LBJ's Speech

What evidence does LBJ offer as proof of the widening economic gap between black and white Americans? How does he explain this gap?How are the sentiments he expressed represented in this cartoon:

In his speech at the Commencement Address at Howard University in 1965, President Johnson (LBJ) offered evidence that the economic gap between African Americans and whites was disparaging. Some of the evidence that he provided was the rising unemployment of young African American men. The unemployment rate for both whites and African Americans in 1948 was 8%. By 1964 African American unemployment was 23%. This is compared to 13% unemployment for white Americans. Also from 1952 to 1963 the median income of African American families compared to white Americans actually dropped from 57% to 53%. This translates into an overall decline in income and economic wellbeing for African Americans.

One of the ways that LBJ explains this widening gap is the unstable African American family. The theory that LBJ came up with was that the instability in the African American family was due to centuries of discrimination and economic oppression at the hands of white Americans. Also he stated that white Americans were to blame for the years of oppression and discrimination. Another way that LBJ explains this widening gap is the constant degradation of African Americans. He states that the constant belittling of this particular group of people affects self-esteem, thus preventing them from obtaining the “American Dream.” LBJ offered that this group of people starts life with a weight on their shoulders that is hard to shed. Discrimination and segregation are the weights of oppression that has essentially kept African Americans from obtaining and maintaining equality. Years of discrimination resulted in economic inequalities that led to unstable family structures. Unstable families resulted in children growing up in poor economic conditions with little expectation for improvement which led to the “cycle of poverty.”

In the first few frames of the cartoon, the weight that is on the African American boy is the weight of slavery of several hundred years. This ball and chain was removed following the Civil War with the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments to the United States Constitution. Here we see that the boy has freedom from slavery however, without equal rights. The white boy is climbing to a better life on the back of the African American boy. By the fifth frame in the cartoon, the African American boy is standing up for his rights like what was beginning to happen in the 1950s with the Civil Rights movement. However, the white boy is doing what many white Americans were doing; he is saying that he was wrong for all of the years of oppression without true understanding. In the last frame of the cartoon there are many different things occurring. The African American in the top of the frame is asking for help from the white boy to reach the shelf of economic prosperity. The white boy is saying that if he helped it would be reverse discrimination and not consistent with the whole point of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In the bottom part of the last frame, the white boy seems to forget that he didn’t get to his level of economic prosperity by himself but rather on the backs of African Americans.

The amendments of the Constitution granted freedoms. However, the purposes of the Civil Rights Acts were to address equality because a person who has freedom but is not treated equally is not likely to feel free. Truly the argument that LBJ made was the difference between civil rights and civil liberties.

Cheerful Robots

According to C. Wright Mills, Americans during the 1950s were Cheerful Robots. Using his excerpt, what you’ve read in the text, and heard in class, why is that description fitting (don’t just repeat or rephrase what’s in the Mills article).

In the article written by C. Wright Mills, who was a sociologist in 1959, he stated that Americans were becoming “Cheerful Robots.” What he was trying to say was that Americans in the early to mid 1950s were not exercising their freedom of choice. Americans were not questioning their government, employers, or developers. They were accepting a way of life that was defined as living the “American Dream.” This lifestyle for middle class America was embraced by the media and was depicted in advertisements. If we consider The Depression on the 1930s and World War II in the 1940s, it is quite clear what occurred in the 1950s. America was recovering economically and people wanted to take advantage of a better life. You certainly cannot fault Americans for wanting to take advantage of the economic prosperity that occurred in the 1950s.

During the 1950s, I believe that the Cheerful Robots were the mainstream of society. They lived in suburban homes with white picket fences and a brand new Ford or Chevrolet in the driveway. Inside, the modern appliances in the kitchen made the daily task of preparing the family meals more enjoyable for women. Dad enjoyed the morning commute to work in his new car. On the way home, he looked forward to watching the evening news on that brand new black and white television in the living room. The children, after school, played carefree in the neighborhood and were not expected home for dinner until the street lights came on. It is not surprising that, after twenty years of strife in America, people would cheerfully embrace this lifestyle.

Levittown, New York became the model of this perfect suburban lifestyle. Levittown was a planned community that consisted of 1,700 identical homes and included churches, shopping centers, modern schools, swimming pools, and recreation areas. It was located 32 miles east of New York City on Long Island. Levit and Sons, Inc. began construction in 1947 and Levittown was complete in 1951. This suburban community was so successful that construction of Levittown, Pennsylvania began in 1952.

The problem was that these suburban hamlets were all white communities. The concept was that families living in these communities could acquire material wealth and live in a safe environment. They were far enough removed from the city that issues regarding minorities and equality were of no concern. The nuclear family could focus on themselves rather than on issues that America faced as a nation. In reality, this concept of peaceful serenity escalated the problem with segregation.

It has been said many times that beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. Whether living in a suburban community like Levittown was the ultimate lifestyle is debatable. However, many Cheerful Robots chose that lifestyle. Many more individuals including minorities wanted that lifestyle. In my opinion, people wanted material wealth and the comfort that comes with owning a home. Even though they knew from the past that nothing is guaranteed. It is hard to fault people who chose to become Cheerful Robots given the alternatives that existed in the 1950s.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Read the excerpt from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The U.S. did not immediately ratify the Declaration. What policies and practices within the U.S. conflicted with many of the principles of the Declaration?

The United Nations (UN) approved the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948. On the committee that drafted this declaration was Eleanor Roosevelt, the widow of the late President Roosevelt. The declaration was broken into two “covenants,” the first covenant discussed Civil and Political Rights, while the second covenant discussed Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights. The United States (US) would not ratify the first covenant until 1992. To date, the US has not ratified the second covenant. We must understand that in 1948, the US was just beginning to understand the difference between civil liberties and civil rights.

It is important to understand that civil liberties are based on the ideal of freedom. Meaning, the US Constitution granted individuals the freedom to do certain things without restraint from the government. However, this did not apply to private individuals or corporations. On the other hand, civil rights are based on the ideal of equality. The UN Declaration of Human Rights clear intent was to provide equality to all human beings. Therein lies the problem and conflict that the US faced in 1948. For Example, in 1948 as far as the government was concerned an African American has the freedom to publish his or her opinions. However, because of the lack of racial equality, a newspaper was not obliged by the Constitution to publish those opinions. It is my belief that a person who is denied equality is not likely to enjoy much freedom.

The UN declaration contains several principles, or articles, that did not, at the time, coincide with policies and practices in the US. One of the major problems with the declaration was that it conflicted with how white Americans viewed minorities. Article 1 of the UN Declaration states that everyone born is free and has equal dignity and rights. In the US, racial segregation was widespread. Therefore, minorities were not born with the same status as whites. Americans born white had more educational, financial, and social opportunities than African Americans and Hispanics. The American idea that being white was far better than being African American or some other minority violated the rights stated in the other articles of the UN Declaration.

Article 17 of the UN Declaration states that everyone has the right to own property. However, at the time it was difficult for African Americans to own property. White property owners would not set to minorities. White bankers were also not interested in giving loans to minorities. Article 20 states that everyone has the right to freedom of association. However, white Americans did not view African Americans as their equals. Therefore, it was considered taboo for whites to associate with African Americans in public. Article 23 states that everyone has the right to work and the free choice of employment. This was completely inaccurate at the time it was written in the US. Minorities, for the most part, were limited to labor that whites deemed acceptable based on their race. This was due largely to the educational inequities that existed between whites and minorities.

The differences between the UN Declaration and the policies and practices in the US did not only affect minorities but they also affected genders. Article 23(1) states everyone has the right to protection against unemployment. During World War II, many women were employed in positions previously held by men. Once the war ended, many women were forced to forfeit their positions back to the men. Article 23(2) stated everyone, without discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work. Women were simply not paid the same as men when performing the same work. White women and minority women were discriminated against due to their gender. Article 26(1) states everyone has the right to education. Due to segregation, it can be argued that education was not the same. In addition, higher education was not accessible to all based on merit. Minorities and white women were denied opportunities to education because of race and gender.

The UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights had no enforcement mechanism. I believe that the US chose not to ratify this declaration because, as a nation, people were beginning to realize the severe racial inequality that existed. Unfortunately, it would take many years to reverse the discriminatory practices that existed in 1948. In 1954, two landmark cases were decided based on civil rights rather than the civil liberties of the Constitution. In Brown vs. Board of Education of Topeka (1954), the courts decided that segregation in public education was a violation of the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution. Similarly, in Bolling vs. Sharpe (1954), the courts decided that the federal government violated the due process clause of the 5th amendment to the US Constitution. In 1964, the Civil Rights Act was passed preventing discrimination based on race, color, national origin, etc. On July 26, 1990, the Americans with Disabilities Act, which was patterned after the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended, was signed into law. It is important to note that the US Civil Rights laws are not entitlements. The idea is to focus on an individual's abilities rather than their race, color, national origin, disability, etc. These are the reasons that today equal employment opportunities are the law.

Comfort Women, silent no longer

Why were the Korean Comfort Women “silent” so long? To answer this question, one thing you will need to think about is how much women’s “worth” is tied to their status as virgins or “sexually pure” and how women who are not “pure” are shamed in societies. You also need to reflect on how rape has been characterized as simply an “unfortunate consequence” of war—this is not true, of course; rape does not “just happen.” Why could the words and actions of Japanese officials and government be interpreted as attempts to further silence them?

During the Pacific campaign of World War II, the Japanese committed several atrocities. One of the major atrocities that affected many Korean, Burmese, Filipina, Chinese, and Indonesian women were the comfort stations set up to please the Japanese soldiers. At these comfort stations, women were repeatedly taken advantage of, beaten, and raped by the Japanese soldiers. The horrible event that occurred at comfort stations changed the lives of the women, who where the victims, forever.

The largest group that was affected by these comfort stations was the Korean women. Part of the reason that the Korean women were affected the worst was because Japan had conquered Korea when they invaded Manchuria. The Japanese government ordered young women to participate in factory work, which the Korean government complied with. However, the Korean government did not realize that the real reason that the Japanese asked for these women was to exploit them at the comfort stations. The Japanese believed that if their soldiers’ sexual needs were satisfied then they would fight harder.

One of the major reasons that the Comfort Women were “silent” so long was their status in their own community. Traditionally, in Oriental cultures a woman who is a virgin or “sexually pure” has a higher status than a woman who is not. Also in Oriental cultures, women are not viewed as highly as men and this is even truer if a woman is not pure. The Japanese soldiers stole these women’s virtue at the comfort stations. Another reason that so many of the Comfort Women chose not to speak up until they were older is so that they might possibly obtain a decent marriage. In Oriental cultures if a young woman is pure they can obtain a better marriage that otherwise might not be available to them. It goes without saying, that the Comfort Women felt ashamed that at such a young age they had lost their virginity. They simply did not want to tell their families or others the horrors they had faced in comfort stations.

One way to look at what the Japanese soldiers did to these women was repeatedly rape them. Even today in our society, women who have been raped tend not to talk about the event. This could also be part of the reason that the Korean Comfort Women chose not to say anything. However, this story is not that simple and there are some interesting facts. In the Japanese culture, prostitutes and prostitution has been going on since at least the 1500s. As it was stated in the video Silence Broken, the Korean people had to learn the Japanese language and history. This is important, because the women were 12 to 15 years of age when they arrived at the comfort stations. In reality, they were children. They were also repeatedly drugged with opium. It is possible, that these women were taken to the comfort stations at such a young age they did not fully comprehend what happened till they were older.

In Japan, the government and officials are trying through words and actions to continue to further silence these women and their horrible claims, of what truly happened in World War II. At the lowest level of the Japanese conspiracy, to cover up the truly heinous acts, there are the soldiers. One of the soldiers interviewed in the movie, Silence Broken, stated that the women in the comfort stations were paid far better than if they were working in their homeland. In an opposing view, one of the Comfort Women stated that some were not paid and others were paid very little. The next level of the conspiracy involves the people that recorded the events at the comfort stations. The military officials would court martial the soldiers that raped the Comfort Women. What they considered rape was not using a condom when they were with the women. It is not surprising that later the records of the events were burned, so there was no longer an official record of what happened. The Japanese say that it is their soldiers’ recollection of the events versus the recollection of the events by the Comfort Women.

Unfortunately, this conspiracy continues even higher in the Japanese government. Some of the Japanese scholars that were interviewed in Silence Broken blamed the United States and the Dutch for not following through on the investigation. These scholars put the blame on the US because they surrendered to them at the end of World War II. If the US truly knew what was happening on the Japanese front lines, and chose not to investigate then we are partly to blame. Also, as far as the Japanese government is concerned the lawsuits that the Korean Comfort Women have filed will probably not be heard. The actions of Japanese government and officials are making it seem as though the events never happened. They continue to deny that these women were forced; rather they insist that the women voluntarily participated in the comfort stations. By the Japanese government not wanting to hear these cases, it seems as though they would rather not acknowledge what truly happened. For the Comfort Women, they feel that if they do not try to get their stories out, then once they die the Japanese government will continue to deny these hideous events.

In my opinion, one step that the Japanese government could do is issue a formal apology to these women. However, the Japanese government would need to admit to themselves and others that something happened to warrant an apology. Here in lies the problem. Conventional war crimes such as murder, rape, pillage, etc. are also offenses under the criminal law of every civilized nation. An admission of guilt would be an admission that someone should or could be prosecuted. Out of fear, arrogance or a lack of respect for women, the Japanese government refuses to correct the atrocities of the past. Even though this action could possible prevent these atrocities from happening in the future. The Comfort Women should continue their fight with the hope that they might find some form of closure.

Although it might not be closure, it should be noted that on January 19, 1946 General Douglas MacArthur issued a charter for an international military tribunal for the Far East. The purpose was for the trial of major war criminals in that area. The trial began in Tokyo, Japan in May 1946. The judgment was read on November 12, 1948. The accused were charged with various crimes including conventional war crimes and crimes against humanity. Of the 23 accused, 7 received sentences of death by hanging and 16 were sentenced to life imprisonment.

Freedom from want and Freedom from fear

Of FDR's four freedoms, the goal of freedom from want and freedom from fear especially reflect American and European experiences during the 1930s and 1940s. Briefly explain what FDR meant by "freedom from want" and "freedom from fear" and explain how the desire for these freedoms was the result of American and European experiences during the 1930s and 1940s.

On January 6, 1941, President Franklin D. Roosevelt discussed four freedoms during a speech that he delivered to Congress. Of the four freedoms, the two freedoms that reflect American and European experiences of the time are the freedom from want and freedom from fear. The goal of President Roosevelt’s freedom from want internationally was to eliminate trade barriers with an economic understanding that would allow every nation the opportunity to provide a healthy peacetime life for its citizens. On a national level, President Roosevelt’s goal was to protect the future standard of living for the American worker and farmer by preventing a Depression from resuming after the war. In other words, he wanted to eliminate the average person’s feelings of need that they had experienced during harsh economic times. The goal of President Roosevelt’s freedom from fear was a world-wide reduction of armaments to a degree that no nation is ever in the position to commit an act of physical aggression against a neighbor. President Roosevelt’s goals are easily understood since World War II was raging in Europe and Japan was aggressive in Asia. There is no question, that President Roosevelt believed that freedom from want and freedom from fear were important. These two freedoms were included in the Atlantic Charter that he and Prime Minister Winston Churchill signed in August 1941.

In the 1930’s, Americans experienced unimaginable hardships that cannot be put into words. People who thought they were living the American dream lost everything. Those who were fortunate enough to have a job were frightened. This is not surprising since they had witnessed friends and neighbors lose their jobs. Then, the families where thrown out on the streets because they could not pay their bills. There was absolutely no guarantee that this would not happen to you next. Banks had failed and prior to 1933 there was not a Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) to guarantee deposits. This meant that if a bank failed, you could loose everything. After the FDIC was created, people still had no confidence and had lost all trust in the banking system. Obviously, bank failures meant industry failures and the losses were of catastrophic proportion.

Unfortunately, the 1930’s in Europe were far worse than in America. The extent of the Depression was greater because Europe was still recovering from World War I. Countries had staggering war debt that had to be repaid. Food was even scarcer because agricultural land had been destroyed and was in various stages of recovery. To make matters worse, Adolf Hitler became the dictator of Germany in 1935. He then started to remilitarize Germany and the Rhineland.

Economically, in the 1940’s, America was recovering from the Depression. The largest contributing factor to the recovery was that American industries were supplying Great Britain and its Allies with military equipment and supplies. WWII was underway in Europe, but in America something else was happening. Newsreels of the war were being aired in movie theaters all across America. For the first time, Americans could see in some what real time the destruction and human suffering that was taking place in Europe. On December 7, 1941, Japan attacked Pearl Harbor and in four short days America was at war on two continents. Reality and fear spread quickly because people knew that the media correspondents would now be reporting on American suffering and causalities. People were thankful that the war was not being fought on American soil.

The 1940’s brought absolute devastation to Europe. Countries were being destroyed and the numbers of military and civilian casualties were unthinkable. People were living in absolute terror. Imagine living near the industrialized city of Corby in Great Britain. The German bombing raids were relentless on industrial centers. To deter the German’s bombing raid at night all lights were turned off. Blackout curtains were placed over all windows so that no light could be seen from the outside. The city and surrounding countryside was in total darkness at night. Walking the streets at night was terrifying. People could hear the German planes in the distance. They could also hear the rats scurrying about but they could not see them. People literally lived from one moment to the next not knowing what might happen.

The Great Depression devastated America and Europe in the 1930’s. WWII destroyed Europe and the media allowed Americans to witness the destruction of countries and the loss of human life. The events of the 1930’s and the 1940’s impacted and changed a generation. There is no question that Americans and Europeans alike longed for freedom from want and freedom from fear. The problem was that trust had been lost. This meant that a Depression could happen again and so could war. These realities were forever etched in the minds of those who survived the 1930’s and the 1940’s. You cannot blame people for believing that although recovery was occurring in the late 1940’s anything gained could be lost at any moment.

Reaction 5: Alain Locke

What does Alain Locke Mean when he says, "The day of 'aunties.' 'uncles,' and 'mammies' is equally gone."? Why does he say this?

What I think Alain Locke is trying to say by the statement that "The day of 'aunties,' 'uncles,' and 'mammies' is equally gone" is that the use of these terms by African Americans is over. At this point in history the US is going through World War I and the Great Migration. If African Americans want to find work, in the North, they need to become part of the main stream of society.

The use of these terms has a tendency for the time to show a lower education level of the people that are using these terms. I believe that the reason that he said this statement is to let African Americans know that if they move from the South to the North they need to try to fit in with white society. In white society at the time these terms were used frequently to demean African Americans. It was a way for poorer whites to show they were better than the African Americans that were moving into urban areas at the time.

What I think Locke was also trying to say is that African Americans are moving into areas that should be more tolerant because of the other immigrants. Also that African Americans should not allow the use of these degrading statements to cloud their personal dreams of a better life in the North. Another point that I believe Locke was expressing that the North would allow for social and economic freedom, which no person based on the color of their skin can take away. Or another way of looking at the statement made by Locke is that he is trying to encourage African Americans to pursue their goals and not allow someone to put them or their dream of having a better life down with the use of derogatory comments.

Reaction 4: Woman on the War Front

Using the links I gave you last week, your text, and your VoF readings, take on the perspective of the personage you chose. You will need to produce a (750 word minimum) letter or diary entry, suitable for publication on your blog. While creativity is encouraged, your writing must be factual and show evidence that you’ve done your readings. You should reference any major events or legislation that would affect your character directly. (Woman on the home front or the war front)

February 20, 1918

Dear Mother and Father,

I hope this letter finds you both well. I am sorry that I have not found the time to write letters home more often. I am certain that you understand that my position, as a nurse in charge at our medical triage unit, keeps me very busy. That however, is no excuse not to write more often. Please accept my apology.

As you recall, before I left for France you reminded me that I am not a part of the United States military but a member of the American Red Cross. You also understood that my job meant that I must make sure that those injured by war, regardless of whether they are Allied or enemy, must receive the best possible medical attention available. I thank you for your faith and encouragement that I would do the job that I do the job I was sent here to do. I am comforted in knowing that the doctors and my fellow nurses share my same belief. The soldiers we treat, even the enemy soldiers, were all injured in the line of duty. That does not mean that we do not pray that this war will end soon.

I have enclosed the Florence Nightingale medal that I received yesterday. The medal is awarded periodically, by the International Committee of the Red Cross, to the most deserving nurses of all countries. It goes without saying that I was both honored and humbled. I wanted to share the medal with the two of you. This will serve as our mutual reminder that even in times of war, there is a need for some to be absolutely impartial and independent. This distinguished honor would not have been possible without your support.

I also want to thank you for sending those heavy winter stockings. Yes, it is still winter and the rainy season has arrived, but the stockings have made it more tolerable than last year. We still do not have floors in the medical tent. This means our white uniforms are muddy and our feet are wet, but we are comforted by each other. One of my nurses is trying to find wood so that we can install floors. Obviously this will benefit our patients as well as all of us. It will also help use keep the surgical tent a little more sterile.

We are still located twenty miles from the front lines. However, the exact location of the front lines remains unknown. I am starting to get used to hearing the sounds of artillery shells and it is no longer a shock. We are at a safe distance but close enough to treat the injuries as timely as possible. However, as times the numbers of injured soldiers is almost overwhelming and seemingly endless.

The horror of some of the injuries will be in my mind forever. The worst is the mustard gas. I hate seeing these sweet boys come in and cough up their lungs. Every time a soldier dies from the gas it tears at the hearts of the nurses attending the individual. I think it must be even worse for the doctors looking over the care of these soldiers. I am sure that the medical triage units much closer to the front lines have to see this more often than we do. At times seeing men die from the gas causes night terrors for some of my staff. Personally, when my shift is over I try to block the horror out of my mind. It is inconceivable that anyone could create a poison that would cause causalities of war in the form that it does. May God have mercy on the souls of the scientists who create such lethal weapons!

There is no question that war is a tragedy. I sincerely hope that the Allied forces will be victorious for the sake of democracy. However, the cost of this war in human life and suffering is incomprehensible. From that stand point, victory cannot be claimed. Human suffering and recovery will take many years after the war has ended. It is possible that some will never recover.

I hope everything at home is going well and I thank God everyday that this war is not being fought on American soil. Please do not worry because our medical team is safe. We hope that we will soon hear that the war is over. I look forward to the day that our conversations are once again in person and not mere letters. Please remember our captured soldiers in your prayers. We can only hope that they are being treated as humanely as we are caring for their soldiers.

With all the love I have,

Elizabeth

Alonzo Vasquez

It’s 1920 and you, Alonzo Vasquez, are a Mexican immigrant to the United States. While you love your new country, it is very important to you that your family remember and honor your culture and traditions, many of which are tied to your homeland. You are increasingly worried that your children, in the process of becoming “American,” are ignoring the importance of their heritage. Why is it so important to you that your family retain some cultural connection to Mexico and your Mexican heritage? What evidence is there that your children are being wholly “Americanized?” What conflicts has this created between you and your children?

My name is Alonzo Vasquez and I immigrated to the United States from Mexico, with my family, in 1918. My wife and I raised our five children in Zamora, Mexico where we owned a small farm. However, after the revolution in Mexico in 1911, it became harder and harder to earn enough money farming to provide for our family’s most basic necessities. So as a family, we decided that I should travel to Mexico City, an urban area, where I might find a job that paid better. I was unsuccessful, but while in Mexico City, I was told that if you know how to farm you can make money in America. We sold our farm in Zamora and moved to the “land of opportunity.” I found work on a corn farm in Omaha, Nebraska. I love my new country and I never dreamed of earning as much money as I have over the last two years. Even better, yesterday, June 12, 1920, the farm owner put me in charge of operations for the entire farm.

Unfortunately, I am afraid that money and opportunity have a price. The price to live in this magnificent country is becoming clear to me. My family is not able to see the changes that are occurring within our family, but I am very concerned. Please understand that I love my family very much. My five children range in age from 16 to 24 years of age. My wife and I raised them so that they would be proud of themselves and their Mexican heritage. Our beliefs are deeply rooted in the Catholic religion. Our lifestyle was simple in Mexico and our family was more important than anything else. Our clothes and food were authentic and made us proud to me Mexicans. Most important were the roles that men and women had in Mexican society. The men provided for the family and the women raised the children and tended to the household chores. It is frightening to think that in two short years these values are unraveling before my very eyes.

I suppose that the best way to describe the phenomenon occurring within my family is that they are “Americanizing.” What I mean by that is they are forgetting what our family had and how proud we were in Mexico. First of all, my three lovely daughters want to work outside the home and go to places of entertainment. I tell them this behavior is not acceptable, but they tell me I am old fashion. I am forced to remind them that if they did these things in Mexico, our family would be shunned. They do not listen. Instead, they want to go out in public without me or one of their brothers. They also think it is acceptable to be around other men that they are not betrothed to. I know in my heart that they understand the need to keep them safe, protecting their honor and virtue from men that mean them harm. My sons have also forgotten our Mexican traditions in their quest to be American. Instead of coming home after work, they go to places and drink heavily, returning home at unreasonable hours. I remind them that if we were in Mexico that other men would not allow them to see their daughters. Then they tell me that we are not longer in Mexico but in America.

I have noticed that not just their actions have changed but the clothes they wear as well. My daughters are wearing things that are too tight and my sons look like fools wearing tighter pants than what is worn in Mexico. Also these children seem to think that is acceptable to speak English at home rather than Spanish. All of these changes in attitudes and clothing are a source of daily conflict. My wife does not help the situation by saying that she will get a job of her own to help the family. The children seem to think that it is better to be with the majority than keep the values they learned in Mexico. At this point I think that it might be necessary to send the family back to Mexico and continue to work here in the United States, where there is better pay. I think that these free spirited children need to be taught that being Mexican is part of who they are and cannot get rid of it.

Ester Klein Reaction

It’s 1892 and you, Esther Klein, are a 17-year-old textile mill worker in the American northeast. You are new to the country and to industrial work, having worked previously on your parents’ farm in the old country. As much as you longed to come to America, your life as a poor Jewish industrial worker in the United States makes you have second thoughts. And life at the mill—why you and some of the other girls dream of organizing and standing up to the mill owners, but what you’ve seen of other labor organizing worries you! So tell me, Esther, what are the sources of your dissatisfaction as a poor woman, a worker, and a Jewish immigrant? Why have your dreams, of what life in America would be, changed?

Diary Entry from Ester Klein, January 1892

My family decided several months ago to sell our farm in Germany so that we could enjoy a better life in America. Papa said financial opportunities and freedom in America would be better than anything we experienced in Germany. In our country being Jewish, means that those who are not scorn you. They do not seem to understand our faith, which is older than some of their religions. Our fellow Jews have also experienced persecution that seems never ending.

The journey to America was not at all what Papa said it would be. Papa said that we would have a cabin for ourselves, but he was mistaken. Once on the ship we were herded like cattle to one of the lowest decks. The open deck was dimly lit and the six members of my family were crushed together with hundreds of other passengers. When we were close to New York we managed to get to the top deck to see the one site that means everything to my family, the Statue of Liberty. After seeing this beacon of hope, I felt that my dreams might come true.

The dreams that I had consisted of helping our family earn enough money to move to the south, maybe Texas, to build a new farm. Our farm would be located where other Jewish families had already established farms. Then once our family farm was established, we would also prosper. We would live in a community that would accept us and allow us to share the American dream.

We arrived in New York, at Ellis Island, where we were processed into America. Our new living arrangement was a tiny one-bedroom apartment. It does not seem possible that our family of six can live in such close quarters. However, after the ship I suppose that anything is possible. The other apartments around us are the same, and we all have to share a common restroom facility. The apartment has no ventilation so it is stuffy and reminds me of an overcrowded chicken coup. The air outside is filled with smoke and other foul odors. This is so different from living in Germany where there is open space and clean air.

Working in this new country at a textile mill is different than I expected. The first problem is that many of the ladies, including myself, are just learning to speak English. Another problem is the numerous, frightening machines that must be operated at the mill. To me they look like giant monsters because I do not understand how to operate them. Some of the women that I work with have injuries from operating “the beasts.” The hours at work are long and I am away from my family most of the day. The heat at times is unbearable, and it is not uncommon to see two or more ladies pass out in this “sweatshop.” The men who operate the mill do not seem to care. This is why some of the ladies are thinking about organizing a strike and have asked me to help them. Unfortunately, I have heard from other workers that organizing or participating in a labor strike has consequences. We could loose our jobs and the owners could make it almost impossible to find another job. If we did strike, the police could be called in to put down the strike. I have heard that both strikers and innocent people sometimes are injured or killed by the police. It seems that however inhumane our conditions are, it is safer to not organize or speak against our working conditions.

Several times, I have told Papa that the stories we heard of the opportunities in this far-off land were just stories. The other day on the streets of New York several men were overheard saying nasty things about Jewish people. Personally, I believe it is wrong to criticize just because our religion is different. It is not right to treat us badly or for them to threaten our synagogue and the Jewish community in which we live.

Personally, I hope that we eventually earn enough money in New York to begin our American dream. We will purchase a small farm in Texas where there is good land and a large German population who shares our values. Also, we have heard stories that Texas has a few small Jewish communities, and overall Texans are more tolerant of others. Everyday I wake up wondering why we moved so far from everything we knew. Then I remember we moved to have a better future. The future I thought of after seeing the beautiful woman with the torch at Ellis Island.

(I am not sure that it was actually Ester Klein’s family that moved to Texas. In Spring, Texas there was a Klein family that had a school named after them - Klein High School. The reason that I know this is that I graduated from Klein High School not long ago. The area that is today Klein, Texas is surrounded by land that was originally farmed by German immigrants.)

Social Darwinism

What, in your own words, is Social Darwinism? How was it used to explain a variety of circumstances (e.g. economic and racial/ethnic) in the late 19th century? Do you hear any of the same sentiments echoed today? Evaluate the theory. Do you find it valid? Why or why not?

What I believe Social Darwinism to be is that individuals in society that are of a higher status will do better than those in a lower status overall. In other words, it means “survival of the fittest.” Those individuals that find themselves placed in the higher status will do better in general than those that fall in the lower status. Individuals in the higher ranks of life, as defined by how society’s judge prized individuals, will do better and provide more to society than those who are lower or less fortunate. Social Darwinism believes lower status individuals will eventually die out.
This theory, derived from Charles Darwin, has been used to explain various circumstances. In the realm of the economy, Social Darwinism has been applied to the idea that the role of a male individual is to provide for himself and his family. A simpler version of this theory is that you are supposed to provide for your family unit. You are not obligated to take care of individuals that cannot provide for themselves such as people with disabilities or former enslaved African Americans. This theory has also been interpreted to mean that for racial or ethnic purposes, that individuals with lighter skin can provide better for themselves and their families, than those of a darker skin tone. The application of Social Darwinism implies that a higher chance of obtaining work exists for individuals with lighter skin than formerly enslaved African Americans.
Unfortunately, to some degree, the theory of Social Darwinism is still being applied today in some areas of society. For instance, statistically speaking, many people still believe that individuals with lighter skin tend to earn more annually than those with darker skin tones. However, this belief is becoming less popular as more businesses focus on productivity rather than historic racial differences. Today, any person with the proper credentials and skills to perform the essential functions of a job has the same opportunity to apply and be hired regardless of the color or tone of their skin. Although it has gotten better, the financial sector is still experiencing discrepancies between those of privilege (old money), those with acquired wealth (new money), and those without wealth. There are however, programs that seek to equalize and help those that are experiencing hard times. A trend that currently seems to be increasingly more popular as our economy remains unstable.
At the time the theory of Social Darwinism was applied to society, it seemed to be valid with the understanding of the world mindset. The people of the 19th century had been ingrained with the theory that white was right and everything else was wrong, so the theory fit the racial or ethnic beliefs. From an economic standpoint, the theory was also valid because those with lighter skin could find more work options that allowed them to obtain more wealth. These individuals with wealth tended only to provide for themselves and their family and not to care for those who could not manage their own lives. In addition, at the time these individuals did not believe in social welfare or for providing for those who could not provide for themselves. Rather they chose to believe that these individuals were inferior and should not survive. Especially if their condition in life could be associated with laziness or the unwillingness to work and provide for their family as was their duty.