide the class into small groups of 3-4 students.
- Provide each group with a list of social and political movements that emerged during the late 1960s and early 1970s in the United States.
- Assign each group a specific movement to focus on (e.g., civil rights movement, feminist movement, anti-war movement, environmental movement, counterculture, etc.).
- Provide each group with audio and/or video clips of speeches, interviews, and protests related to their assigned movement.
- Instruct the groups to listen to and/or watch the clips and discuss the following questions:
- What were the goals and objectives of the movement?
- Who were the key figures and leaders of the movement?
- What were the key events and milestones in the history of the movement?
- How did the movement contribute to broader social and political changes during this period?
- Bring the class back together and have each group share their findings with the rest of the class.
- Facilitate a class discussion on the diversity of social and political movements that emerged during this period, as well as the common themes and challenges they faced.
ACTIVITY: The Counterculture Movement of the 1960s
Objective: To explore and analyze the impact of the counterculture movement on American society.
Instructions:
- Begin the activity by providing a brief lecture on the counterculture movement of the 1960s, including its origins, key figures, and impact on American society. Use audio clips of music from the era to set the tone and atmosphere for the activity.
- Divide the class into small groups and provide each group with a set of articles and photos from the counterculture era. Instruct the groups to analyze the material and identify key themes and issues that emerged during this time period.
- Each group should create a poster that highlights the key themes and issues they identified from the material provided. They should use the poster paper and markers to create a visual representation of their analysis.
- Once the posters are complete, have each group present their findings to the class. Encourage class discussion and debate around the themes and issues that emerged from the counterculture movement.
- As a final step, provide each student with a sticky note and ask them to write down one thing they learned from the activity. Collect the sticky notes and use them to facilitate a class-wide discussion on the impact of the counterculture movement on American society.
SUMMARY
- Years between 1964 and 1971 were significant in American history
- Witnessed pivotal events bringing seismic changes to political, social, and economic landscape
- Civil Rights Act of 1964 marked pivotal moment for racial justice and set stage for future victories
- President Lyndon B. Johnson's War on Poverty birthed programs like Medicare, Medicaid, and Head Start
- Vietnam War was divisive force, costing lives of over 58,000 Americans, sparking protests and civil unrest
- Watergate scandal in early '70s revealed unchecked might of government posed dire threat to democracy
- Lessons of past must be embraced to create just and equitable future for all Americans
- Term "Un-American" should be removed from vocabulary as it dehumanizes and demotes oppositional viewpoints
- America is a tapestry of diverse cultures and ever-changing ways of being
- Idea of being "un-American" used as tool for bias against those on fringes of society throughout history
- Civil rights and LGBTQ movements testify to unyielding determination of American people for justice and equality
- Women in America began questioning roles in society in 1800s, leading to demand for control over bodies and lives
- Comstock Law in 1873 outlawed dissemination of contraceptive devices, limiting women's access to birth control
- Portrayal of fathers in negative light in media reinforced gender stereotypes and restricted men from participating in domestic duties
- This period marked turning point in American history and opened door for later feminist movements
- Battle for reproductive freedom ongoing and understanding historical context crucial for appreciating hardships and sacrifices made for gender equality
- Essential to keep pushing towards more righteous and egalitarian society.
ASSIGNMENTS
- Forum Discussion #11
Forum Discussion #11
Harrison Salisbury was a renowned American journalist who reported on major global events such as the Soviet Union, China, and the Vietnam War. He was known for his incisive reporting and ability to bring a human dimension to international conflicts. In his later years, he hosted a television interview series called "Behind the Lines," which featured discussions with notable journalists about their experiences covering war zones and other challenging assignments. The show was highly regarded for its in-depth and nuanced exploration of the ethical and practical considerations of reporting from dangerous locations. Watch this video interview and answer the following:
What is your opinion on the concept of gonzo journalism as described by Hunter S. Thompson? Do you think there is a place for this writing style in modern journalism, or do you believe it undermines the credibility of factual reporting? Additionally, should readers be responsible for discerning when a writer uses hyperbole or exaggeration for effect or is it the writer's responsibility to make it clear to their audience?
Need help? Remember the Discussion Board Rubric.
THE RUNDOWN
So, there's this dude named Hunter S. Thompson, and he's famous for being a gonzo journalist. We've all heard of him, but have you ever considered what that term means? Well, according to Thompson, he came up with it because he realized that his writing wasn't traditional journalism, but it wasn't entirely fiction. It was this wild, explosive blend of humor, intense style, and operational reporting. And yeah, that's gonzo journalism. Thompson was a versatile writer tackling everything from sports to foreign correspondence. But he's probably most famous for his later work, like "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas," which was him just letting his mind go completely off the rails. But he started differently. Thompson's early stuff was much more grounded in traditional journalism before he found his voice as a gonzo writer.
And speaking of Thompson's later work, there's this one story where he got sent a portrait by a friend to send to Art Ready at the last minute. He thought the picture was excellent but was disgusted by the campaign and the country's state. So he wrote this epitaph that he considered the kookiest 500 words ever written about the campaign. It's like, damn, that's some serious gonzo energy right there. Now, here's the thing: Thompson was only sometimes a significant voter. But in 1968, he decided to cast his ballot for Dick Gregory. And you know what? He was feeling pretty damn depressed about things because he knew that the campaign was over, and he had no idea what was coming next. He knew he should be on the Watergate story, but Rolling Stone was too focused on music to let him cover it. And that's where things get complicated because there's this tension between gonzo journalism and factual digging. People believed some of the crazy stuff Thompson was writing halfway through the campaign, and that was a problem because sometimes he was messing with them. That's the price you pay for being the king of gonzo journalism.
WORK CITED
Hey, welcome to the work cited section! Here's where you'll find all the heavy hitters that inspired the content you've just consumed. Some might think citations are as dull as unbuttered toast, but nothing gets my intellectual juices flowing like a good reference list. Don't get me wrong, just because we've cited a source; doesn't mean we're always going to see eye-to-eye. But that's the beauty of it - it's up to you to chew on the material and come to conclusions. Listen, we've gone to great lengths to ensure these citations are accurate, but let's face it, we're all human. So, give us a holler if you notice any mistakes or suggest more sources. We're always looking to up our game. Ultimately, it's all about pursuing knowledge and truth, my friends.
LEGAL MUMBO JUMBO
What is your opinion on the concept of gonzo journalism as described by Hunter S. Thompson? Do you think there is a place for this writing style in modern journalism, or do you believe it undermines the credibility of factual reporting? Additionally, should readers be responsible for discerning when a writer uses hyperbole or exaggeration for effect or is it the writer's responsibility to make it clear to their audience?
Need help? Remember the Discussion Board Rubric.
THE RUNDOWN
So, there's this dude named Hunter S. Thompson, and he's famous for being a gonzo journalist. We've all heard of him, but have you ever considered what that term means? Well, according to Thompson, he came up with it because he realized that his writing wasn't traditional journalism, but it wasn't entirely fiction. It was this wild, explosive blend of humor, intense style, and operational reporting. And yeah, that's gonzo journalism. Thompson was a versatile writer tackling everything from sports to foreign correspondence. But he's probably most famous for his later work, like "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas," which was him just letting his mind go completely off the rails. But he started differently. Thompson's early stuff was much more grounded in traditional journalism before he found his voice as a gonzo writer.
And speaking of Thompson's later work, there's this one story where he got sent a portrait by a friend to send to Art Ready at the last minute. He thought the picture was excellent but was disgusted by the campaign and the country's state. So he wrote this epitaph that he considered the kookiest 500 words ever written about the campaign. It's like, damn, that's some serious gonzo energy right there. Now, here's the thing: Thompson was only sometimes a significant voter. But in 1968, he decided to cast his ballot for Dick Gregory. And you know what? He was feeling pretty damn depressed about things because he knew that the campaign was over, and he had no idea what was coming next. He knew he should be on the Watergate story, but Rolling Stone was too focused on music to let him cover it. And that's where things get complicated because there's this tension between gonzo journalism and factual digging. People believed some of the crazy stuff Thompson was writing halfway through the campaign, and that was a problem because sometimes he was messing with them. That's the price you pay for being the king of gonzo journalism.
WORK CITED
Hey, welcome to the work cited section! Here's where you'll find all the heavy hitters that inspired the content you've just consumed. Some might think citations are as dull as unbuttered toast, but nothing gets my intellectual juices flowing like a good reference list. Don't get me wrong, just because we've cited a source; doesn't mean we're always going to see eye-to-eye. But that's the beauty of it - it's up to you to chew on the material and come to conclusions. Listen, we've gone to great lengths to ensure these citations are accurate, but let's face it, we're all human. So, give us a holler if you notice any mistakes or suggest more sources. We're always looking to up our game. Ultimately, it's all about pursuing knowledge and truth, my friends.
- "Civil Rights Act of 1964." National Archives and Records Administration. Accessed March 21, 2023. https://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/civil-rights-act.
- "The War on Poverty: A 50-Year Retrospective." White House Council of Economic Advisers. Accessed March 21, 2023. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/docs/war_on_poverty_report.pdf.
- "The Vietnam War." History.com. Accessed March 21, 2023. https://www.history.com/topics/vietnam-war/vietnam-war-history.
- "Watergate Scandal." History.com. Accessed March 21, 2023. https://www.history.com/topics/1970s/watergate.
LEGAL MUMBO JUMBO
- (Disclaimer: This is not professional or legal advice. If it were, the article would be followed with an invoice. Do not expect to win any social media arguments by hyperlinking my articles. Chances are, we are both wrong).
- (Trigger Warning: This article or section, or pages it links to, contains antiquated language or disturbing images which may be triggering to some.)
- (Permission to reprint this blog post in whole or in part is granted, provided that the author (or authors) and www.ryanglancaster.com are appropriately cited.)
- This site is for educational purposes only.
- Fair Use: Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research. Fair use is permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
- Fair Use Definition: Fair use is a doctrine in United States copyright law that allows limited use of copyrighted material without requiring permission from the rights holders, such as commentary, criticism, news reporting, research, teaching, or scholarship. It provides for the legal, non-licensed citation or incorporation of copyrighted material in another author’s work under a four-factor balancing test.