FREE ESSAY ON CAMPUS UNREST

CAMPUS UNREST

In response to great opposition to United States' involvement in the Vietnam War, the
antiwar movement of the 1960s sprung forth. A vast majority of involvement in this
movement was represented on college campuses across the nation. Many college students
wholeheartedly believed that the war in Vietnam served no point. America was simply once
again sticking its nose in business that was not our own. As a result of the war,
universities nationwide in the sixties were in uproar as students attempted to express
their opinions through both violent and nonviolent means. 
Anti-Vietnam protests were first displayed through teach-ins that took 
place during the fall and spring semesters ("Campus Unrest" 1). These events were large
discussions held on college campuses where students, faculty and administration met to
openly learn about and discuss issues relating to the war. Teach-ins were efforts for
Americans in relation to universities to voice their opinions and get the attention of
government officials with the prayer that United States involvement in the war would not
continue to increase at such a rapid rate. They stressed the importance of peace, not
violence. Such teach-ins first took place in March of 1965 at the University of Michigan.
This set a precedent for other colleges and universities as these rallies began to take
place more and more frequently ("Campus Unrest 1).
One example of a teach-in that occurred during the anti-Vietnam war movement was
discussed in the Rutgers Daily TARGUM. In April of 1965, students and faculty at Rutgers
in New Jersey staged a "Teach-in on Vietnam". Professors William Fitzpatrick, Lloyd
Gardner, and Warren Susman had taken the podium to debate their stances on the war in
Vietnam. Gardner felt that "[w]estern civilization was greatest when isolated to the size
of Greek city-states, and failed most miserable when it reached out to take lands it was
not entitled to take" (Hochman 1). Fitzpatrick on the other hand expressed a very
different opinion: "We are fighting in Vietnam not to save our 'little brown brother,'
but to save ourselves...we live in a world today of civilizational struggle" (Hochman
1).The third professor, Susman, suddenly became extremely angry and bolted towards the
two, banging on the podium when he approached. The crowd witnessing the event went wild
and stood to applaud Susman, and the remainder of the teach-in proved to be just as out
of control. Eleven speeches were given in all discussing U.S. involvement in Vietnam and
other pertinent issues. This teach-in at Rutgers was similar to many others nationwide
that took place on college campuses in opposition to the war (Hochman 2).
Another teach-in took place at the University of California Berkely. It was the largest
teach-in yet and it lasted for thirty-six hours and over thirty thousand people
participated in it. There were also marches on Washington Avenue in which twenty-five
thousand people attended. These marches became popular when the college students went
home for the summer (Wells 25).
Also, in the early 1960s drastic social change was being pushed from another direction at
universities. An organization known as Students for a Democratic Society sprung forth in
order to instigate this type of reform ("Vietnam" 2). Leaders of the SDS realized that
many college students were becoming restless with the way many aspects of society were
operating, especially the United States' action in the Vietnam War. They were sick of
sitting back indifferently while the aspects of society they valued were falling apart
("Port" 8). The SDS believed that colleges and universities were the ideal places to
initiate such social transitions in America. There were four main reasons these students
felt convicted in this way. One was because these schools were places of education that
had great influences on the opinions of students attending. A second reason was because
colleges were the most principal establishments for utilizing information. 
Another was the way skills of persuasion and exploitation learned in classes could be
used. A fourth reason was the great socioeconomic diversity present on every college
campus. Universities were optimal locations for nearly every thought and opinion from
across the country to be expressed ("Port" 12). 
For these grounds, Students for a Democratic Society came together to ensure that
universities stepped out of the shadows and straight into the political involvement they
had for so long left up to their predecessors. They stated: As students for a democratic
society, we are committed to stimulating this kind of social movement, this kind of
visionand program in campus and community across the country. If we appear to seek the
unattainable, as it has been said, then let it be known that we do so to avoid the
unimaginable ("Port" 14). 
The University of California at Berkeley is yet another example of a college campus in
turmoil during the 1960s. Before the war in Vietnam, students had already begun to
organize nonviolent demonstrations to protest the administration's recent request for
political activism on campus to end. Students saw this requirement as a violation of
their freedom, and as a result they formed the "Free Speech Movement," holding numerous
public objections ("Berkeley" 1)
In 1969, the university planned to construct new dormitories on a recently purchased
piece of property. Students saw this idea as yet another opportunity for them to rebel,
and they soon flooded the area in order to prevent building from beginning. In the end,
the head of the university saw that the only way to end this hazardous ordeal was to
cancel the plans, and so he did ("Berkeley" 1-2).
Many American students were convinced that the colleges and universities they attended
were failing to educate them on the world around them. Learning how to do industrial
labor or desk work was hardly going to be effective in getting involved in political
change. A group of students formed the May 2nd Movement which was a protest in 1964
organized by students who felt that their universities were not providing a proper
education. They wanted to learn vital skills and information necessary to be active in
the political aspects of their nation. 
The main goal of the May 2nd Movement of 1964 was to form a way to 
counteract the actions of the "imperialistic" United States government, but in order to
do so they knew their claims had to be well researched and backed. Students suspected
that the U.S. invasion of Vietnam served no purpose but to gain more power and repress
the Vietnamese people ("What" 2-4).
In order to ensure that from this point forward students were no longer being poorly
educated, they began to organize their own universities, the first being F.U.N.Y. (the
Free University of New York). These schools were run and attended by those active in the
May 2nd Movement. Efforts to spread their beliefs throughout the nation were made in two
main ways. First was a publication known as the "Free Student" that documented student
occurrences dealing with the war and the anti-war movement. This magazine was made
readily available on nearly every college campus across the country. Second was through
study groups where students met voluntarily to discuss and inform themselves about how to
instigate political reform ("What" 5). 
These young people expressed great opposition to the war in Vietnam because they believed
that it was not what was best for the United States as it affected everyone in one way or
another. Students were affected through their education, laborers in the steel mills were
affected as the government prevented them from walking out on the job in order to
maintain production, and the entire country was damaged as billions of dollars were
removed from the national budget in order to fund the efforts overseas("What" 4-5).
A turning point of the anti-war movement occurred in November of 1969. The New
Mobilization to End the War, otherwise know as the "Mobe", proved to have a turnout of
nearly a 500,000 people, the biggest crowd ever to gather in the United States in order
to "ignite a political shift" (Wells 334). In an article entitled "The Mobe: High Noon
for the Anti-War Movement", a student at the University of Chicago recounted his
experience as an active participant in this infamous protest. His words represented the
thoughts and actions of many young adults in the American home front during the Vietnam
War ("Mobe" 3-4). He described his arrival, along with countless other students, on a bus
to Washington D.C. as absolutely unbelievable. People packed the streets forming a crowd
that appeared as if it went on for miles and miles. He soon learned that one group had
recently been pacing back and forth at Arlington Cemetery, bearing candles and screaming
out the names of United States soldiers who had lost their lives so far in battle (Wells
391). 
A second group known as the Weathermen was a part of the Students for a Democratic
Society. These protesters made the decision to incorporate acts of violence in their
demonstrations. They illegally stampeded the embassy of South Vietnam and upon doing so
were sprayed with tear gas by police officials. In response to the halt of their actions,
the Weathermen suddenly became violently out of control, shattering glass and flaming
trash cans ("Mobe" 3-4). 
Hearing these reports, the author of this article said he claimed to be filled with
excitement at the possibility of witnessing or even participating in such events. He then
started off to join the march down Pennsylvania Avenue past the White House. Along with
other protesters he proceeded to yell profane chants such as, "1 , 2, 3, 4, we don't want
your fu@#*@# war." Nearing the final leg of their march, the protesters were said to have
seen John Mitchell, the Attorney General, and attacked him, hurling trash and debris in
his direction. Police responded to this sudden violence with the release of massive
amounts of tear gas. The student recounting this event remembered thinking that surely
the American government would be forced to react to this outrage of events; however, his
hopes proved to be no more than that ("Mobe" 4-6).
The primary protest against the war in Vietnam occurred in April, 1965. This
demonstration was organized by the Students for a Democratic Society. They advocated
equality for all races and a breakdown of the nuclear inventions. This protest included
20,000 young adults that marched in order to show the government the viewpoints of the
majority of their generation who were opposed to the Vietnam War ("Vietnam" 2).
Although collegiate opposition to the Vietnam War was first expressed through nonviolent
manners as with the SDS, students soon realized that their voices, even though the
government heard them, were not instigating the extreme change they had hoped for in what
was going on overseas. Many decided that further action needed to be taken. They could
not give up their efforts when their opinions had already been made known, so protests
soon began to display much violence. What had once started as peaceful efforts soon took
a turn for the worst ("Rise" 6). 
One college in particular where opposition to the war in Vietnam was made very apparent
was Kent State. On May 1, 1970, a group of students in a riot burned down the ROTC
building on campus. After this, Governor John Rhodes of Ohio ordered the National Guard
to the Campus. On May 4, The Ohio National Guard opened fire on the demonstrators. The
National Guard had been ordered to leave two days earlier, but a large protest had begun
about the United States' invasion of Cambodia and about the guards being on the campus,
so the guards stayed put. The guardsmen were ordered into riot formation and some of the
demonstrators began throwing rocks at them. A pistol shot was heard, and the guards
opened fire at the crowd. The shooting lasted for thirteen seconds, and in that time,
four people were killed and nine others were wounded (Dunnigan 264). The Kent State
killings sparked protests across the country. More than four hundred universities and
colleges shut down as students and professors staged strikes, and nearly a hundred
thousand demonstrators marched on Washington Avenue, encircling the White House and other
government buildings (Karnow 89). 
Another of the major demonstrations expressing unrest on college campuses during the
Vietnam War took place in 1970 at Jackson State College. This Mississippi school was
brought into the spotlight in May of that year as students held demonstrations protesting
racial and civil inequalities and the recent killings of students at Kent State
University. During this riot, fires were lit across campus and a truck was flipped over.
When firefighters determined that they could not calm the riot alone, they phoned for
police assistance. Around seventy-five officers were dispatched to the scene at Jackson
State loaded with ammunition and ready to take any action necessary to put the violent
protests to a halt ("Jackson"1-2). 
The police made efforts to enter both male and female dormitories in order to help put
out the fires, but students formed a blockade and refused to let them through. Within
minutes police officers began firing shots into the crowd. In the end the lives of around
fifteen students were taken that day as a result of police shootings, and many other
young people were badly injured. Following this vicious incident, Mississippi state
police refused to comment that they had in fact played a major role in the violent
retaliation at Jackson State that day ("Jackson" 1-2). 
The following June, President Nixon responded when he called for the Commission on Campus
Unrest. Several hearings were held concerning the turmoil at Jackson State, but despite
the testimonies of faculty and students at the school, no one was prosecuted for the
damaged and lost lives. Since nothing was done to punish the police officers, the Jackson
City Council decided they would block off Lynch Street to automobile traffic. A memorial
plaza, the Gibbs-Green Plaza, was constructed in honor of the lives taken at the Jackson
State riots ("Jackson" 1-2).
The unrest on college campuses during the 1960s was one of the drastic results of the
United States getting involved in the war in Vietnam. Students held great opposition to
the war because they believed that the U.S. was power hungry and greedy, looking out only
for their best interest and forgetting the liberties of the Vietnamese people. This major
aversion was expressed through changes in clothing and behavior, but much more
importantly through both violent and nonviolent demonstrations. American universities
nationwide reaped the effects of the Vietnam war as students decided they would not
longer be indifferent but instead freely proclaim their viewpoints through words and
actions.
Bibliography
"Berkeley in the 60s." 9 May. 2001. .
"Campus Unrest." 28 Apr. 2001. .
"Campus Unrest at Virginia Tech." 28 Apr. 2001. .
Dunnigan, James F., and Albert A. Nofi. Dirty Little Secrets of the Vietnam War. New
York: Thomas Dunne Books, 1999.
Hochman, Jerry. "Viet Policy is Blasted by Faculty During All-Night Teach-In Protest."
Rutgers Daily TARGUM. 9 May. 2001. .
"Jackson State 1970." 28 May. 2001. .
Karnow, Stanley. Vietnam: A History. New York: Penguin Books, 1997.
"The Mobe: High Noon for the Anti-War Movement." 6 May. 2001. .
"Port Huron Statement." 9 May. 2001. .
"The Rise and Fall of the Anti-Vietnam War Movement in the U.S." 28 Apr. 2001. .
"The Vietnam War: The Effects at Home." 28 Apr. 2001. .
"What is the May 2nd Movement." 9 May. 2001. .
Wells, Tom. The War Within. Berkeley: University of Ca. Press, 1994.
Works Cited
"Berkeley in the 60s." 9 May. 2001. .
"Campus Unrest." 28 Apr. 2001. .
"Campus Unrest at Virginia Tech." 28 Apr. 2001. .
Dunnigan, James F., and Albert A. Nofi. Dirty Little Secrets of the Vietnam War. New
York: Thomas Dunne Books, 1999.
Hochman, Jerry. "Viet Policy is Blasted by Faculty During All-Night Teach-In Protest."
Rutgers Daily TARGUM. 9 May. 2001. .
"Jackson State 1970." 28 May. 2001. .
Karnow, Stanley. Vietnam: A History. New York: Penguin Books, 1997.
"The Mobe: High Noon for the Anti-War Movement." 6 May. 2001. .
"Port Huron Statement." 9 May. 2001. .
"The Rise and Fall of the Anti-Vietnam War Movement in the U.S." 28 Apr. 2001. .
"The Vietnam War: The Effects at Home." 28 Apr. 2001. .
"What is the May 2nd Movement." 9 May. 2001. .
Wells, Tom. The War Within. Berkeley: University of Ca. Press, 1994.