Ep. 41 – Lessons from LBJ’s America: A Conversation with Mark Lawrence

[0:00:07 Peniel] Welcome to Race and democracy, a podcast on the intersection between race, democracy, public policy, Social justice and citizenship. On today’s podcast of race and democracy, we are pleased to welcome Dr. Mark Lawrence, who is the sixth director of the LBJ presidential Library and a professor of history at the University of texas at Austin. Dr Lawrence is the author of assuming the burden, europe and the american commitment to war in Vietnam and the Vietnam War. A concise international history. Mark Lawrence. Welcome to Race and Democracy.

[0:00:43 Mark] Thanks so much for having me Peniel.

[0:00:48 Peniel] I want to get right into it because of all the global, really cataclysmic events that are happening and since you’re both the director of the library, but an expert on President Lyndon johnson who faced racial upheavals and progress in the 19 sixties, what do you make of the national protests that we’ve seen for racial justice in the aftermath of George Floyd, a 46 year old african american man who was killed at the hands of the Minneapolis police on May 25th. Um, and what we’ve seen both nationally and internationally and sort of the response from the White House, and do you see any comparisons between 1968 or just the 19 sixties and the johnson presidency?

[0:01:37 Mark] It’s a terrific question and one that I’ve definitely been thinking a lot about, you know, a friend of mine said a couple of days ago that this year started out in 1918 because of the spanish flu and then it became 1929 because of the economic catastrophe. And now it’s become 1968. And I think there’s uh an important point here, all the most troubling aspects of these three moments in american history are sort of all baked together right now. Uh, which in some ways leads me to say this is completely unprecedented situation with so many different and quite troubling things happening at the same time. But I take your point, the point of your question, uh, what might we learn from the 19 sixties? Um, that would be helpful in understanding what’s what’s going on. Um, today, I think there are some very interesting, um, points of similarity between, um, what played out, not just in 1968 although we tend to equate all of those events with that year in particular, really across 1965 66 67 68 what’s, what’s taking place now? Um, and um, you know, I think, uh, looking at what’s going on now, reading the newspaper is very instructive even for students these days, to get some flavor for what the 19 sixties might have looked like and felt like. Um, and yet there are of course significant differences. It seems to me the nature of politics at the highest level is quite different and actually cast the mid to late 19 sixties in a relatively favorable light, right? The the political debate back in that era was lively, was informed, was intellectually rich, um was sophisticated. And it seems to me one of the things that’s really dropped out of american politics at that highest level, at least, is as much of what I’m just describing in connection with the 19 sixties. I think that’s one of the most disturbing things to me as a as a historian and really as a as a citizen. Um It’s it’s it’s increasingly difficult, I think, to have conversations and sophisticated and respectful. And wait, that said, it does go ahead.

[0:03:59 Peniel] How did Lyndon B. johnson respond to the racial upheavals of the 19 sixties during his presidency, Whether it’s Harlem or Watts or even after New Work? Do you think he responded compassionately, empathy, empathetically. How exactly did he respond?

[0:04:21 Mark] You know, I think it’s somewhere in between compassionately and um ineffectually. And let me explain what I mean by that very briefly, it seemed to me that he really struggled to understand what it was that was motivating activists on a number of different issues, but certainly african american activists in connection with all the upheavals from 65 to 1969. Um, I think he was very much a creature of the 1930s and 1940s. He thought in terms of top down reform, he thought of himself as a bringer of reform and enlightenment, and really couldn’t understand when people nevertheless um took to the streets or defied his authority or challenged what he understood to be a compassionate set of decisions uh, you know, embraced under, under his watch. Um It was a real problem for him by the end of his presidency and shows I think many of the ways in which he was out of touch by the late 19 sixties with what was really happening at a grassroots level in the United States.

[0:05:33 Peniel] And when you say out of touch, because I think this current president, president Donald j trump has also been accused of being out of touch. Whether you think about the covid 19 pandemic and its impact on the american economy, the racial disparity is connected to that, but he paints a very rosy rhetorical picture of both his relationship to the african american community. He also, he always cites low african american unemployment. Um And and sort of there’s a disconnect between his understanding of the way in which his supporters uh make american great Maga country might think of or perceive of african americans. Um and the real reality. So that disconnect when you see these protests, do you think these protests are rooted in the same dissatisfaction that we saw in the 1960s? Because those protests were routed and dissatisfaction with poverty, racial segregation, the criminal justice system, the way in which police policed african american communities. What do you think? You know, you talked about Lyndon johnson being sort of yeah, you know, flummoxed by the disruptions, and I think some of the country is flummoxed by these disruptions, wondering what what’s going on, uh what do you think the roots of them are?

[0:06:48 Mark]  Yeah, I think one of the interesting um points of comparison between what’s going on now and in the 1960s is the tendency of certain parts of the american population um to assume that all is well, because we had the important landmark reforms of the 1960s. In other words, we extended rights, right? We we had the Civil Rights Act of 1964 the voting rights act of 1965. And in various pieces of legislation that have been passed since this has given the impression um that we’ve sort of solved the racial problem. And I think what’s happening now, that creates so much consternation is in some ways the same thing that confounded LBJ. We see that those measures were not sufficient, right? That there are grievances that cut to poverty, that cut to everyday humiliations that cut to the criminal justice system that can’t be solved in a top down manner, LBJ was the ultimate top down guy. And this is no, I don’t mean to take anything away from his accomplishments, but he was relatively blind, I think, to the ways in which that was necessary, but not sufficient to solve the problems that ailed the United States. There’s a lot of that going on today. I think as well.

[0:08:08 Peniel] now when we think about the 19 sixties, we did have the great society compare and contrast now and and, and uh, then because the great society, the war on poverty, Lyndon johnson, I think one of the most important parts of his presidency was such a forward looking vision for justice in America. And in a lot of ways racial justice was central to that vision. What are the comparisons in the contrast that you’re seeing between them and then and now, especially in light of the multiracial character of these demonstrations, it’s not just black people on the streets. Um, it is, there’s a lot of white people latin x other allies, but certainly there’s, I’ve never seen this many white people active. These are the racial justice.

[0:08:54 Mark] You know, I think that the great society emerged from a very distinct and I won’t go as far as to say, unique. But a very unusual moment in american history when all the stars were aligned to give americans very broadly, a lot of confidence in governmental institutions to produce meaningful reform, to marshal all of the resources and the expertise of the nation to fix problems. And whether the problem was poverty or the war in Vietnam or race right, there was a strong sense of confidence and a real willingness to empower governmental institutions. I think what’s happening now is similar in certain ways to what took place in the 19 sixties, but it takes place against a very different backdrop in terms of ordinary people’s understandings of what the role of government should be, it can be. Um and it’s, you know, it’s taken 30 years of very profound political transformation more than that, 50 years in the United States to move us away from that strong sense of confidence that that existed briefly in the 19 sixties. So, I think what you see is people very frustrated that they don’t know what the mechanisms are to produce change. They don’t seem to exist through government. Right. The message we received from the from the administration and from lots of other folks as well, is that government is broken right? Government can’t be really effectively part of the solution. So, I guess the upside of that is that people are increasingly taking responsibility in their own lives and acting in a more grassroots sort of way. So this is not without its its upside, but what we’ve lost, I think is a sense that government can be part even a major part of the solution.

[0:10:39 Peniel] Now, you’re an expert on the johnson administration. Sometimes we make an argument the war on poverty failed, the great Society failed. Obviously that’s not true. What was effective about the great Society, vis a vis racial justice, what things actually worked, what things are still legacies such as head start that we have today, that were quite effective. But in the national imagination we might think of man, that period failed.

[0:11:10 Mark] Yeah, it’s a great question is so much debate, of course, about the successes and failures of the great society. But in the racial arena, it seems to me indisputable in a very basic way that the civil Rights Act of 60 for the voting rights act of 65 together produced very profound um effects. The problem, of course, came. And this is where I think LBJ really struggled is that it wasn’t sufficient right. When those relatively straightforward issues complicated though they were, but relatively straightforward issues were sort of solved as matters of policy, um lots of problems remained in terms of the everyday lived experience of of ordinary people. So I tend to think of the great society as you know, going, uh, you know, 30% of the way down the road and producing very important and necessary transformations, but ultimately being kind of helpless in the face of the kinds of problems that weren’t as readily tractable for for the federal government or for a liberal like LBJ and the political forces that he represented now.

[0:12:19 Peniel] When we talk about this contemporary situation, and we think about the ways in which it’s actually similar to the 19 sixties. What ways do you think it’s dissimilar? And we’re really at um if not an entirely new, but a unique situation in our own contemporary lives in terms of 2020. And what what lessons from history? Um can we if there if there are any take for um really policy changes and not necessarily just at the federal level, but you know, locally as well?

[0:13:01 Mark] Yeah, I mean, I think one of the though this may seem kind of simple minded to put it this way. One of the important differences between now and then is that now we know that then happened. And what I mean by that is we know that there is this history of very sincere and at least partially successful reforms that were touted as solving problems at a very basic level. That though they produced indisputable advances have left a huge unfinished agenda um and lots of frustration, I think when year after year after year goes by and history actually seems to move backward instead of forward. Um, as I think President Obama put it, uh, not not too long ago. Um people I think are at least loosely aware of the fact that we’ve been working on these problems for a long time, and this is to take nothing away from those in the 19 sixties who understood that they had been working on these issues for a century by that point, I get that there was a strong back story there as well. But I think that the frustration grows in part out of a sense that there was this era of promise and progress in the history of the last 50 years has been backsliding away from that. And now, um, you know, we see so little, so little guidance or inspiration from our leaders to try to get us back on track and even to validate that earlier experiences, something that brought about meaningful changes and should be kind of, you know, put back on track and in some ways to get us headed in the right direction. Again.

[0:14:48 Peniel] Now, I’ll ask you about Lyndon johnson’s role during the 19 sixties in terms of in the aftermath of these disruptions, because certainly we saw Barack Obama, what is it about presidents and this, this notion of sort of law and order, both democrats and republicans that persists in our own time. Yet this inability to talk about what are the origins behind demonstrations? What are the origins behind why people would take to the streets? And I think we’re still seeing that today, and I’m curious about that. Why, why do I guess presidents, when they see and experience this disruption, um immediately talk about the rule of law.

[0:15:39 Mark] Right, Well, I think one reason is surely that they are making a political calculation about what Richard Nixon famous called this famously called the silent majority. Now, whether silent majorities exist or not or existed at certain points when they were said to have existed as an interesting question. But I think that there is a natural tender, easy tendency among presidents starting in the 19 sixties and probably earlier to assume that people in the streets is politically dangerous, that there is a political advantage to be gained by appearing to be on the side of those who, though they may recognize certain grievances in certain injustices, nevertheless see direct confrontation and action as threatening in some way. Um, I I don’t have enough experience with public opinion and some of the important historical moments when this kind of message has been invoked by presidents to have a strong opinion about whether this has been successful in under what circumstances, But I would say is a broad proposition they probably haven’t been wrong in recognizing that these kinds of moments are manipulable. Um, in order to gain politically from a message of law and order, I think donald trump is probably um, running some very significant risk by playing that card, because it seems to me the biden campaign is probably better positions to play the law and order card, not in a harsh sense of what we’re going to crack down on these people in the streets, but rather in the sense that, you know, what we represent is sanity in rudimentary justice that will allay some of the grievances, you know, that are that are pushing people out into the, into the street. This is one way in which, you know, 2020 is interesting to put into dialogue with 1968 right? Who is the who is the candidate of law and Order? Um, you know, who is the who is the candidate? Who’s most likely to reassure people, right? Um, and I think it was Nixon in 1968. And who is this time around is an interesting question to think about.

[0:17:53 Peniel] My final question is what do you think the LBJ library is going to be doing in the future to be part of this this conversation? Because right now there’s so much interest in racial justice, there’s so much interest in tackling institutional racism. We live in Austin, uh, you know, this is the home of so much potential prosperity for everyone, but that hasn’t been the outcome in the way in which our city is structured. So what can the LBJ Library do two help facilitate these conversations, public history, public education, but bring people together.

[0:18:40 Mark] But I really appreciate that question Peniel, it’s what I’ve been thinking an awful lot about and I don’t think there is a single answer to your question. Um, I worry that I’ll go on for the next hour addressing that. I’ll be super brief. Um, I’ll say that the answer to that question depends on which part of our operation you’re talking about. But let me give you some examples. Public programming is something that I think we’ve done very well over the years and we have given prominent place the questions of racial justice, as you know, um, particularly in the last five or six years. And that will certainly continue. And I dare say that that will be redoubled given the attention quite rightly, that these issues are getting at this point is difficult to do virtually. But we’re looking for ways to do that. We’ve had interviews recently with bakari sellers with you yourself been ill and um with others who can speak in really sophisticated ways to these themes. Um we’re redoing parts of our museum exhibit right now and one of our goals is to do more, to recapture the reality of segregation and poverty. The museum has been, as you might expect very much about LBJ’s perspective. What we’re trying to do is not to change the balance in a dramatic way, but to do more to capture for our visitors what social realities were like in the 19 um sixties, our Education Department is developing new curricula to try to hit these themes, um uh harder and frankly to, we’re trying to brainstorm ways to bring people into the LBJ library who haven’t over the years. I think it’s fair to say seeing it as a particularly comfortable or inviting place. We have various ideas, including um special days that would be devoted to particular. Um community groups may be free days or free evenings that would throw our doors, you know, literally open without any barriers whatsoever. We’re thinking about new temporary exhibits that would address the kinds of themes that are on everybody’s minds these days. So lots lots going on and I know it’s easier to talk about it than to do it, but I think we have the determination to be part of this very important conversation.

[0:20:57 Peniel] All right, so we’ll close on that optimistic note of breaking down barriers through conversation. Uh public meetings uh that are talking about education, racial justice, um and the role that both the johnson presidency played in promoting that in the 19 sixties, but the role that his legacy uh and those of us who are invested in that legacy can play in promoting it in our own time. Uh So thank you. Marc Lawrence is the sixth director of the LBJ Presidential Library um and he is a professor of history at the University of texas at Austin, my my colleague and friend and he’s the author of assuming the burden, europe and the american commitment to war in Vietnam. The Vietnam War, A concise International History. He’s working on a new book in the Shadow of Vietnam, The United States and the Third World in the 19 sixties, which I can’t wait to read. Mark, thank you for joining us here on Race and Democracy.

[0:21:53 Mark] Thank you so much.

[0:21:55 Peniel] Thanks for listening to this episode and you can check out related content on twitter at Peniel joseph, that’s Peniel Joseph and our website CSRD.LBJ.utexas.edu. And the Center for Study of Race and Democracy is on facebook as well. This podcast was recorded at the Liberal Arts Development Studio at the College of Liberal Arts at the University of texas at Austin. Thank you. Mm