the Summer of Love
The next challenge set for the Californian Governor would be on fulfilling his campaign of finding a peaceful solution to the riots that tore Californian and, at a national level, American society apart, as the counterculture and civil rights movements became stronger and more capable of exerting pressure over traditional society.
The summer of 1967 would be a special time in regards to this. Both the ‘long, hot summer’ of civil rights and the ‘summer of love’ of the hippie culture would happen through the nation, bringing with them an both an upheaval and a backlash as the various sects of increasingly polarised American society became increasingly more aggressive towards one another.
Beginning in June, great riots would erupt throughout the nation, from Atlanta to Boston, from Buffalo to Tampa. The bloodiest events in that summer were in Newark and then in Detroit, a week apart from each other, as the African American communities, wearied with the disenfranchisement and violence directed towards them, not just in the old South, but really through the entire country, rose up and rioted against the injustices they suffered. In New Jersey the National Guard had had to be called, arresting thousands and adding to the body count already stacked up in the fighting between civilians and police. Detroit, however, would prove to be the bloodiest battle, with Governor of Michigan, Republican George Romney, sending in the National Guard, that yet failed to contain the situation until the President of the United States, after much dithering and pressures from both sides, felt compelled to send federal military forces in to crush the rioters. Tanks and soldiers manned with machine guns stood against the African American rioters, beating them to submission, images being broadcasted of the city burning, with tanks and machine guns fighting on the streets, as Americans tried to grip this wasn't some faraway nation, but their own country. The riot spread and two dozen cities would rise up alongside Detroit. In that city alone, more than 7,200 people were arrested.
In California, the heat had already begun even before Summer came. On May 2, two dozen armed members of the Black Panthers Party stormed into the California State Capitol while it was in session, causing an uproar throughout the nation. Feynman quickly became involved in the case to the highest degree as he was found hosting a group of eighth-graders at the Capitol Lawn, enthusiastically going about explaining them a concept of Physics and making them laugh in the process, as he was keen to do. Suddenly, they found themselves amidst a major security hazard as armed men stormed the Capitol.
Despite his security’s fierce push to take him inside for safety, Governor Feynman insisted on greeting the armed men who could not be disarmed by the security forces since they were not technically breaking any laws, having no concealed weapons on them. Although tightly guarded by his security, the Governor shook hands with some of the Black Panthers members and showed himself available to listen to their demands and answer them cordially. Although he couldn’t dissuade them from laying down their weapons, the protest didn’t harm anyone and the protesters left the building, if not quietly, at least feeling somewhat victorious. Although there were mixed reactions, the testament of his courage and the idea of him being there protecting the schoolchildren gave Feynman a boost of popularity as the true days of the Summer began.
The Summer of Love was, regardless of its name, a year-long event that dominated San Francisco through 1967, and spread throughout the world. It was the apogee of the hippie culture, with 100,000 adepts of the movement coming together in the neighbourhood of Haight-Ashbury. A Council had been organised to assist what was the unsustainable number of people going into the area, the Council of the Summer of Love, manned by local activitists who propped up a Free Store and a Free Clinic to assist the visitors, but still lacking many resources to provide adequate service to the massive incoming crowds.
It was a horde of drug-consuming, government-antagonising, anti-consumerist left-wing radicals, whose previous lesser activities had already caused the conservative backlash that had seen men as Goldwater or Reagan nearly elected. Now that a massive, unmanageable mass had effectively taken over a neighbourhood of San Francisco, this ‘hippie threat’ had become a reality in the minds of many. And there were similar bouts around the world. In Los Angeles alone 4000 people had massed by late April, in Monterey 60,000 people had gathered for the pop festival hosted there. In Manhattan, it was predicted 50,000 hippies would enter the city for the summer, and there were also festivals promoted through England.
In essence, it was a very large event that had turned the already antagonised college students into fully despised hippies, on the eyes of the conservative movement that is. The number of young people associating themselves to the movement grew greatly over the summer, confirming the conservative fears that spread like wildfire in the American household. Surprisingly, the movement, while being extremely pacifist and openly outspoken against the Vietnam War and militarism in general, attracted many military personnel from nearby bases, who would attend the festival in great numbers.
The counter-culture movement concerned those who were, to say the least, ingrained with the current culture, the mainstream politicians and the common citizens who saw their movement as foreign and as against the patriotic values they embraced. Although not as persecuting as the McCarthyites had been, there were many who frowned on the political behaviour they deemed ‘un-American’.
It was around that particular controversy that Governor Feynman was dragged in to the problems surrounding the Summer of Love. A liberal Governor with ties to the student community, the civil rights movement and a penchant to speak for them, he was quite popular among the hippie community, considering their general distaste for government. This admiration made him suspicious to the growing conservative motherland, whose ranks had not been among his voters last fall.
Those tensions boiled over when scandal appeared – Governor Feynman’s signature was found among that of other known American intellectuals and artists of world renown endorsing an anti-war advertisement by the radical British political activist Margaret Gardiner in
The Times.
They had been changing correspondence since early May, at which point Feynman, who until then although attentive to reportages was not fully aware of the Vietnam War developments, began researching and asking questions on the matter. His interest peaked with the contact with Gardiner, he spent a great part of his off-duty times in late spring and early summer studying the war thoroughly, reading many books on the subject and exchanging correspondence with authors and journalists on the matter.
Although most assumed Feynman would be mildly against the war, as proper of his stand in politics, his standing with the radical wing was a surprise that, combined with the accusations of cooperation with the hippies, made Feynman an attractive scandal for the media.
Although at first he resisted answering the questions being posed by the media, making him seem as a communist sympathiser and a pacifist, by the end of August he spoke before the press in Sacramento, as the exacerbation of drug usage among the festival goers and the deaths and violence associated with it were marking the beginning of the end for the Summer of Love.
“There has been a lot of talk the last few weeks about where it is I stand on the war being fought on Vietnam. It is my fault. I did sign the articles by Ms. Gardiner in
The Times, where she explained her position, backed by myself and other prominent Americans. I endorsed them then and I endorse them now.
That is not to say my position hasn’t changed. When I first received a letter from Ms. Gardiner asking me to endorse her project, I must confess that, like many of Americans, I was not fully aware of what is happening in Vietnam. I knew there is a war. I knew that young Americans, students of mine, sons of friends and family, were going there to fight. I knew some people were very against the idea of sending our young people there to fight. And I knew that there was no end in sight for this war.
That is not enough. As a scientist, as a professor I can tell you that, if one of my students defended a theory with only that knowledge, I would fail him and discredit him. I thought of answering Ms. Gardiner in that manner but, as a citizen and as a Governor, I found it my duty to be informed and take a stand on a position that matters so much, since it deals with the lives of our youth.
Thankfully, I found available to me the finest resources to make my research. There were many documents that enlightened my ignorant spirit around the nuances of the war and, more importantly, there were many kind and candid people who dared to help me in this quest. Some in California, some in Washington and I even had the pleasure of speaking with men stationed in Saigon.
It was after my research that I decided to sign the letter Ms. Gardiner meant to publish. And I hope I can read it out loud so that it is clear that I endorse this view and no other.
«We, citizens of the United States, who are deeply concerned over the war in Vietnam, wish to put it on record that we do not subscribe to the official view of our country and of yours, that Hanoi alone blocks the path to negotiations. On the contrary, there is considerable evidence which has been presented to our Government but which has never been answered by them, to show that escalation of the war by the United States has repeatedly destroyed the possibilities for negotiation.
We assure you that any expression of your horror of this shameful war – a war which is destroying those very values it claims to uphold – ought not to be regarded as anti-American but, rather, as support for that American which we love and of which we are proud. »
It is my belief that, in the strategy employed by our military, the possibilities for peace, which should be paramount, have been set aside for military convenience. As Americans, it is our duty to ensure that our nation pursues the establishment of peace, order and liberty in the world as ends to wage war upon. Otherwise, we are belligerent and betraying the very same qualities that have our families support our nation.
But, above all, it is my belief that to question the course of these actions and to ask for a strategy that has a peaceful end in sight for the war is not, as some of our more belligerent citizens claim, against the principles of the United States, but in their favour and that to uphold a will towards resolution is not, as they claim, anti-American, but that the very opposite is true and that the blind belligerency those citizens proclaim goes against the values we hold dearest.
It is in the best interests of America and of our fighting youth that a dialogue is kept open with Hanoi so that peace may be established as soon as possible and to have them return with the laurels of victory. It is more important yet to keep a dialogue open in America, and that no citizen is kept from talking or accused of treason when giving his constitutionally-protected opinion on the course our country should take.
Thank you.”
The speech was cordial but strong on its stand. While many disagreed with his approach, and continued to accuse him of treasonous activity, the fact was that the majority of Californians and Americans was satisfied with the clearing up of what was meant by the articles.
At that point, the scales were changing and already a great quantity of Americans believed that it was a mistake to remain involved in Vietnam. To them, the message of Feynman did no offence and actually helped strengthen their views. To those who still believed in the war, the vast majority could find solace in the cordial notes of the approach, while those less willing to do so, the true hawks, were already unfriendly to Feynman and his more liberal agenda.
Ultimately, the Summer of Love was a tiring but fruitful affair for Feynman whom, unbeknownst to him, had given his fist steps unto national and international politics by becoming a faint but nonetheless beacon for debate around the Vietnam War question.
