Obsolete but Preferable: The Role of Textbooks in the Modern Social Studies Classroom

Despite everything we’ve been led to believe over the past two decades, books have not completely disappeared from our society, nor our schools. Indeed, the world has rapidly moved in the direction of technological reliance at a seemingly infinitely higher rate since it entered the 2020s. This is especially true in educational settings, as teachers have begun to use a vast array of online tools, and many students across the country are more and more completing digital assignments. Yet, with all of this progression, texts themselves have not been completely phased out. No analyzation of the American education system can be generalized for every single school, let alone every single teacher. However, it is clear that the majority are still based on or at least reference some form of text. Still, this begs a question regarding the nature of the role that physical textbooks still play in the modern classroom, especially social studies ones considering so much of said subject is based on text interpretation. Ultimately, it is clear that textbooks generally are no longer the sole basis for classes’ entire curricula but are still used as valuable reference points. In addition, there has been a major shift away from traditional physical textbooks, and a move towards more differentiated options. 

To begin my research, I first looked into suggestions on how textbooks could continue to be useful tools. As my research isn’t catered towards one specific grade level, the article “A Content Analysis of Vocabulary Instruction in Social Studies Textbooks for Grades 4-8″ by Janis Harmon, Wanda Hedrick, and Elizabeth Fox from The Elementary School Journal proved a useful starting point. These authors posit that the real issue with the current usage of textbooks is not the book itself, but the way it is used. The primary alternative method of using textbooks regards vocabulary terms. Specifically, the authors claim that “effective practices for promoting vocabulary development stress the importance of instruction that affects comprehension, not just word knowledge alone” (Harmon, Hedrick, and Fox, 254). Thus, textbooks can’t be used to create simple repetition practices, they have to challenge the students in innovative ways which force them to exercise critical thinking skills about the matter at hand. Therefore, vocabulary terms are one of the most essential parts of a textbook, but there must be a dramatic shift away from how this device is being used at present, and how it has been used in the past.

The second article, and perhaps the most important I read, comes from the Georgia Educational Researcher and was written by two professors from Spelman College in Atlanta, Georgia, Dr. Amber Reed and Dr. Bailey Brown. Their article “Divergent Representations of Africa: A Qualitative Analysis of Georgia Social Studies Textbooks” explores the complexities of textbook usage in the deep American South, and how inherent biases towards various cultures is manifested in their content. In their research of Georgia’s public schools, they found that these issues are systemic and institutionalized. As such, they claim that “research also finds that educators are often ill-prepared to teach global perspectives in the social studies curriculum and that teachers’ biases and Eurocentric framework for teaching material can reproduce misconceptions about other countries” (Brown and Reed, 26). Thus, the biased nature of textbooks, at least in Georgia, is almost guaranteed for renewal as such misconceptions are carried down from one generation to the next. Therefore, there is likely little malicious intent in textbook bias, but failing to recognize it plays into the Eurocentric attitude that the American education system has long subscribed to. As such, this article doesn’t necessarily argue for doing away with textbooks altogether, but it does explain the need for a serious overhaul of the “traditional” methods they inspire.

The final article I referenced comes from the Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy. Written by Professors Sarah Matthew and Craig McGill, “Honestly, I Had a Very Strong Reaction to This Reading” contrasts to the aforementioned pieces by actually arguing in favor of moving away from traditional textbooks. They explore what the term “graphic” means in a literary context and how it can often be misconstrued. On the one hand, it can immediately act as a scare tactic many use to support banning certain titles as it assumes such content is either violent or pornographic. But in reality, “graphic” doesn’t have to imply any extreme at all, and at its most basic level just refers to the use of imagery or illustrations (Matthew and McGill, 433). As such, Matthew and McGill heavily advocate for the increased use of graphic novels as alternatives for traditional textbooks, arguing that they can bring a new perspective and encourage certain critical thinking skills not found otherwise. Not only that, but they also advocate for teaching banned material itself, in order to show students why titles are challenged, and what implications doing so holds. 

After doing my preliminary research into contemporary attitudes towards continuing textbook usage, I developed a two-pronged approach for my own research into this topic. The first prong involved transferring my findings from the articles I found into questions for three teachers I interviewed. While only three teachers’ opinions can be difficult to form conclusions upon, they are from different parts of New Jersey, and all teach at different levels. One teaches ninth and eleventh grade social studies at Ewing High School. Another teaches sixth grade ancient civilizations at Community Middle School in West Windsor. The final teaches sixth grade social studies at West Brook Middle School in Paramus. They were each asked the same five questions, three of which pertain to the above articles, and I have decided to retain their names in order to further encourage honesty in their answers. Moreover, they were not shown the data collected or previous teachers’ answers until after the interview was completed thereby ensuring autonomy in their responses. The five questions I asked these teachers were: overall, what do you believe the role of textbooks should be in the contemporary classroom; what kind of textbooks do you use, if any at all; do you believe textbook vocabulary terms can be beneficial if taught the right way; have you found that textbooks are generally more biased or unbiased; and how do you feel about teaching banned books, is it important that students are exposed to such material?

In contrast, the second prong focused on the student perspective. For this part of my research, I created a survey which I used to sample students in the class of the aforementioned teacher from Community Middle School. I was also able to obtain some responses from outside West Windsor from other students I work with, particularly in Byram and Stanhope in Sussex County. However, about 90% of the responses came from Community. As such, again I approached drawing blanket conclusions from this data with caution, but it still provides valuable insight into the direction at least this type of school is moving in. For the students I also asked five questions, inquiring about what type of texts are most appealing to them, which types they have used before, which types they believe would be most beneficial for them going forward, how positive an impact they believe textbooks have been on their education so far, and how strongly they believe textbooks can still play a positive role going forward.

Surprisingly to me, and with few exceptions, each teacher shared very similar answers to the five questions. The consensus seemed to be that textbooks should only act as complementary material to otherwise well-constructed lessons. Furthermore, you needn’t actively seek out textbooks for the niche purposes of vocabulary terms or just for the sake of teaching banned material. This can be done more organically, which is more beneficial to the fluidity of the unit at large. And textbooks, at least those in use in New Jersey, generally try to present information in unbiased ways, but as with any written material, biases do poke through. Hence why it is again important to not rely upon textbooks, or any one source for that matter, so heavily. Put most straightforwardly, the teachers I interviewed were in general agreement that textbooks can’t be the basis of an entire class but can still serve as one of many important resources for instruction or reference.

Similarly, the data I received from the students was not what I was expecting. In terms of what they found most appealing, graphic novels took about 1/3 of the responses. However, traditional textbooks achieved nearly the same number. Unsurprisingly, traditional textbooks were overwhelmingly the most used type of text, but eBooks fell not far behind, and graphic novels again took about 1/3 of the responses. Most surprising of all, traditional textbooks took the plurality of the responses for what type of text students believed would be most beneficial for them going forward, receiving about 40%. And finally, most of the responses for the final two questions fell somewhere in the middle, with zero responses indicating that they strongly disagreed, and 15% indicating that they strongly agreed. 

            The twenty-first century so far has seen a dramatic increase in reliance on technology and advancements in this field. And yet despite the seemingly resulting trend that physical textbooks have become obsolete, they can still play a role in the modern classroom. In completing my research, I have found that few have argued that such resources should be done away with entirely. In fact, many authors who have written on this subject have simply made suggestions for alternative practices. In addition, the teachers I spoke to were also generally supportive of continuing usage of textbooks so long as they do not dominate an entire class. Even students, who in general as an entire demographic have long been stereotyped as vehemently anti-textbook, seem not only willing, but happy to continue learning from them going forward. Again, it is important to acknowledge the small sample sizes used to conduct this study, and further research would have to be completed in order to make any type of generalization. But the general conclusion I draw from this project is that not only can textbooks still play a role in the modern classroom, but they must continue to be a commonly used resource.

The data I received both from the teacher interviews and the student surveys somewhat contradicted the information I found in the articles. First and foremost, it seems that the educators I talked to have few issues with the systematic bias in textbooks. They don’t negate its existence; rather they just see them as any other type of text which has to be approached with caution. They see the bias actually as useful, because any source is going to include it. Thus, it can be beneficial to have their students look for biases and point them out when they find them. The implication of their lack of hesitation in this regard seems to be that the era of fully textbook-based classes is just about over. A simple reliance on one textbook dooms students to a narrow view of the world, especially in social studies settings. Moreover, running your class as such is a dangerous reversal of the current trend which aims to facilitate critical thinking, rather than simple content knowledge.

Furthermore, continued textbook usage is completely acceptable, but it has to be supplemented with abundant material from other sources. And not only do students see continued textbook usage as necessary, but many even see traditional textbooks as having played a significant and even positive role in their education. Thus, while it is important to supplement traditional textbooks with other material, it seems we cannot be so extreme as to throw them out entirely. They serve as a familiar source of knowledge which many might feel lost without. So, to answer the initial question this research was based off of, textbooks can absolutely play an important and expansive role in the modern classroom. We just have to ensure that they are being used the right way and are not the only type of source students are exposed to. 

Brown, Bailey, and Reed, Amber. 2023. “Divergent Representations of Africa: A Qualitative Analysis of Georgia Social Studies Textbooks.” Georgia Educational Researcher 20 (2): 26–44. doi:10.20429/ger.2023.200202.  

Harmon, Janis M., Wanda B. Hedrick, and Elizabeth A. Fox. “A Content Analysis of Vocabulary Instruction in Social Studies Textbooks for Grades 4-8.” The Elementary School Journal 100, no. 3 (2000): 253–71. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1002154.

Mathews, Sarah A., and Craig M. McGill. 2022. “‘Honestly, I Had a Very Strong Reaction to This Reading’: Social Studies Pre‐Service Teachers’ Application of Literacy Frameworks While Engaging with a Graphic Textbook.” Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy 65 (5): 431–39. doi:10.1002/jaal.1224.

Personal Stories about the Impact of Climate Change

Changes in the global climate exacerbate climate hazards and amplify the risk of extreme weather disasters. Increases of air and water temperatures lead to rising sea levels, supercharged storms and higher wind speeds, more intense and prolonged droughts and wildfire seasons, heavier precipitation and flooding. The number of climate-related disasters has tripled in the last 30 years. The United Nations Environment Programme estimates that adapting to climate change and coping with damages will cost developing countries $140-300 billion per year by 2030.

Source: https://www.oxfam.org/en/5-natural-disasters-beg-climate-action#

An annual average of 21.5 million people were forcibly displaced each year by weather-related events – such as floods, storms, wildfires and droughts – between 2008 and 2016, according to the International Displacement Monitoring Centre. This figure reached a record 32.6 million in 2022. The International Environmental Partnership, an international thinktank, expects this number to surge. It predicts that 1.2 billion people could be displaced globally by 2050 due to climate change and natural disasters. Source: https://www.zurich.com/media/magazine/2022/there-could-be-1-2-billion-climate-refugees-by-2050-here-s-what-you-need-to-know

Source: Rethinking Schools

 “These are hard times for people like me who work on coffee farms. I’ve worked here in Sonsonate since I was a kid. I have done pretty much every job there is to do on this farm. There are a lot of problems now — pests, low prices for coffee beans — but the big one is climate change. It used to be that the rainy season would start in May. But with climate change, who knows? The rains sometime come early, and the coffee plants flower, but then the rain will stop and so things dry up. Sometimes the rains come late or don’t come at all. That leads to a terrible harvest. Forty years ago, this farm produced 4,000 tons of coffee. This year? It will produce about 300 tons. In the last 10 years in El Salvador, 80,000 people lost their jobs in the coffee industry. I guess I’m one of the lucky ones, because I still have a job, although it pays only about $30 a week. My daughter couldn’t find any work at all, other than trying to sell food on street corners. So in order to survive, she and her family joined one of the migrant caravans traveling to the United States. What else was she supposed to do? I’m old now, so cannot make the journey north, but if I was younger, I probably would. My friend, Reyna de Jesús López, who works on the coffee farm with me, paid to send her 12-year-old son to the United States. She says that sometimes he calls her to say that he wants to come home, but she tells him, “What are you going to do here? There are no opportunities for young people.” Things here have never been easy, but climate change made them worse. The government in the United States tells Salvadoran migrants to go home. But one of the main reasons migrants can’t go home is because of climate change — caused mostly by the rich countries, like the United States, with all their greenhouse gases.”

Source: Project Drawdown

I’m taking action on climate change solutions because I was made homeless three times by climate change, hurricanes hitting my island. So I feel it very personally. I am working on a project to restore the mangroves to a community called Water Key, which was a bone fishing destination. So we’re engaging with the community there, all of whom were also displaced by climate change. Hurricane Dorian in 2019. It is now 2024 and no one has been able to move back yet. They’re living on the main island of Grand Bahama. They go on the weekends to try to rebuild their homes. But we’re hoping now that when we plant thousands, hundreds of thousands of mangroves in and around that area that they will still be able to be a bone fishing destination and that those mangroves will grow. At the same time, the community will be able to move back to the island.

Source: Project Drawdown

“When I was growing up, we didn’t talk about climate change. We talked about global warming, the ice caps and polar bears. Everything changed for me when I moved to New Orleans, just a couple of days before hurricane Katrina hit. Hurricane Katrina was one of the deadliest hurricanes that made landfall in American history, killing over 1800 people. And it was also one of the most expensive disaster recovery efforts that we’ve had to undertake since then, things have only gotten worse. Our climate continues to get warmer and more unpredictable. We have stronger hurricanes, more wildfires, increased droughts and floods. The time to take action was really decades ago. The next best time to take action is now.”

Source: The Harvard Gazette

I’m a member of the Hoopa Valley Tribe in Northern California, and I live on the reservation, which is about an hour away from an actual Target or Costco, over two mountains. What’s special about the Hoopa tribe is that we’ve never stopped practicing our traditional ceremonies. I grew up in a culturally rich, matriarchal society. We have a woman’s coming-of-age ceremony to celebrate a woman’s coming into a leadership role in the community. We had a lot of women serving on the tribal council; my mom herself also served on the council. Our population is small: 2,000 people. And when I was younger, my family and other families used to rely a lot on natural resources. A lot of our food would come from the environment around us. But that slowly started to dwindle away as I got older because of climate change and the use of our waterways by big agricultural farms. Our water resources also decreased due to fires, and since our culture is so intertwined with our land and natural resources, it has become a lot harder to keep our culture. It is hard to make baskets or jewelry because natural resources are becoming scarce. For the younger generations, it has been hard to grow up without having access to those resources that can allow them to express themselves through culture and art. We see that playing out in a mental health crisis among students because of threats to their culture, which is being taken away.

Source: The Harvard Gazette

“I live on the north shore of Oahu, Hawaii, in a very small town called Kahuku. Our population is 2,000. We have one stoplight. We used to have a gas station; now it’s in the town over. Our sense of community identity is strong. As far as the impact of climate change in my community, I’ve seen the way beaches and landscapes have changed tremendously from when I was little to now. Native Hawaiians, and Indigenous folk everywhere, have a deep connection with the land and the water, and this is hard for other people to understand. For us, the land and water are living beings, sort of relatives that hold lots of stories that are so connected to our culture and identities. Hawaiian lives are deeply impacted by climate change and over-tourism, which is not sustainable and is also harmful to the environment. Indigenous people are forced to face the worst and most harmful impacts of climate change when we contribute the least to it.”

Source: The Harvard Gazette

“I grew up in Puerto Rico. In the past five years, we faced hurricanes, earthquakes, and COVID. There is no question that the worsening climate on our planet is making it more likely for natural disasters to occur, and I want to make clear the stark difference between the impact of climate change in the Global North and the Global South. What we underestimate, in the U.S. and the Global North, is how climate change worsens natural disasters. To us in the Global North, it means a couple more hurricanes, but for the Global South, where most developing countries are located, natural disasters are not ephemeral. They become significant; their gravity multiplies exponentially. Climate change is worse for the Global South because they are less able to recover from the increased volume and gravity of the impact of natural disasters. Puerto Rico was badly hit by Hurricane Maria five years ago, and people are still suffering to this day because of it. It is because of the catastrophic system failure that took place in the wake of Maria: All systems failed and became too weak to recover, and economically, it made it hard for the island to rebuild. Once the infrastructure is weakened, as well as its ability to recover, the island becomes more vulnerable to the next natural disaster. We just had Hurricane Fiona, which was a Category 1 hurricane, and we felt the damage as if it were Maria, which was Category 5.

Source: New York Times

“When the rain began to pour over Green Mountain, N.C., in late September, Alison Wisely kept a close eye on the puddles growing slowly outside her window. Hurricane Helene was churning across the American South, and Ms. Wisely, 42, and her fiancé, Knox Petrucci, 41, were hunkering at home with her two young sons. The house was hundreds of miles from any coastline. On the morning of Sept. 27, a nearby river overflowed, and catastrophe came quickly. Floodwaters rushed toward the couple and the children — Felix, 9, and Lucas, 7. In a frantic effort to escape, all four lost their lives. Their deaths represent only a small fraction of Helene’s terrible toll. The storm has killed more than 200 people, making it the deadliest tropical cyclone to strike the mainland United States since 2005.”

Source: Australian Climate Case

“My name is Emma. I’m sixteen years old and I live on the south coast of New South Wales. I’ve always been into nature and the environment. Growing up I used to get really upset when I saw a tree being cut down. Then we learned about climate change in year 7. I remember it being really scary – I thought the world was perfect but really it isn’t. I just thought the way we were living was fine but that was a real eye opener. Climate change is becoming part of our lives now and affecting us directly. I was here when the bushfires happened – it was New Year’s Eve and the smoke was coming from the south and the north. The smoke got thicker and thicker as the day went on. I remember looking at Gulaga and it was just glowing. Everyone was banding together in town and just waiting. Eventually we went home but we couldn’t do anything because the power was out. The next day when we woke up the sky was a dark red and the trees were black. It was surreal – I couldn’t tell what time it was. The wind kept changing direction – the Cobargo fires were coming towards us but we got lucky and the wind changed. Several times we evacuated to the golf course with all of our stuff until the threat had passed.”

Source: Australian Climate Case

“My clan is the crocodile clan – Saibai Koedal – on my father’s side and on my mother’s side I’m Fijian. My grandfather and his family left Saibai just after the war. He wouldn’t have called it climate migration, but a key reason for them leaving was that people’s gardens were starting to get inundated with salt water, making it harder to grow crops. He had the foresight to realize that if it got worse then Saibai wouldn’t be able to support us. People say ‘oh it was the 1940s’ but the Industrial Revolution was well underway and the climate was already changing. My family has been away from Saibai for more than 70 years. It’s definitely had an impact on how we use our language and practice our culture. The young boys in Seisia often say ‘one day I’ll get to go to the homeland’ even though we’re only a few islands away. We’re witnessing climate change happening here in Seisia now. We’re seeing more extreme weather and more intense storm surges. Elders say that it’s very different now to the old days. You can see the effects on the shape of the shoreline – the beach used to have a shallow gradient but storm surges and king tides have carved the sand into a steep slope.”

Source: Global Citizen

Lato K.Kenya: “As pastoralists in Kenya, we are experiencing long periods of drought and short but dangerous rain periods, which bring flooding. The drought causes starvation of our cattle and the rain drowns them.”

The Wildness Society has video interviews with five Americans whose lives were impacted by climate change. Source: https://www.wilderness.org/articles/blog/5-stories-people-impacted-climate-change-and-inspired-take-action

WaterAid has a feature on people impacted by climate change around Lake Chilwa in Malawi.      https://www.wateraid.org/uk/stories/climate-stories

Underground Railroad Sites in New York’s Southern Tier

Source[1] 

The Underground Railroad was a network of churches, safe houses and community centers that led thousands of people escaping slavery to freedom. Northern states like Pennsylvania played a major role in the progression of freedom, and the trail made several stops in New York, including the Southern Tier counties along the Pennsylvania border. Here are some of the local landmarks near Binghamton that played a role in the success of the Underground Railroad, including private homes and churches across the region.

This Whitney Point home was owned by George Seymore in the late 1850s and was a spot along the Underground Railroad network. During that time most people who lived in the area knew the Seymore home was being used to hide and assist escaped enslaved people. According to former Broome County historian Gerald Smith, the home was later converted into an antique shop called the Underground Antiques and eventually turned into a private residence. 

The Cyrus Gates Farmstead was once used as a sanctuary along the Underground Railroad. On 30 acres in Maine, Cyrus Gates’ home — referred to as “Gates’ white elephant” — was built in the 1850s by a New York City architect. It was added to the National Register of Historic Places in 1999. Gates was a cartographer and surveyor, as well as a vocal abolitionist. Up in the attic, the Gates home had an emergency hiding place. Tucked behind a hidden panel in the back of a cupboard, escaped slaves could crawl into a 10-by-20 foot secret room in the house’s south wing attic, crouching so as not to hit the four-foot-tall ceiling, when they needed to hide.

Members of Park Church, originally named the First Independent Congregational Church of Elmira, were active participants in the Underground Railroad. They included John W. Jones, an escaped slave who helped over 800 travel to freedom through Elmira and Jervis Langdon, a local financier who helped Frederick Douglass escape from slavery. The church offered shelter, provided food and finances, and took legal action against slavery. They also prepared a petition to officially record their stance as an anti-slavery church and in 1871, it became Park Church. In 2006, the church was added to the National Park Service’s Network to Freedom program. 

During the mid-19th century, the home of Dr. Stephen D. Hand stood at the site of the current Binghamton City Hall. After moving to Binghamton and starting a successful medical practice, he took an active role in the Underground Railroad. Hand opened his doors to those seeking freedom. His home was near two existing African American churches — the Bethel Church and the First Colored Methodist Episcopal Church — which created a trio of spots in close proximity offering help. The home was demolished in the 1960s and Binghamton City Hall took its place. The building has a plaque to recognize the significant role the Hand home placed in the Underground Railroad. 

The church, founded in 1838, is a stop on the Downtown Binghamton Freedom Trail, recognized for its role in the Underground Railroad. The historic marker at the site shares its history as originally the AME Zion Church, a site that was a place of worship and safe spot to rest and receive help while traveling. Rev. Jermain Loguen, director of the Underground Railroad in Syracuse, was also pastor at the church in the 1860s.


Tulsa Massacre was Erased from History

My partner Felicia Hirata, friends Judy and Ruben Stern, and I were discussing the movie Killers of the Flower Moon and conversation shifted to the 1921 Tulsa Massacre. Felicia, Ruben, and I are all retired New York City high school social studies teachers and we realized we had never taught about the massacre in class, and we were unsure of whether we even knew about it when we were teachers. It had effectively been erased from history.

As a high school teacher, I did introduce my students, almost all African American and Latinx, to post-World War 1 racist attacks on African Americans with the poem “If We Must Die” by Claude McKay that was first published in the July 1919 of The Liberator coupled with photographs and newspaper headlines of the 1919 Chicago race riot showing white mobs and police attacking Blacks in the street. The McKay poem is especially powerful and resonated with students because it is a call for resistance.

https://alansingerphd.medium.com/the-100th-anniversary-of-the-tulsa-race-massacre-5cee3a689f6f[1]

I now teach social studies methods at Hofstra University in suburban Long Island, New York. After our discussion of Killers of the Flower Moon and the Tulsa Massacre, I decided to review how the post-World War 1 race riots and the Tulsa massacre were covered in the textbooks I used as a high school teacher and in more recent editions used by teachers today, books my students will likely use when they become teachers, books that continue to minimize the role that race and racism played in American history.

Ruben and I both taught United States history at Franklin K. Lane High School in the 1980s using Lewis Todd and Merle Curti’s Triumph of the American Nation as our primary textbook. Chapter 27 “New Directions in American Life Changing Ways (1900-1920)” ignores race, in fact the book’s index does not include race or racism as a category (Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1986). After discussing World War 1, the authors skipped directly to the “Golden Twenties” where the post-war race riots were ignored. In a later chapter, “Decades in Contrast Changing ways (1920-1939),” “Black migration to the North,” “Disappointed hopes,” and “The riots of 1919” are briefly mentioned, but not what happened in Tulsa. Students learned from the book that “Frightened whites, convinced that black Americans were trying to threaten them and gain control, responded with more violence. Police forces, ill-equipped to deal with riots, usually sided with whites” (751). Perhaps even more disturbing than the omissions, is this justification offered for the white rioters.

I also used Thomas Bailey and David Kennedy, The American Pageant, 7th Edition (1983, D.C. Heath) with a college-level dual enrollment class. A section in Chapter 39, “The Politics of Boom and Bust, 1920-1932” titled “The Aftermath of War” includes a paragraph explaining that “Vicious race riots also rocked the Republic in years following the Great War . . . [I]n the immediate post-war period, blacks were brutally taught that the North was not a Promised land. A racial reign of terror descended on Chicago in the summer of 1919, leaving twenty-three blacks and fifteen whites dead. Clashes also inflamed Knoxville, Omaha, Washington, and other cities.” There was also no mention of 1921 and Tulsa massacre in this textbook. Unlike Todd and Curti, Bailey and Kennedy didn’t justify the behavior of the white rioters but by suggesting that these were somehow clashes between Blacks and whites, it takes the onus off white mobs killing African Americans and driving them out of housing and jobs.

Even Howard Zinn’s widely used A People’s History of the United States, first published in 1980 by Harper Collins and reissued most recently in 2015 by Harper Perennial, the most progressive history of the United States that I used as a reference, falls short. Zinn included the post-war strike wave but not the race riots in 1919 or the destruction of the Black community of Tulsa in 1921.

I read From Slavery to Freedom, A History of Negro Americans, 3rd edition by John Hope Franklin and Alfred A. Moss, Jr. (1969, Vintage) as an undergraduate at CCNY in a class on American Nego History during the 1968-1969 school year. Unfortunately, it did not have much influence on the American history curriculum.

In the 7th edition (published in 1994 by Knopf), Franklin and Moss have a chapter “Democracy Escapes” about conditions faced by African Americans in the United States in the post-World War 1 era after approximately 380,000 African Americans served in the army and about 200,000 were stationed in the European theater (346-360; Goldenberg, 2022). Despite welcoming parades in major American cities, The Crisis reported “This country of ours, despite all its better souls have done and dreamed, is yet a shameful land. It lynches . . . It disenfranchises its own citizens . . . It encourages ignorance . . .It steals from us . . . It insults us . . . We return. We return from fighting. We return fighting. Make way for Democracy! We saved it in France, and by the Great Jehovah, we will save it in the U.S.A., or know the reason why” (347).

Between June and December 1919, Red Summer, Franklin and Moss estimate there were twenty-five anti-Black race riots in American cities (349). The most serious riot was in Chicago where there were thirty-eight fatalities, over 500 reported injuries, and 1,000 families left homeless (350-351).  The book also briefly describes a “race war” in Tulsa, Oklahoma in June 1921 where nine whites and 21 blacks were killed.

On Long Island, New York, the most widely used United States history textbook is Holt McDougal’s The Americans by Gerald Danzer, Jorge Kor de Alva, Larry Krieger, Louis Wilson, and Nancy Woloch. The 2012 edition has two references to the post-World War I racial climate. A “Historical Spotlight” box in a chapter on “The First World War” explains that “Racial prejudice against African Americans in the North sometimes took violent forms. However, the 1917 East St. Louis riot seems to be excused because “White workers were furious over the hiring of African Americans as strikebreakers at a munitions plant.” The 1919 Chicago riot is also blamed on African Americans who “retaliated” when a Black teenager was stoned to death by “white bathers” after he swam into “water off a ‘white beach’” (600). A later chapter on the Harlem Renaissance mentions that “Northern cities in general had not welcomed the massive influx of African Americans. Tensions had escalated in the years prior to 1920, culminating in the summer of 1919, in approximately 25 urban race riots” (659). This section does not explain who was rioting and who was being attacked.

The 12th edition of The American Pageant (2002), widely used in Advanced Placement classes, added Lisabeth Cohen as a co-author. A section on “Workers in Wartime” included the “sudden appearance” of African Americans in “previously all-white areas sometimes sparked interracial violence,” equally blamed on Blacks and whites (711). A photograph of a victim of the 1919 Chicago race riot lying on the ground face down includes the caption “The policeman arrived too late to spare this victim from being pelted by stones from an angry mob” (711). From the picture, it is difficult to tell that the victim was African American and he is not identified as such in the caption, although the police standing above him are clearly white. Members of the mob and its victims are not identified, and the caption inaccurately suggests that white police were trying to protect the Black community. The 16th edition, published in 2015, notes in Chapter 32 “American Life in the Roaring Twenties, 1919-1929” that a “ new racial pride also blossomed in the northern black communities that burgeoned during and after the war,” but contained no mention of the race riots in 1919 or 1921 (749) and the chapter on “The Politics of Boom and Bust, 1920-1932” dropped the reference to “vicious race riots” in the 1983 edition.

The fourth edition of Making America (Houghton Mifflin, 2006) by Carol Berkin, Christopher Miller, Robert Cherny, and James Gormly references the East St. Louis and Tulsa riots in the index and race riots are paired with lynchings as examples of the conditions faced by returning Black veteran after World War 1. Unlike other texts, this book clearly identifies that “white mobs” were attacking African Americans in East St. Louis, Washington DC, Chicago, Omaha, Tulsa, and Detroit (694, 706, 732). It is also one of the few textbooks to list racism in the index.

America’s History 9th edition for the AP Course by James Henretta, Rebecca Edward, Eric Hunderaker and Robert Self, published by Bedford, Freeman & Worth in 2018, includes Chapter 21, “Unsettled Prosperity: From War to Depression, 1919-1932.” This chapter has a section titled “Racial Backlash.” White attacks on Black workers and communities are presented as a response to the Great Migration during World War I and competition for jobs and housing. The section references 1917 riots in East St. Louis, Illinois where white mobs “burned more than 300 black homes and murdered between 50 and 150 black men, women and children”; the Chicago race riot of 1919; the Rosewood, Florida Massacre; and the “horrific incident” in Tulsa. The Tulsa “incident” did receive significant coverage, about half of a paragraph. “Sensational, false reports of an alleged rape helped incite white mobs who resented growing black prosperity. Anger focused on the 8,000 residents of Tulsa’s prosperous Greenwood district, locally known as ‘the black Wall Street.’ The mobs – helped by National Guardsmen, who arrested African Americans who resisted – burned thirty-five blocks of Greenwood and killed several dozen people. The city’s leading paper acknowledged that ‘semi-organized bands of white men systematically applied the torch, while others shot on site men of color.’ It took a decade for black residents to rebuild Greenwood” (653-654).

The best coverage of the 1917-1921 anti-Black race riots is probably Eric Foner’s AP text Give Me Liberty (6th edition, Norton). Chapter 19 “Safe for Democracy: The United States and World War I,” has a section on “Racial Violence, North and South.” It reports on the East St. Louis and Chicago attacks by white mobs on Black workers and communities, lynchings in the South targeting returning Black war veterans, a bloody attack on striking Black sharecroppers in Arkansas, and Tulsa. Foner describes Tulsa as “The worst race riot in American history . . . when more than 300 blacks were killed and over 10,000 left homeless after a white mob, including police and National Guardsmen, burned an all-black section of the city to the ground. The Tulsa riot erupted after s group of black veterans tried to prevent the lynching of a youth who had accidently tripped and fallen on a white female elevator operator, causing rumors of rape to sweep the city” (766).

Over one hundred years after the Tulsa Massacre, the United States needs to stop pretending that racism ended with the American Civil War and take steps to address the lingering impact of slavery and systemic racism on American society. An important step would be to ensure that high school students learn about events from the past that continue to shape the present.


Isolationism: FDR’s Immigration Crisis 

Auschwitz, Bergen-Belsen, Belzec, and Ravensbrück. Think of an ice-cold place with no hope of getting out of your worst nightmare. These were some of the most well-known labor camps during World War 2 in Germany and Poland. They were built to target many different groups, like Jehovah’s witnesses, gypsies, and homosexuals. The biggest group targeted was the Jewish population. Hitler’s goal with building these labor camps was to relocate as many Jewish people as possible and make them work to death or just to kill them, these camps were meant for mass murder. There is a lot of hidden history that is not discussed about the Holocaust.

There was a lot of blame going around and new power coming into place that America was not fully aware of because they focused on being stable after the Great Depression. In Europe tensions rose and Germany became very angry about the outcome of World War 1. Germany believed the repercussion from World War I they had gotten was not fair.  Hitler blamed the Jewish population for their loss in World War 1 and thought that they had to pay for their betrayal to the German people. Thus, sparked the idea for Hitler to create labor camps to torture and destroy the Jewish population. While the labor camps were being built there were things going on beforehand that sparked antisemitism in Germany. They had to go around wearing the star of David on all their clothing, they couldn’t go to public schools just Jewish schools, couldn’t go to the movies or to certain restaurants and a lot of Jewish business owners lost their businesses from German soldiers trashing it and shutting them down all because they were Jewish. 

Gas chambers were the kiss of death. Jews and others who made it farther would get tattoos. Jews had no name anymore and just were referred to as a number. All hair would be cut off and then would be told to change into the same striped outfits and sent to their barracks and from there they would be sent to work all day and every day with little to no food. One wrong move and anyone could be killed. Reapings would happen as well. Those who were picked were sent to either different camps or to the gas chambers to be killed. This was kept secret in Europe and only thought to be rumors for many years. Around 6 million lives were lost. 

            FDR was a great leader in so many ways and did want to help the country and the people of the United States out first and foremost. He wanted to get the country out of the Great Depression and make sure that the people were being taken care of. However, there were split sides on what the United States should have been doing during this time. Historians are still debating this topic to this day and disagree with the isolationist mindsets that were put into place and FDR should have gotten involved and helped the Jewish population more. Saying he should have done what he wanted regardless of the backlash he would have gotten from the people. The isolationist mindset and closed-door policies has been seen as something that ruined the United States because in 1941 Japan had conducted a surprise attack on Pearl Harbor. That created other countries to have animosity towards the United States. Pearl Harbor ended up being the turning point for the United States to get involved in the war, leading to all of those closed-door policies to go out of the window. America was finally waking up and realizing what was going on outside of the country. 

The public loved FDR. He had a great relationship with the country because they had felt like they truly knew him. This starts with his fireside chats where the country was able to listen to him and what he wanted to do for the American people. While he was their president there was his hominess about him where he became more than a president to them.  The people saw how FDR had a helping hand in the reason the country got out of the Great Depression because of his New Deal policy. The New Deal was a domestic program between 1933-1939 which aimed to provide relief and reform the people of the country.

So many lives were lost. Lives were lost because of leaders not believing the rumors of the labor camps, but also because of the restraints put on the immigration policies and visas that would have helped the immigrants trying to get into the country.  Policies have to get passed through many different levels of the government because of the checks and balances system so FDR isn’t the main source of the issue, it was the government as a whole. While the borders had been closed and not as open for quite some time, the decision to close the border angered immigrants who greatly needed help.. There was a genocide happening in Europe because of Nazi regime and the antisemitism running through Germany. America had a lot of difficult decisions to make when it came to policies and deciding what they wanted to do with the immigrants, specifically the Jewish population. America wants to be neutral, and the Jewish population was not something the country was prioritizing. From another entry that was written by FDR he states “I have no intention in getting into a war with Germany. American will not enter. (343) There was no way that FDR was going to allow American to assist with anything including with the immigrants.  The US turned an eye and the immigrants had to then go back to their countries they were trying to leave. Many went into hiding and others were captured and sent to different places, whether it be different countries or a labor camp. This did not just affect the Jewish population, it affected so many immigrants from all over and while the Holocaust as a whole killed around 13 million innocent lives, 6 million of which were Jewish men, women and children. 

At this point the country was torn on what to do. There were some groups that wanted to just get involved in the war because they didn’t want anything to happen to us because we were staying out and cutting ties with other countries. Yet there were the other groups that wanted nothing to do with the war because it was on European soil and did not concern the US in any way.  Due to this split there were discussions being had in Congress over what to do with these sets of Neutrality acts that were rolled out and how to rethink the mindsets of the isolationist. 

After the attack on Pearl Harbor it was like the United States woke up. The Japanese had bombed America’s soil and the people were shocked and distraught. This is what isolationist mindsets do, they had created enemies because with these policies the US was cutting ties with allies and countries had been trading with which was going to create conflict. We never truly had any issues with Japan until all of this happened. The immigration policies after the attack got even tighter than they were before. They truly didn’t want anyone, no matter where they were coming from, to come in and that showed because of the way they were treating the Japanese American groups in the country. However, the containment mindset and isolationism changed completely after the attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941. The people were angry; they wanted everyone who was on the axis side to pay for what they had just done to us, so America joined the allied powers and in 1941 America was officially a part of the war. 

The United States was involved in the war and helping out the Allied powers, men and women were being a part of the war being nurses and taking over the jobs that men were doing and in ways being a part of the war was an eye opening for what women’s roles were like showing women can do just as much as men could do. The American citizens started to speak out more about how they were feeling about the policies already in place and in the novel America Between The Wars there is a letter that gets discussed about how the American families are feeling during his time of presidency, this section shows the side of the American families that want nothing to do with the war, it states“ Dear Mr. President, my wife and I have just heard your speech over the radio, I can not refrain from expressing our deepest appreciation for your state will do everything to keep this country neutral.”(214) This was what the American citizens were thinking; however, being isolated was the wrong move for this country even though the leaders and some of the public agreed to just be focused on the country but in the end the country got attacked by enemies. The isolationism did bring harm to the country and didn’t truly help us. It made the country look weak and made the people feel divided because if the country had not been  isolated could Pearl Harbor have been prevented. While that is a question historians will never truly know it shows FDR should have listened to his heart. FDR should have focused on the people like he did but not in a containment isolationist mindset where certain events might have been avoided. 

Overall, FDR did a lot of good for the people of the country. Did he do the same for immigrants that wanted to come into the country or for the immigrants already in the country?  That is questionable. FDR did not treat the Japanese American immigrants in America right after that attack on Pearl Harbor and FDR changing his immigration quotas and rejecting the Jewish population into the country was not seen as a good move. There will always been good and bad things that any president will do but in this case things could have been different and prevented if he did what he wanted to do and stopped listening to mixed opinions of the public and his cabinet members and because of these policies and the split down the middle this caused a lot of antisemitism and hatred in the country to the Japanese Americans and to the Jewish population that were already here and or the ones who were trying to come in. 

Antisemitism is all too well known throughout the world. Antisemitism is something that has been seen for centuries, the meaning of antisemitism is to be hostile or prejudiced against Jewish people, this has dated back to ancient times but became more seen during the time when Hitler was the dictator of Nazi Germany. The Nazi’s were corrupting the youth and they were being taught how to spot a Jew based on their eyes and hair color, their nose side, how their skull lined up etc. The antisemitism that was happening in Germany would later on during the war spread to the United States in a different way.  As mentioned before, it was antisemitism was always around but because of the increase in hate crimes and antisemitism, other countries were seeing what was really going on.

The Jewish population is one of the groups throughout history that have been blamed and have suffered for far too long. Hitlers building of the labor camps was a genocide and a way to try and erase them for good. FDR and the American population had heard word about these labor camps that were built out in Germany and Poland but had just thought they were rumors. Over in the United States, immigrants had always been coming in for quite some time from all over the world for a fresh start for their families and at the time we were a very friendly and welcoming country when it came to these matters. This had stopped for a while and had been tightened during World War I. When the Great Depression began and people were laid off from their jobs and couldn’t afford anything for their families, their outlooks on immigration started to shift. The people of the United States started to think it wasn’t fair that there were all of these immigrants coming into the country and because they had just suffered through a Depression where they could hardly afford anything that the immigrants should either go somewhere else or that America should be going from open door to a closed-door policy with self-containment and isolationism. 

From that moment on when FDR listened to the majority of the public to become self-contained and isolated matters started to get worse from the Jewish population trying to come into the country and the Jewish population that was already here in the states before the policies were put into place. Historian Breitman who has done a lot research specifically when it comes to the Holocaust and the efforts FDR had states “FDR knew that many Americans held prejudicial views of the Jews.”(5) Breitman has done a lot of research through his book to be able to make a statement like this. There were protests before WW2 was happening towards immigrants and the Jewish population because of fear. . There was an argument made my Breitman stating “ Even if FDR has been more willing to override domestic  opposition and twist arms abroad, he could not have stopped the Nazi’s in the mass murder of about six million Jews.”(5) to make this point is saying that nothing was going to change regardless of the United States changing their quotas and foreign policies to now not allowing them in wouldn’t change anything. There was nothing that could have happened from these events and issues from happening. 

Congress at that point was getting very frustrated. They were seeing the reactions from FDR and the people of the US. There was craziness because emotions were all over the place. In Texas the governor had reported “Efforts to expand Jewish immigration, he said had created a terrible anti-semetic sentiment throughout the country which might break into riots if his bills go through.”(150) The people were getting very vocal about their feelings towards immigration. FDR made a case to congress about their concerns and stated “ This would be a divide with the American people and add to widespread perceptions at home and abroad that Jews had manipulated the policies.”(207) Whether Congress believed what FDR had to say is still a mystery however, what FDR had to say about the American people  was something that was already going through the American people’s minds. 

When the rumors were going around about the labor camps in Europe the people wanted nothing to do with. The public didn’t believe that in Europe there could possibly be any chance of a genocide to a specific group of people. FDR had heard wind of these rumors as any leader would have during this time and states in one of his letters to his Secretary of State “ I do not favor American participation over this matter.”(55) The fact he was getting wind of this and still didn’t want to believe it either and was listening to the American people was an outright shock. FDR seemed to be brushing these rumors away and just wanted to continue to only focus on his isolationism and being neutral during this war.

While the Jewish population was living in fear not only in Germany, they had come to fear the United States. The Jewish population had thought the states would be a safe place for them to come to but when they were turned away because FDR and his committee wanted to change his foreign immigration policies that all changed. The Jewish population was happy for what FDR had done for them, they felt like they were finally able to escape the troubles they were having with the Nazi’s slowly growing to have power. However, once World War II had started those policies changed drastically. Some of those policies were not in place anymore or changed significantly. Numbers were cut by over half and so many Jewish families were sent back to Germany at the start of the war and taken to the labor camps or just killed on the spot for trying to escape. In some ways the United States did such a disservice to the Jewish population They lost all of their clothes, jewelry, houses and worst of all their identity, they were not humans anymore according to the Nazi’s.  So many of the Jewish population were killed or died of illness in those labor camps and the antisemitism that was in Germany had spread to the United States. 

The people of the United States were calling the Jewish population spies to the Nazi government thinking they wanted us to get involved in the war. That was not the case. They wanted a safe place to live where they didn’t have to fear for their lives. Some were sent back to Germany. The people did not want to believe that a genocide towards the Jews were actually happening and they wanted to live in their own happy bubble. The government did nothing to stop the hatred that had spread to the United States because it was not their issue. A little later on in the war when the Americans were on Europe soil and came across a strange looking area in the middle of nowhere was when they realized what they had just stumbled upon. The United States had to do something about this, so they sent word back to the United States and FDR declared that all of the labor camps be liberated. The anger and sadness that got back to the American people and their views on the Jewish population changed drastically. 

Breitman, Richard, and Allan J Lichtman. 2014. FDR and the Jews. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Belknap Press Of Harvard University Press.

Wayne, Cole.  1983. Roosevelt & the Isolationists, 1932-45. Lincoln : University of Nebraska Press.

Robert, Divine A. 1969. Roosevelt and World War II. Johns Hopkins University Press.

Bernard, Fay. 1972. Roosevelt and His America.

Rafael,Medoff. 2009. Blowing the Whistle on Genocide : Josiah E. Dubois, Jr. And the Struggle for a U.S. Response to the Holocaust. West Lafayette, Ind: Purdue University Press.

Welky, David, 2012. America between the Wars, 1919-1941: A Documentary Reader. Malden, Mass.: Wiley-Blackwell. Harrap, and Elliot Roosevelt, The Roosevelt Letters Volume 3; 1928-1945.

Governed by Despots: John Swanson Jacobs Chronicles Enslavement and Resistance

(reprinted with permission from New York Almanack (https://www.newyorkalmanack.com/2024/12/john-swanson-jacobs-enslavement/)

The University of Chicago Press recently published a unique account of an escape from enslavement in North Carolina decades before the Civil War. The United States Governed by Six Hundred Thousand Despots (2024) by John Swanson Jacobs tells of his escape from enslavement by North Carolina plantation owner and Congressional Representative Samuel Sawyer in 1838 while he and the slaveholder were in transit through the City of New York. Jacobs eventually made it to Australia where his story was published serially in 1855 by the Sydney Empire. It was later republished in 1861 in London, UK under the title “A True Tale of Slavery” by The Leisure Hour: A Family Journal of Instruction and Recreation. The 1861 version of Jacob’s story is available online at the website Documenting the American South.

John Swanson Jacobs was born in 1815 in Edenton, North Carolina, the younger brother of his better-known sister Harriet Jacobs, author of Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl (1861). Harriet Jacobs originally published her book under the pseudonym Linda Brent, possibly to protect those who remained enslaved at home. In the book she referred to her brother John as “William” and Samuel Sawyer, the white father of her two children who “owned” both them and John, as “Mr. Sands.” John Swanson Jacobs, safely in Australia, published under his own name.

In 1838, Sawyer traveled north because he and his fiancé planned to be married in Chicago, Illinois where she had family. He was able to bring an enslaved John Swanson Jacobs with him to New York State because although slavery had been abolished there in 1828, state law permitted enslavers visiting or residing in New York part-time to maintain slaves within their households for up to nine months. This statute was not repealed until 1841.

The following is an excerpt from chapter 5 of A TRUE TALE OF SLAVERY that was published in The Leisure Hour: A Family Journal of Instruction and Recreation (No. 478–February 21, 1861). In this excerpt, Jahn Swanson Jacobs describes his escape from slavery while in New York City.

“THE latter end of the third year after I was sold, my master was elected Member of Congress. I was ordered to get ready for Washington . . .  After my master had been there a short time, he went to board with Mrs. P—-, who had two young nieces here, to one of whom he was soon engaged to be married. As good luck would have it, this young lady had a sister living in Chicago, and no place would suit her like that to get married in . . . Everything was ready, and the hoped-for time came. He took his intended, and off we started for the West. When we were taking the boat at Baltimore for Philadelphia, he came up to me and said, “Call me Mr. Sawyer; and if anybody asks you who you are, and where you are going, tell them that you are a free man, and hired by me.”

We stopped two or three days at the Niagara Falls; from thence we went to Buffalo, and took the boat for Chicago; Mr. Sawyer had been here but a few days before he was taken sick. In five weeks from the time of his arrival here, he was married and ready to leave for home. On our return, we went into Canada. Here I wanted to leave him, but there was my sister and a friend of mine at home in slavery . . . I tried to get a seaman’s protection from the English Custom-house, but could not without swearing to a lie, which I did not feel disposed to do.

We left here for New York, where we stopped three or four days. I went to see some of my old friends from home, who I knew were living there. I told them that I wanted their advice. They knew me, they knew my master, and they knew my friends also. “Now tell me my duty,” said I. The answer was a very natural one, “Look out for yourself first.” I weighed the matter in my mind, and found the balance in favour of stopping. If I returned along with my master, I could do my sister no good, and could see no further chance of my own escape. I then set myself to work to get my clothes out of the Astor House Hotel, where we were stopping; I brought them out in small parcels, as if to be washed. This job being done, the next thing was to get my trunk to put them in. I went to Mr. Johnson’s shop, which was in sight of the Astor House Hotel, and told him that I wanted to get my trunk repaired.

The next morning I took my trunk in my hand with me: when I went down, whom should I see at the foot of the steps but Mr. Sawyer? I walked up to him, and showed him a rip in the top of the trunk, opening it at the same time that he might see that I was not running off. He told me that I could change it, or get a new one if I liked. I thanked him, and told him we were very near home now, and with a little repair the old one would do. At this we parted. I got a friend to call and get my trunk, and pack up my things for me, that I might be able to get them at any minute. Mr. Sawyer told me to get everything of his in, and be ready to leave for home the next day. I went to all the places where I had carried anything of his, and where they were not done, I got their cards and left word for them to be ready by the next morning. What I had got were packed in his trunk; what I had not been able to get, there were the cards for them in his room.

They dine at the Astor at three o’clock; they leave the room at four o’clock; at half-past four o’clock I was to be on board the boat for Providence. Being unable to write myself at that time, and unwilling to leave him in suspense, I got a friend to write as follows: — “Sir–I have left you, not to return; when I have got settled, I will give you further satisfaction. No longer yours, JOHN S. JACOB.”

This note was to be put into the post-office in time for him to get it the next morning. I waited on him and his wife at dinner. As the town clock struck four, I left the room. I then went through to New Bedford, where I stopped for a few months . . . The lawyer I have quite a friendly feeling for, and would be pleased to meet him as a countryman and a brother, but not as a master.”

Once free, John Swanson Jacobs moved to New England where he became an active abolitionist. His efforts took him to Rochester, New York and vicinity on a number of occasions and to New York City at least three times, in May 1849, October 1850, and July 1862. On May 11, 1849, the New York Herald printed an account of a speech by Jacobs at an American Anti-Slavery Society meeting where he called on attendees to make it “disreputable” for people who claimed to be Christians to hold other people in bondage. According to North Star on October 24, 1850, Jacobs spoke in New York City calling for active resistance to fugitive slave laws following the seizure of James “Hamlet” Hamilton by slavecatchers and on July 28, 1862, New York Independent reported on an interview with Jacobs where he recounted his experience as a cook on a British ship, with the support of British authorities in the Bahamas, that was attempting to enter the port of Charleston, South Carolina in violation of the federal blockade of Southern ports (252-258). Excerpts from these articles follow.

“A slaveholder named Skinner, who was a skinner in every sense of the word, was in the habit of coming every year, to visit his brother, Re. Dr. Skinner, who . . . lived at 160 Green[e] street; and yet the baby-stealing, women-whipping tyrant never received a rebuke from his reverend brother, at whose table he sat . . . If anyone asked him what must be done to abolish slavery, his answer was, that it must cease to be respectable. They must make it disreputable, and then slaveholders would be ashamed of it . . . If they had less of religion, and more of Christianity, it would be all for the better” (252-254).

“My colored brethren, if you have not sword, I say to you, sell your garments and buy one . . . I would, my friends, advise you to show a front to our tyrants, and arm yourselves; aye, I would advise the women to have their knives too . . . I advise you to trample on this bill, and I further advise you to let us go on immediately, and act like men” (256).

“[A] very intelligent colored man, formerly a slave in North Carolina, but recently for several years a resident of England, called at our office the other day, and related facts showing that British vessels are stilled engaged in running our blockade, and that the British officials in the Bahamas are, if possible, more inimical to our Union than are the same class of people at home . . . He shipped as a cook on board the steamship Lloyds, at London . . . ‘for Havana and any of the West Indies Islands’ . . . the captain (Smith) announced to the crew that he designed to run the blockade before Charleston, and offered three months pay extra to such as would remain with the ship . . . Jacobs refused to go to Charleston at any price whatever, and demanded, what was his undoubted right, that he be sent home to London. After various efforts on the part of Capt. Smith to indure (sic) Jacobs to either go to Charleston or to settle and sign a satisfaction, he attempted coercion. He had Jacobs taken before a police magistrate to answer the charge of having deserted the ship . . . The law was all on the side of Jacobs, but the public sentiment of Nassau was so strongly against him, and in favor of the unlawful and contraband trade with the Rebels” (257-258).

American Exceptionalism’s Downward Trek: Declining Victory Culture in the 1990s Observed Through the Star Trek Franchise

On January 3, 1993, the first episode of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine began with the Federation defeat at the Battle of Wolf 359. Captain Jean Luc Picard of the USS Enterprise had been captured and assimilated into the Borg Collective as Locutus of Borg and was forced to lead the battle against the Federation.[1] A fleet of Federation ships, including the USS Saratoga, attempted to engage Locutus in battle, but were quickly overpowered. First officer Benjamin Sisko assumed command of the Saratoga after the captain and majority of the bridge crew were killed and the ship was disabled. Sisko issued the order to abandon ship and went to help his wife and child. He located them in the remains of their living quarters buried under rubble; he was able to rescue his son, but his wife was already dead. Another officer forced him to leave her body behind and board an escape shuttle. As the scene fades, Sisko holds his unconscious son as he watches the Saratoga explode with his wife’s body still on board.[2]

Star Trek: Deep Space Nine (1993-1999) presented a vastly different conceptualization of the future than the one Gene Roddenberry originally created in the 1960s series Star Trek: The Original Series (1966-1969).[3]Roddenberry intended to portray a hopeful future where mankind was able to move past conflict and explore the galaxy.[4] However, as the political atmosphere of the United States changed over time, the themes of the various series in the Star Trek franchise changed as well, especially after Roddenberry’s death in 1991. As a result of political and social turmoil in the 1990s, there was a disillusionment with the United States as an institution that culminated in a concurrent decrease in American exceptionalism and victory culture reflected through contemporary popular media. The concept of American exceptionalism refers to the celebratory ideology that Americans perceive the United States as inherently extraordinary. This is the result of its democratic nature and the unique “American identity” that can be claimed across race, class, and gender; factors that subsequentially makes it fundamentally superior to other nations.[5] One way that this dogma is reflected in American society is through the presence of victory culture, which reflects a glorified exceptionalist view of the nation in order to highlight American superiority and disseminate patriotic values to the populace. The development of an increasingly cynical view of America can be observed by charting and comparing Star Trek: Deep Space Nine with Star Trek: The Original Series in regard to the themes and plotlines of each series and how these changes reflect evolving responses to sociopolitical conflict and violence in the United States in the 1960s and 1990s respectively.[6]

The increased polarization in the United States in the late twentieth and early twenty first centuries is a highly contentious and relevant topic for the current political climate in America. Kevin M. Kruz and Julian E. Zelizer traced the increasing divide of American society between 1974 and 2019 in their book Fault Lines: A History of the United States Since 1974.[7]They determined that economic, racial, political, and gender and sexual divisions are factors of the American experience which have exacerbated the “fault lines” of the United States by tracing their influence on major events between 1974 and 2019. The influence of these factors on American society increased significantly after the 1960s and 1970s because of the institutionalization of polarized ideologies through targeted legislation and widespread access to popular media. This structural division was particularly exacerbated by the end of the Cold War through the development of more accessible and increasingly partisan media news networks such as MSNBC, Fox News, and CNN, which compounded the preexisting divides among the American populace.

Another significant historical factor to consider when analyzing popular opinion through a television show is the influence of current events on the political climate, and how views of those events are reflected through media. Tom Engelhardt detailed the rise and fall of victory culture and American exceptionalism in the United States in his book The End of Victory Culture: Cold War America and the Disillusioning of a Generation.[8]He claimed that victory culture, Engelhardt’s term for the propensity of American media and culture to highlight the nation’s military triumphs, gradually ended between the years 1945 and 1975. This was due to the memory of the United States’s actions during the Second World War, specifically the deployment of two atomic bombs onto a surrendering Japan, and the end of the unpopular Vietnam War. As a result, the United States decreasingly viewed conflict as a motivating force and congruently perceived war in a negative light. This was further exacerbated by the end of the Cold War through the loss of a unifying common enemy for the United States that Engelhardt, similarly to Kruze and Zelizer, claimed was critical for the collective victory culture-based American identity.

Analysis of the impact of the Cold War on American society is extensive, and many historians have documented its effect on different forms of film-based media, such as television and movies. Historians like Thomas Doherty, Jim Cullen, and Bryn Upton examined the impact of the Cold War on American film and television, independently demonstrating how contemporary events influenced cinematic themes. In his book Cold War, Cool Medium: Television, McCarthyism, and American Culture Doherty highlighted the influence of television on American society as a result of its increased presence in the majority of American households in the 1950s.[9] Additionally, he refuted common misconceptions regarding the connection between McCarthyism and Cold War era television, ultimately demonstrating that television resulted in social resistance which helped to make the United States a more inclusive place, in addition to aiding in the end of McCarthy’s policies, through the portrayal of an inclusive society.[10] Cullen wrote From Memory to History: Television Versions of the Twentieth Century where he examined how historical shows from the past half a century portrayed earlier decades as a way to understand the time they were created.[11] He determined that the majority of television shows function as interpretations of events, and episodes can be used as “artifacts” that are representative of when they were written to understand the past. Additionally, Upton wrote Hollywood at the End of the Cold War: Signs of Cinematic Change, where he compared pre and post-Cold War films with analogous themes, intending to understand how their “interpretive framework” was influenced by the culture of the period.[12] Similarly to Engelhardt, Upton determined that in the 1980s there was a negative shift in the United States’ perception of themselves after the end of the Vietnam War, which was further exacerbated by the loss of a common enemy with the end of the Cold War. This meant that the United States struggled to develop a new interpretive framework without the presence of the Cold War and a common external enemy such as the Soviet Union. He asserted that the end of the Cold War resulted in altered perception of concepts like heroism and villainy, where binary characters with simple motivations that reflect, or contrast, American values, evolved to become more complex with more detailed backstories and intentions.[13]

While there has been much written about the influences of current events on film before and after the end of the Cold War, there is a gap in general 1990s historical scholarship. The goal of this paper is to examine evolving public perception of the United States as an institution through comparative analysis of diminishing victory culture in Star Trek: Deep Space Nine in relation to Star Trek: The Original Series, in order to determine how American exceptionalism decreased in response to changing political landscapes and major historical events of the decade. While Englehardt argues that victory culture is depicted through media portraying American military triumph, this paper will demonstrate that victory culture is the medium used to disseminate American exceptionalist messages through cinematic plot regarding all perceived accomplishments of the United States in addition to militaristic triumphs. Furthermore, it will evaluate why the hopeful view of the future in the 1960s became significantly less optimistic in the 1990s, explore how public opinion was reflected in the Star Trek franchise, and analyze the role that televised media played in social commentary during the second half of the 20th century. In its conclusion, this paper will also provide pedagogical suggestions for social studies educators on ways they can incorporate science fiction media into the classroom using the analysis in this paper, given the educational practice of utilizing film to engage students as a result of their accessibility and engaging nature.[14]

The 1960s were characterized by perpetual social upheaval and political conflict that stemmed from the end of the Second World War and the beginning of the Cold War in the 1940s. This was paralleled by the resulting foreign and domestic tensions of the Cold War as the United States government waged an ideological conflict against communism through the Vietnam War in the late 1960s and early 1970s, in addition to a war of mutual destruction with the Soviet Union until its collapse in 1991. During the Reagan Administration in the 1980s, conflict between Republicans and Democrats increased exponentially in response to the revitalization of the conservative base and a heightened focus on moral politics that subsequentially amplified patriotism throughout the United States.[15] This increased focus on morality culminated in the 1990s culture wars, where the Clinton Administration and the conservative base clashed over moral and values based politics.[16] Additionally, the expanding involvement of the United States military in the affairs of foreign nations and increasing instances of foreign and domestic terrorism at the end of the 20th century exacerbated tensions that were reflected in popular media of the time. As a result, social discord and political fearmongering characterized by heightened sociopolitical conflict and violence was amplified in the 1990s relative to the 1960s.

Since the founding of the United States, there has been an ongoing conflict over the amount of power that the federal government should be able to exert over the individual states and citizens. This conflict was exacerbated in the twentieth century following the implementation of the New Deal, resulting in an ongoing ideological dispute over the responsibility of the United States government to provide welfare assistance to its citizens through a federal social safety net after the pervasive homelessness and poverty experienced during the Great Depression.[17] An additional societal challenge of the late twentieth century was combating high crime rates seen in inner cities that arose in combination with substantial poverty, resulting in a mass incarceration crisis caused by 1960s legislation which disproportionally targeted people of color.[18] This was accomplished through the criminalization of urban spaces through legislation designed to incarcerate minority populations through drug-based crimes that resulted in the relocation of African Americans from urban cities to rural prisons, culminating in a conservative shift during the post-war period. Another social concern of this time was the Johnson Administration’s War on Poverty in response to the pervasive poverty rates in the United States. Moreover the 1980s Reagan era caricature of the “welfare” queen created a negative stereotype that targeted and incarcerated primarily African American women who were suspected of committing welfare fraud, further increasing mass incarceration rates.[19] Furthermore, expedited deinstitutionalization of mental hospitals in the 1990s resulted in the imprisonment of a disproportionate number of people with mental illness who could not access proper psychiatric care in the United States.[20] In response to the culture wars of the 1990s, the Clinton Administration expanded on legislation that limited access to government welfare programs in addition to laws that increased mass incarceration for drug crimes that compounded pre-existing mandatory minimum sentence requirements.[21]

Themes of mass incarceration and poverty are reflected in episodes of both Star Trek: The Original Series and Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, which can be used to the determine the zeitgeist of each era in relation to American exceptionalist themes by examining the presence of victory culture in each series. The Original Series provided a significantly more glorified interpretation of social progress than Deep Space Nine, which demonstrates the contrasting overwhelming absence of American exceptionalism in the 1990s. For instance, the 1967 episode of The Original Series “The City on the Edge of Forever” and the two-part 1995 Deep Space Nine episode “Past Tense” both have time travel-based plots where main characters travel back in time to preserve their future. Both episodes center around the significance of advocacy and combatting poverty but have vastly different perspectives regarding the methods that the government should implement to help impoverished citizens. The main characters of each series function as the perspective of the contemporary viewer and can be used to assess the perception of the general populace on sociopolitical developments by examining how they respond to their experiences in the past. Furthermore, the events in these episodes can be used to gauge the general perspective of the public towards the United States as an institution during each decade in response to specific current events by assessing the presence of celebratory victory culture themes in each series.

            In “The City on the Edge of Forever,” Captain James Kirk and First Officer Commander Spock travel back in time to New York in 1930 to restore the “correct” timeline after it was disrupted.[22] When they arrived in New York City they encountered Edith Keeler, a social worker from a local soup kitchen at the 21st Street Mission, who, in exchange for working at the soup kitchen, assisted them with getting jobs and an apartment. Keeler was presented as a progressive thinker through her enlightened view of humanity’s future. However, this was contrasted by her belief that only the “deserving poor” who were not at fault for their circumstances and continued to work despite their misfortune, should receive assistance. This dichotomy is demonstrated through the daily speech she gave to the mission’s attendants before meals as “payment,” where she said:

I’m not a do-gooder. If you’re a bum, if you can’t break off with the booze, or whatever it is that makes you a bad risk, then get out…One day soon, man is going to be able to harness incredible energies…that could ultimately hurl us to other worlds in…some sort of spaceship. And the men that reach out into space will be able to find ways to feed the hungry millions of the world and to cure their diseases. They will be able to find a way to give each man hope and a common future.[23]

The contradiction of this speech emphasizes themes of Social Darwinism and rugged individualism, the belief that people are responsible for their own economic success or failure. By beginning the speech with a demand for “bad risks” to leave based on their reliance on alcohol she distinguished those who were undeserving of help by highlighting the traits she found to be disagreeable. Her contrasting belief in a brighter future was demonstrated in the speech when she discussed how technological advancements and travel to different planets would ultimately resolve the social problems faced during the Great Depression.

During the early years of the Great Depression, before the New Deal revolutionized government-based welfare and federal economic intervention programs in the United States, it was believed that charities should hold the majority of the responsibility for helping the less fortunate. Social workers, like Keeler, were known to have a more progressive view regarding the causes of issues like poverty based on their mission to use grassroot methods to counteract societal inequity by working directly with poor communities through advocacy and education. [24] However, at the time many social workers were also heavily involved in the prohibition movement due to their belief that alcoholism was a disease caused by poor life choices and subsequentially felt that the 18th Amendment outlawing the sale of alcohol in the United States significantly improved the morals and conditions of low income communities.[25] As a result, Keeler’s contradictory assertions that she would not provide assistance to those who were undeserving of help, especially alcoholics, while preaching about the bright future of humanity would be socially acceptable within the context of the period and her chosen profession.

In response to the high rate of poverty in the United States, President Lyndon B. Johnson declared a national war on poverty in his 1964 State of the Union Address. In 1966, Vice President Hubert Humphrey wrote an article detailing the goals of the War on Poverty and the Johnson Administration’s actions to eliminate poverty in the United States. [26] Humphrey identified that the independent actions of private charity and the federal government counteracted each other and claimed that they could not simultaneously exist if they continued to operate autonomously.[27] He also acknowledged that before the implementation of the War on Poverty, the dominant American philosophy regarding welfare reflected Social Darwinist perspectives, and recognized that there were many people who still held these beliefs. The federal welfare legislation that Humphrey supported was extremely progressive for the time and did not align with the beliefs of many Americans in the increasingly polarized political climate of the 1960s due to the connection of welfare to racial politics and the fact that it was perceived as an example of federal overreach.[28]

The lack of reactions by Kirk and Spock, in public and in private, regarding Keeler’s statements and the poverty crisis in New York City because of the Great Depression, indicated that they were, at the very least, ambivalent toward her actions. For instance, they could be observed discussing the barbarity of the period but do not provide any commentary on their observations or show any desire to help the people that they encountered in the past. Through Kirk and Spock’s inaction and Keeler’s unwillingness to help individuals that she saw as undeserving, “The City on the Edge of Forever” comments on the philosophies that Humphrey counteracted in the War on Poverty article which reflected common perspectives on poverty, homelessness, and the undeserving poor in the 1960s. Furthermore, the ongoing debate regarding the responsibility of private charities to help citizens verses government funded federal assistance can be observed in the episode based on Keeler’s role as a social worker who ran a private charity organization in New York and subsequent status as the sole social services provider in the episode.[29]

The inflated importance of the United States in The City on the Edge of Forever is representative of the American exceptionalist views of the 1960s and provides an example of victory culture regarding the social progress of the United States through the revelation that deviating from the status quo would result in an undesirable future. In the episode, Spock discovered that Keeler needed to die in a traffic accident because in the version of events where she lived, Keeler developed a peace movement which delayed the United States’ entry into World War II thus allowing the Nazis enough time to develop the atomic bomb and win the Second World War. As a result, humanity stagnated and was incapable of developing sufficient technology to reach space, thus preventing the conception of the United Federation of Planets; the governing interplanetary union in the Star Trek universe that Earth helped to develop. This indicates that the United States’ role in WWII was seen as so significant that without their actions there would have been repercussions for the entire universe that lasted into the 23rd century. Additionally, this helps to rationalize America’s use of atomic weapons in the Second World War by claiming that if the United States did not develop and utilize the bomb, there was a risk of Germany doing so first and destroying the free world.

            Themes and commentary in “The City on the Edge of Forever” can be compared to the 1995 Star Trek: Deep Space Nine two-part episode “Past Tense” to demonstrate evolving perspectives regarding social and welfare programs between the decades. In the episode, space station Deep Space 9’s Commander Benjamin Sisko, Lt. Commander Jadzia Dax, and Doctor Julian Bashir were accidentally sent to San Francisco in August of 2024 to a watershed moment in Earth’s history.[30] In this fictional imagining of the future, cities across the United States isolated “undesirable citizens” like the mentally ill, unemployed, and poor from the rest of society in locked “sanctuary districts” that were utilized as a method of enforced social control, similar to ghettos. Sisko and Bashir were placed into one of these districts, where they were quickly accosted by a group of other residents who wanted to steal their food ration cards. The ensuing fight resulted in the death of another resident, Gabriel Bell, when he attempted to help protect Sisko and Bashir. Bell was a fictional historical figure from 2024 who was famous for protecting hostages that were taken during a violent protest orchestrated by the residents who attacked Sisko and Bashir, and who took advantage of the situation to call attention to the grim reality of the sanctuary districts. In order to preserve the timeline, Sisko assumed Bell’s identity to fulfill his role in the hostage crisis and ensure that national legislation outlawing the districts was enacted. Through this plotline, the episode provides commentary on many different social issues, such as mass incarceration, welfare, unemployment, homelessness, and the mental health crisis caused by the deinstitutionalization of mental hospitals. This was a direct response to the Clinton administration’s 1992 campaign promise to change the welfare system and 1994 legislation that exacerbated the mass incarceration crisis, while also providing a response to pervasive social concerns that arose through actions taken by the Reagan Administration in the previous decade.

Character conversations and overarching plot in “Past Tense” provided commentary on Bill Clinton’s 1992 campaign promise to “…end welfare as we know it…” and later legislation like the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Authorization Act of 1994, which implemented harsh sentencing minimums for certain crimes, especially those related to drugs, and aggravated the mass incarceration crisis in the United States.[31] In 1992, a Clinton campaign commercial described their goal to restructure the welfare system in order to add mandatory work requirements to “…break the cycle of welfare dependency,” and later resulted in the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 which restructured federal welfare programs and implemented new requirements to receive assistance.[32] Furthermore, concern regarding rising crime rates in inner cities starting in the 1960s led to the development of new methods of calculating crime rates that subsequentially resulted in the American mass incarceration crisis that perpetuated socioeconomic consequences that increased the violent crime rate from 200.2 per 100,000 in 1965 to 684.6 per 100,000 in 1995.[33] The mass incarceration crisis was further compounded by the escalation of the deinstitutionalization of mental hospitals in the 1990s, which, according to a 2013 study in The Journal of Legal Studies, resulted in a 4-7% growth in incarceration rates between 1980 and 2000.[34] This caused a mental health crisis in the United States because of the lack of education regarding the treatment and care for people with mental illness and, consequentially, there was a disproportionate number of people with mental illness in the United States who were homeless. Law enforcement officers would often arrest these individuals for petty crimes and instances of indecent behavior in public spaces, and would them hold them in local jails to wait for psychiatric care.[35] These developments were reflected in “Past Tense” through the use of sanctuary districts to house the “undesired” citizens of the United States to the extent that overcrowding led to limited housing and resources which resulted in increased instances of organized violence within the districts.

Throughout the episode, Sisko, Dax, and Bashir frequently commented on issues of social injustice in the sanctuary district, both in private conversations and directly to the people who live in 2024. For example, while trying to find a place to sleep, Sisko and Bashir see a man wrapped in a blanket sitting on the street, who appeared to be hallucinating, and proceed to have a discussion regarding the general ambivalence they observed towards the suffering in the sanctuary districts:

Bashir: There’s no reason for him to live like that…they could cure that man now, today if they gave a damn.

Sisko: …it’s not that they don’t give a damn, it’s that they’ve just given up. The social problems that they face are too enormous to deal with.

Bashir: …that only makes things worse. Causing people to suffer because you hate them is terrible but causing them to suffer because you’ve forgotten how to care – that’s really hard to understand.[36]

When taken in the context of the welfare crisis of the period, especially given Clinton’s campaign promises to limit welfare access, this conversation provides commentary on legislation that targeted and incarcerated minority populations for drug based crimes and welfare fraud in addition to incarcerating people with mental illness rather than providing them with psychiatric care.[37] This resulted in the development of a system that punished rather than rehabilitated, perpetuating social injustice without an attempt to find a solution by ignoring and targeting people seen as unworthy of help subsequentially increasing the stigma towards receiving welfare assistance in the United States.

The critique of the United States in the show is further emphasized throughout the two-part episode through the interactions of characters from 2024 with the main cast. Contemporary characters commented on the injustice of their situation and expressed frustration with their inability to change the system. For example, the government worker at the sanctuary district who processed Sisko and Bashir’s paperwork, described the systematic bias of the sanctuary districts based on the categorization of people and defines the pejorative slang terms, gimmes and dims, used to describe the groups: “Gimmes are…people who are looking for help. A job, a place to live…the dims should be in hospitals, but the government can’t afford to keep them there, so we get them instead. I hate it, but that’s the way it is.”[38] The worker, Lee, was later taken as one of the hostages and her critical sentiment towards the sanctuary districts was further emphasized in a conversation with Bashir. She described an incident when she first started working for the sanctuary district where she was almost fired after she processed a woman who had an arrest warrant for the crime of child abandonment. She discussed how the woman left her son with the family that previously employed her, because she could not take care of him, further revealing that:

Lee: I felt so sorry for her. I didn’t log her in, I just let her disappear into the Sanctuary.

Bashir: Well, that was very kind of you…what happened to this woman?

Lee: I don’t know, but I think about her all the time. Ever since then I’ve just done my job, you know? Tried not to let it get the best of me.

Bashir: It’s not your fault that things are the way they are.

Lee: Everybody tells themselves that, and nothing ever changes. [39]

This conversation provides metacognitive analysis on the pervasive feelings of dread and inadequacy that the average American experienced regarding social injustice and their inability to change their role in the perpetuation of a system of oppression. Any aspect of American exceptionalism reflected in “Past Tense” through long term influence of the United States in the forming of the Federation that was displayed through Sisko, Dax, and Bashir’s intervention in the past, is negated through the way that characters blatantly criticized the system in addition to the implication that their intervention into the status quo was necessary for the correct future to occur.[40] This means that the episode does not function as an example of victory culture and, as a result, American exceptionalism is subsequently not evident in this episode to the same extent as it was in “The City on the Edge of Forever,” which lacked the larger criticism of social injustice seen in “Past Tense.” Through their active intervention to change the status quo, Sisko, Dax, and Bashir were able to integrate themselves into the past in a way that Kirk and Spock did not by ensuring Keeler died to prevent the Nazis from winning World War II.

While there are themes of American exceptionalism in “The City on the Edge of Forever,” in the way that it highlighted the social progress of the 1960s, the critical themes in “Past Tense” towards the sociopolitical decisions of the era demonstrate a disillusionment with the institution of the United States. Furthermore, the time periods that the characters traveled to are also significant when analyzing commentary in each series. In The Original Series, Kirk and Spock go back in time to the 1930s, a retrospective point in history that was seen as one of the darkest periods in living memory. This is contrasted in Deep Space Nine, with Sisko, Dax, and Bashir traveling back in time a prospective dark future in 2024 which was created by the writers. By focusing the episode on a dark lived point in history, the writers of The Original Series highlighted the exceptionalism of the 1960s through contrast with the Great Depression, creating an example of social reform-based victory culture. Comparatively in Deep Space Nine, the writers portrayed a negative view of the United States through the creation of a fictional point in the near future where social divisions were heightened to the extent that society was on the verge of collapse, as a result of the actions taken by the American government. This episode provides critique by the writers regarding the sociopolitical failings of the 1990s and functions as a call to action regarding their desire to see social change enacted in order to prevent the possibility of the future that they described in “Past Tense,” which is contrary to the themes of social stagnation seen in “The City on the Edge of Forever” that emphasized the exceptional progress of the 1960s.

            After the end of the Second World War, the United States had to reconcile their new status as the world’s only remaining stable superpower, which manifested through their increased involvement in conflicts in both the Middle East and previously Soviet dominated regions. The other defining political development of the second half of the twentieth century was the Cold War, which permeated every aspect of American sociopolitical and personal life and heightened internal tensions in the United States. The 1960s were a turbulent point in history as a result of the Cold War, especially regarding the ensuing military conflicts in Korea and Vietnam that were waged in an attempt to prevent the spread of communism. During the Vietnam War, there was a disillusionment with the United States because of American involvement in what was perceived to be a useless and never ending conflict. The legacy of the Vietnam War defined perspectives regarding the increasing involvement of the United States military in the affairs of other countries like Somalia, Haiti, and the Balkans in the 1990s.[41] This was evident through varying perceptions of the American declared victory in Operation Desert Storm of the Persian Gulf War in 1991, particularly when President Bush claimed that the negative legacy of the Vietnam War was over and called for a “new world order” where countries worked together to protect freedom, security, and the rule of law.[42]

            Another major concern between the 1960s and 1990s was an increase in instances of terrorism in the United States. One example was the heightened threat of international aviation terrorism from the 1960s through the 1980s with saboteurs hijacking or destroying planes to gain political leverage and provide propaganda for their causes.[43] Furthermore, 1970 had the highest number of terrorist attacks recorded by the Global Terrorism Database (GTD), with more than 460 instances in the year alone, before rates steadily declined throughout the 1980s and 1990s.[44] The increasing sociopolitical divide in the United States further resulted in acts of violent domestic terrorism such as the attacks by the left-wing extremist group the Weather Underground who were credited with at least 25 bombings between 1974 and 1978, the Unabomber who killed three people and injured 23 others between 1978 and 1995, and the Oklahoma City Bombing in 1995 that killed 168 people and injured hundreds of others.[45] Furthermore, the 1993 World Trade Center Bombing by Islamic fundamentalist extremists associated with Al-Qaeda resulted in a 100-foot crater in the building that killed six people and injured more than one thousand others.[46] This was accomplished by the perpetrators hiding a bomb in the parking garage under the towers with the intent to completely destroy them, a goal which was later completed by Al-Qaeda on September 11, 2001, and had planned a series of plane bombings at the time. Importantly, fear of domestic and foreign terrorism increased exponentially in the wake of the Oklahoma City Bombing in 1995 by American white nationalists Timothy McVey and Terry Nichols, which led to new legislation under the Clinton Administration in 1996 that made terrorism a federal crime, gave funding to federal agencies, and made it easier to deport people who entered the country illegally.[47]

Historians H. Bruce Franklin and Nicholas Evan Sarantakes wrote about how the Cold War and the United States’ involvement in Vietnam were two of the most influential current events represented in Star Trek: The Original Series. Franklin examined select episodes that aired between 1967 and 1969, to demonstrate how they directly related to the Vietnam War.[48] He established that the episodes reflected the United States’ evolving perspective on the war based on how the first two episodes examined presented the war as a necessary evil, while the last two represented the desperation of the era and called for radical change, namely an end to the Vietnam War. Similarly, Sarantakes argued that the Original Series used cinematic allegory to comment on contemporary politics and foreign policy as a way to express the role the writers believed the United States should play in world politics. [49] He accomplished this by highlighting the intentional allegorical comparison of political prowess and the capitalist and communist powers during the Cold War in The Original Series.

Fear in response to of the threat of national and international violence was pervasive in the American consciousness during the 1960s and 1990s. Many episodes in The Original Series had plots that included violence and combat, but there was never an active war. The show did include Cold War inspired plots through the Federation’s ongoing political conflicts with the Romulan and Klingon Empires, which were known to result in minor skirmishes and attempted acts of terrorism such as in the episode “The Trouble with Tribbles.” Furthermore, it is important to note that the conflict with the Romulans was not introduced until the 14th episode and the hostilities with the Klingon Empire did not begin until the 26th episode. The battles between the Federation and these empires were generally isolated to single episodes rather than longer overarching season-long plots. During the 1990s, the number of white supremacist organizations and anti-government militias in the United States was increasing.[50] As a result, Deep Space Nine provided commentary on the mounting examples of political terrorism through the Bajoran religious ideological conflict. Furthermore, the heightened involvement of the United States military in foreign nations was indirectly criticized through the demonstration of the futility of combat and the psychological impacts of war on young civilians and soldiers, specifically through the characters of Jake Sisko and Ensign Nog. These episodes served to comment on the lingering effects of combat on the physical and mental wellbeing of soldiers and civilians in addition to counteracting the perceived glory of combat by presenting protagonists committing morally dubious acts in battle.

The interactions between the Klingons and the Federation were grounded in racist stereotypes and ideological differences rather than active battle-driven hatred. In the episode “The Trouble with Tribbles,” the crew of the USS Enterprise came into contact with a group of Klingon soldiers while on shore leave, who provoked a fight with the Starfleet officers by calling the captain and the Enterprise derogatory names, which resulted in a bar brawl led by the Chief Engineer and the Head Navigator. [51] This altercation exemplified the ideological basis and contemptuous nature of the Klingon-Federation conflict. The episode provided further commentary on the Cold War through the discovery of a Klingon spy on the K-7 space station, who poisoned grain stores in an attempt to allow the Klingon Empire to gain full control of the planet the station was orbiting by killing all of the Federation colonists. This attempted act of sabotage was discovered by the crew of the Enterprise and did not result in a war between the Federation and the Klingon Empire. However, the discovery of a Klingon infiltrator who was physically altered to look human and was acting as the aide to a Federation undersecretary, highlights themes of American exceptionalism because the crew of the USS Enterprise was able to identify and neutralize this enemy, thus preventing civilian deaths and a war with the Klingons. This is reflective of the omnipresent fear that communist insurgents were infiltrating the United States government during the Cold War for nefarious purposes.[52] As a result, the episode functions as an example of victory culture that emphasized the moral superiority and successes of the Federation, who represented the United States, by rooting out traitors in comparison to the failed attempt of deceit by the Klingons who acted as an allegory for a communist nation.

A preeminent example of commentary on terrorism in Deep Space Nine is in the episode “In the Hands of the Prophets,” where a religious fanatic bombed a school on the Deep Space 9 station.[53] This attack was motivated by a federation teacher referring to the Bajoran gods as “entities” while employing a purely scientific perspective during her lesson, rather than using terminology that aligned with the Bajoran faith. This situation instigated debate regarding the content children should be taught given that Deep Space 9 was technically a Bajoran station, and whether the Bajoran and Federation children should receive the same education or even attend the same school. This eventually escalated to a bomb being detonated in the school as a message to the teacher, and ultimately led to an assassination attempt against Vedek Bareil, a progressive religious leader who was the most likely candidate to become the next head of the Bajoran religion. It is heavily implied that the orthodox sect leader, Vedek Winn, orchestrated the bombing in order to stage the assassination attempt against Vedek Bareil and prevent him from becoming the Kai of Bajor.[54] The violence in this episode reflected the threat felt in the United States from far right domestic terrorism in recent decades, especially regarding the fear for the safety of civilians and children. Additionally, the religiously motivated school bombing in this episode serves as allegory for the religiously motivated bombing of the World Trade Center by Islamic fundamentalists associated with Al-Qaeda in February 1993, four months before this episode aired, that resulted in the deaths of six people and the injuries of over one thousand others.[55] The success of the station’s crew in thwarting the assassination attempt can be interpreted as an example of exceptionalism, but the underlying implications regarding the motivations behind the incident emphasize the instability of politics by highlighting violent ideological conflict in a manner that vilifies conservative extremism. Furthermore[HB1] , the episode demonstrates the fragile relationship between the Bajoran and Federation residents on the Deep Space 9 stationat the beginning of the series in a manner that depicts the Federation citizens as outsiders and interlopers, because they were imposing their values onto the Bajoran children, ultimately undermining any American exceptionalist themes.

The central theme of war was pervasive throughout Deep Space Nine; the series began by exploring the consequences of the Federation defeat at the Battle of Wolf 359 and the occupation of Bajor by the Cardassians, and subsequentially concluded with the Federation victory in the Federation-Dominion War.[56] The commentary on war in the series was largely accomplished by portraying youth experiencing battle and exploring the psychological impacts of combat through the experience of Jake Sisko in “…Nor the Battle to the Strong” and Nog in “The Siege of AR-558” and “It’s Only a Paper Moon.” These episodes emphasized the disillusionment with the United States and the decreasing view of war as exceptional, through the changing perspective of each character regarding the glory of battle as a direct result of their experiences. This was further accomplished by including multiple examples of violence through plots centered on both terrorism and military conflict in the series in addition to the presentation of immoral actions taken in combat by the Federation soldiers in the name of survival.

 In “Nor the Battle to the Strong,” Jake Sisko, son of Deep Space 9’s Commander Benjamin Sisko, was an 18 year old civilian who accompanied Dr. Julian Bashir to a medical conference with the intention of writing a news article about him.[57] However, when Dr. Bashir was diverted from the medical conference to a field hospital because of an attack by the Klingons, Sisko willingly entered the battlefield with the intention of detailing the glory of combat.[58] When he encountered armed conflict and death, Sisko struggled to reconcile the violence that he experienced with his preconceived notions of the grandeur of war. He witnessed multiple people die in gruesome ways, vomits in reaction to Bashir’s macabre gallows humor about surgery, and fled combat multiple times. For example, when Sisko and Bashir attempted to retrieve a power generator from their ship, they were pinned down by shelling which caused Sisko to run away, leaving an unconscious Bashir behind. This was contrasted by his actions at the end of the episode, where Sisko unintentionally caused their base’s entrance to collapse by blindly shooting into the air to protect himself from advancing Klingons. Sisko’s actions provided the medical team with enough time to safely evacuate the patients in the field hospital, which resulted in Bashir labeling him a “hero.” When Sisko ultimately wrote the article detailing his experiences, he discussed the futility of the battle in the context of greater history, and the impact that it had on his life.

More than anything I wanted to believe what he was saying but the truth is I was just as scared in the hospital as I’d been when we went for the generator, so scared that all I could think about was doing whatever it took to stay alive. Once that meant running away and once it meant picking up a phaser. The battle of Ajilon Prime will probably be remembered as a pointless skirmish but I’ll always remember it as something more – as the place I learned that the line between courage and cowardice is a lot thinner than most people believe.[59]

This quote demonstrates the harmful psychological impact of war and the futility of combat in a time where there was increased threat of the United States entering a global conflict in the Middle East. It also portrayed the decreasing exceptionalism associated with combat by the American populace, through emphasis on the reality of fear and cowardice rather than the historical glorified view of combat seen in examples of media that highlighted America’s exceptionalism through military victory culture.

The fact that the Federation’s war with the Klingons seen in this episode was caused by the infiltration of enemies into the Klingon government via shapeshifters in addition to the conflict being the result of the violation of a cease fire, makes this equally as analogous with terrorism as war. This conflict provided commentary on both the threat of active war and the rise in hate groups and violent protests in the mid-1990s and the subsequent Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, passed by the Clinton Administration.[60] Sisko’s experiences in the episode demonstrate a primal, emotional response to war, even if he had indirectly experienced combat on Deep Space 9 and in the Battle of Wolf 359 as a child. Detailing the experiences of a protagonist who responded to combat in dishonorable and realistic ways further emphasized the lack of American exceptionalism in the 1990s in the wake of increased violence and the threat of terrorism.

In addition to commentary on the psychological effects of combat on civilians through Jake Sisko, Deep Space Nine provided analysis regarding the experiences of young soldiers through Ensign Nog in “The Siege of AR-558.” The episode took place during the War with The Dominion, an empire from the Gamma Quadrant that was trying to destroy the Federation.[61] Captain Sisko brought a group of officers from Deep Space 9, including Ensign Nog of Starfleet and his uncle Quark, who was acting as a representative of the Ferengi Alliance, to deliver supplies to a battalion of Federation soldiers who had taken control of a Dominion communications tower.[62] The 43 surviving Starfleet officers, out of the original 150 stationed at the communications tower, had been pinned down for five months. This was significantly longer than the 90 day maximum deployment mandated by Starfleet and meant that they were experiencing severe battle fatigue that had resulted in infighting among the officers.

Captain Sisko eventually commanded Nog to participate in a small scouting party to determine the number of Dominion Jem’Hadar soldiers encamped nearby.[63] Quark tried to persuade his nephew to stay at the base, but Nog rebuffed his attempt based on his sense of duty as a Starfleet officer and his need to prove himself as the first Ferengi in Starfleet in combination with his hero worship of the surviving officers at the base. While on the mission, they were ambushed by the Jem’Hadar and Nog was wounded, he was rushed back to the base for emergency medical attention, ultimately resulting in Dr. Bashir amputating his leg. During the battle, Quark and Nog remained in the base while the rest of the officers, including Dr. Bashir, engaged the Jem’Hadar. Prior to the battle, the officers were able to repurpose Dominion landmines and use them to slow the Jem’Hadar’s advance by putting them in the path between their encampment and the communications tower. This episode portrayed the cynicism of the 1990s towards the United States by having the protagonists repurpose and intentionally reprogram brutal enemy weapons to be triggered by movement with the intention of eliminating approximately one third of their enemy’s forces. The lack of glory in combat is evident in the episode through the Federation soldiers’ desperation overriding their moral objections to using the landmines in a desperate attempt to survive the battle.

In the episode “It’s Only a Paper Moon,” Nog returned to Deep Space 9 after an extended medical leave where he was fitted with a bio-synthetic leg and received psychological counseling.[64] However, it is revealed that Nog was still experiencing post-traumatic stress symptoms, depression, and phantom limb pain that manifested in a psychosomatic limp which required him to use a cane. Nog also became obsessed with listening to the song “I’ll be Seeing You,” performed by the holographic character Vic Fontaine, because Dr. Bashir played the song for him while he was wounded during the battle. This led to Nog choosing to live in Vic’s holographic world for an extended period of time to recuperate and learn to cope with his experiences.[65] Vic helped Nog to reconcile some of his trauma, but he ultimately refused to leave the Holosuite. When Vic confronted Nog, he said:

When the war began…I wasn’t happy or anything, but I was eager. I wanted to test myself. I wanted to prove I had what it took to be a soldier, and I saw a lot of combat. I saw a lot of people get hurt. I saw a lot of people die. But I didn’t think anything was going to happen to me. And then, suddenly Dr. Bashir is telling me he has to cut my leg off. I couldn’t believe it. I still can’t believe it. If I could get shot, if I could lose my leg, anything can happen to me, Vic. I could die tomorrow. I don’t know if I’m ready to face that. If I stay here, at least I know what the future is going to be like.[66]

Nog was using a fantasy world to cope with the trauma of being wounded at the Siege of AR-558 but was ultimately unable to hide from reality forever. The psychological impact of war on young soldiers was a highly relevant topic in the wake of the Gulf War and with the increasing threat of United States involvement in a major conflict in the Middle East. Furthermore, the diminishing presence of victory culture in the 1990s is evident through the emphasis on the physical and psychological trauma of combat on soldiers. Nog’s injury as a result of his need to prove himself as a soldier emphasized the evolving American consciousness towards warfare and changing perception regarding the lack of glory in combat by highlighting the negative consequences of willingly entering war, even for soldiers who had trained for and previously experienced battle.

            Jake Sisko and Ensign Nog provided two different examples of the exposure of young adults to combat in different contexts. Jake wanted to document the glory of battle as a reporter, while Nog joined Starfleet and felt dutybound to serve in the Dominion War as the first Ferengi officer, but still felt a sense of hero worship towards his fellow soldiers at the battle of AR-558 for their actions in combat. It is important to note that despite the fact that Jake was a civilian and Nog was an officer, both willingly entered battle in search of glory and were disillusioned by their experiences in spite of the fact that they had been previously exposed to conflict in some manner. These characters reflected the shifting mentality of the United States away from victory culture and American exceptionalism towards a disillusionment with the American institution as a whole. The commentary in the show differs from The Original Series through the overarching presence of violence in the series in addition to demonstrating the negative impact that war had on the young characters in the show. By including the aftereffects of combat, they were providing an increasingly realistic view of war that reflected the populace’s understanding of conflict, especially in the wake of the televised aspects of the Vietnam and Gulf Wars.[67]

            The 1990s were a transitional period between the mid-twentieth century and the grim future of the twenty-first. There was still a hopeful view of the future in the 1960s, which can be observed through the presentation of the characters in Star Trek: The Original Series despite the turbulence of the era. This was the result of lingering exceptionalist views of the nation in the wake of the Second World War which persevered during the ideological conflict of the Cold War inflating the United States’ sense of superiority. Contrarily in the 1990s, the general populace became disillusioned with the United States as an institution, culminating in a much darker view of the future in the series Star Trek: Deep Space Nine. This change was caused by the shifting American consciousness to become actively critical of the widespread pervasive social conflict that disproportionally targeted disenfranchised populations and the heightened threat of violence in the United States after the end of the Cold War from terrorism and American involvement in foreign conflicts. Additionally, the overwhelming disillusionment with the United States by the general populace resulted in decreased examples of victory culture that depicted the exceptionalism of America in terms of their social and military achievements. By comparing social and political events from the time they were created to themes depicted in each show, the cynicism of the 1990s can be observed, especially when contrasted with the exceptionalist view of America in the 1960s.

Sociopolitical commentary and themes of violence in the Star Trek franchise can be examined to understand both the changing perception of the American populace and the rising tensions of the time in response to the increasing threat of war and violence at the end of the twentieth century. Commentary on major sociopolitical crises like mass incarceration, mental illness, and welfare can be observed through the reactions of major characters to their surroundings in time travel based episodes in addition to the actions of contemporary characters from the past.  Furthermore, the increasingly negative view of combat in the 1990s can be observed by examining the presence of war throughout the entirety of Deep Space Nine and by exploring how the reactions of characters to violence mirrors contemporary developments regarding the threat of terrorism and war. This analysis furthers the examination of popular media commentary on sociopolitical conflict and the increasing threat of violence, which is especially significant in the context of understanding the influence of rapidly changing American media and determining the events that impacted the polarized political climate of the 2020s. Ultimately, this analysis demonstrates that historians can use science fiction shows, like the Star Trek franchise, as primary source relics to understand the zeitgeist of the era they were created, in spite of how they may appear disconnected from modern events due to their unrealistic setting. This paper demonstrates the significance of television to the study of cultural history as a result of its accessibility to the general public and the way that these shows provide commentary on current events, which reflects the public opinion of the general populace. This is especially true for the shows in Star Trek because of the unique opportunity for historical study presented by the way that the Star Trek franchise consists of various independent shows over multiple decades, which can be used to observe changing mentality of the United States. As a result, the declining American exceptionalism and view of the United States in the 1990s can be observed by examining different themes and plots in multiple series of the Star Trek franchise over time in order to determine the declining presence of victory culture in each era.

In the context of the social studies classroom, this research similarly  demonstrates the ability of teachers to use science fiction media, including television series, to show students how historical perspectives are represented in popular culture. Film has been used in the classroom for decades given how engaging it is for students, and how consumable the medium is for students of all backgrounds and abilities as a way to visualize events, understand reactions to incidents, and scaffold conversation.[68] Science fiction has traditionally been a platform for writers to provide analogous commentary on their experiences and perceptions of current events, a quality that is abundantly clear in the Star Trek franchise. This genre has been used in order to portray fictionalized versions of historical events and ideas, which can be explored in the classroom by evaluating the representation of political themes and contemporary events in film and shows. The unique quality of the Star Trek series spanning multiple decades can be used in the classroom in order to demonstrate changing mentality regarding the current and public perception of the United States to students. As a result, teachers can use short clips or entire episodes in order to present the changing perspectives of the United States through this franchise in particular. Using this type of visual media will help students to understand the impact of decisions made during the contemporary era and will also help them to comprehend the impact of complex sociopolitical and military developments in the United States, such as mass incarceration, welfare, increased threat of terrorism, and the consequences of the end of the Cold War and Gulf War in the 1990s.

Behr, Ira Steven and Hans Beimler, writers. Star Trek: Deep Space Nine. Season 7, episode 8, “The Siege of AR-558.” Directed by Winrich Kolbe, featuring Avery Brooks, Aron Eisenberg, Armin Shimerman, and Alexander Siddig. Aired November 10, 1998, in broadcast syndication. https://www.paramountplus.com/shows/video/mIdm1LceoK_eeqS uaO8_jl7G_QNJuhi6/.

Behr, Ira Steven and Robert Hewitt Wolfe, writers. Star Trek: Deep Space Nine. Season 3, episode 11, “Past Tense, Part 1.” Directed by Reza Badiyi, featuring Avery Brooks, Terry Farrell, and Siddig El Fadil. Aired January 2, 1995, in broadcast syndication. https://www .paramountplus.com/shows/video/Y2jFFEXQw_2hrGX5mrGX90zqkzR4vi7G/.   

Behr, Ira Steven, Robert Hewitt Wolfe, René Echevarria, writers. Star Trek: Deep Space Nine. Season 3, episode 12, “Past Tense, Part 2.” Directed by Jonathan Frakes, featuring Avery Brooks, Terry Farrell, and Siddig El Fadil. Aired January 9, 1995, in broadcast syndication. https://www.paramountplus.com/shows/video/X1Qfoe06ZqK3hdP4O8YYb bKGSHZ2tydI/.

Berke, Richard L. “THE 1992 CAMPAIGN: THE AD CAMPAIGN; Clinton: Getting People Off Welfare.” New York Times, September 10, 1992, A20. https://www.nytimes.com/1992/09/ 10/us/the-1992-campaign-the-ad-campaign-clinton-getting-people-off-welfare.html?smid =url-share.

Ellison, Harlan, writer. Star Trek: The Original Series. Season 1, episode 28, “The City on the Edge of Forever.” Directed by Joseph Pevney, featuring William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, DeForest Kelley, and Joan Collins. Aired April 5, 1967, in broadcast syndication. https://www.paramountplus.com/shows/video/1179123511/.

Gerrold, David, writer. Star Trek: The Original Series. Season 2, episode 15, “The Trouble with Tribbles.” Directed by Joseph Pevney, featuring William Shatner, James Doohan, and Walter Koenig. Aired December 29, 1967, in broadcast syndication. https://www.paramo untplus.com/shows/video/1226188697/.

Humphrey, Hubert H. “The War on Poverty.” Law and Contemporary Problems 31, no. 1 (1966): 6-17. https://doi.org/10.2307/1190526.

Mack, David, Ronald D. Moore, and John J. Ordover, writers. Star Trek: Deep Space Nine. Season 7, episode 10, “It’s Only a Paper Moon.” Directed by Anson Williams, featuring Avery Brooks, Aron Eisenberg, and James Darren. Aired December 30, 1998, in broadcast syndication. https://www.paramountplus.com/shows/video/C4tVIj7ZzLXaNyd 1NAVh71SEN85fkPP2/.

Parker, Brice R and René Echevarria, writers. Star Trek: Deep Space Nine. Season 5, episode 4, “…Nor the Battle to the Strong.” Directed by Kim Friedman, featuring Cirroc Lofton and Alexander Siddig. Aired October 21, 1996, in broadcast syndication. https://www.paramo untplus.com/shows/video/M0Jzs5X8tCYk_8WOjuCwArnwUfhMEsZD/.  

“The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996.” Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation. US Department of Health and Human Services, August 31, 1996. https://aspe.hhs.gov/reports/personal-responsibility-work-opportunity-reconciliation-act-1996.

Wolf, Robert Hewitt, writer. Star Trek: Deep Space Nine. Season 1, episode 20,“In the Hands of the Prophets.” Directed by David Livingston, featuring Avery Brooks, Nana Visitor, Colm Meaney, Rosaland Chao, and Louise Fletcher. Aired June 20, 1993, in broadcast syndication. https://www.paramountplus.com/shows/video/gg7NOUqKNrbke8RtQxpzYx 9teVPy22Hz/.

Piller, Ira Michael and Rick Berman, writers. Star Trek: Deep Space Nine. Season 1, episode 1, “Emissary, Parts 1 and 2.” Directed by David Carson, featuring Avery Brooks, Terry Farrell, and Siddig El Fadil. Aired January 3, 1993, in broadcast syndication. https://www .paramountplus.com/shows/video/zbYJuXEpNDasxVJf48I7BRo3vg5ogjuF/

Secondary Sources

“1993 World Trade Center Bombing,” Latest Stories, U.S. Department of State, February 21, 2019, https://www.state.gov/1993-world-trade-center-bombing/.

Arasly, Jangir. “Terrorism and Civil Aviation Security: Problems and Trends.” Connections 4, no. 1 (2005): 75-90. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26323156.

Carrier, Jerry. A Long Cold War: A Chronology of American Life and Culture 1945 to 1991. New York: Algora Publishing, 2018.

Ceaser, James W. “The Origins and Character of American Exceptionalism,” American Political Thought 1, no. 1 (2012): 3-28. https://doi.org/10.1086/664595.

Cullen, Jim. From Memory to History: Television Versions of the Twentieth Century. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 2021.

Doherty, Thomas. Cold War, Cool Medium: Television, McCarthyism, and American Culture. New York: Columbia University Press, 2003.

Engelhardt, Tom. The End of Victory Culture: Cold War America and the Disillusioning of a Generation. Rev. ed. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 2007.

Franklin, H. Bruce. “Star Trek in the Vietnam Era.” Film and History 24, no. ½ (1994): 36-46. https://doi.org/10.1353/flm.1994.a395002.

Hijiya, James A. “The Conservative 1960s.” Journal of American Studies 37, no. 2 (2003): 201-227. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021875803007072

Kennedy, David M. “What the New Deal Did.” Political Science Quarterly 124, no. 2 (2009): 251-268. https://www.jstor.org/stable/25655654.

Kohler-Hausmann, Julilly. “Welfare Crises, Penal Solutions, and the Origins of the ‘Welfare Queen.” Journal of Urban History 41, no. 5 (2015): 576-771. https://doi.org/10.1177/009 6144215589942

Kruz, Kevin M. and Julian E. Zelizer. Fault Lines: A History of the United States Since 1974. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2019.

McAndrews, Lawrence J. “Promoting the Poor: Catholic Leaders and the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964” Catholic Historical Review 104, no. 2 (2018): 298-321. https://doi.org/10.1 353/cat.2018.0027.

Miller, Erin. “Patterns of Terrorism in the United States, 1970-2013: Final Report to Resilient Systems Division, DHS Science and Technology Directorate.” National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START), Department of Homeland Security, (2014): 1-27. https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/OPSR_TP_T EVUS_Patterns-of-Terrorism-Attacks-in-US_1970-2013-Report_Oct2014-508.pdf.

Mui, Vai-Lam. “Information, Civil Liberties, and the Political Economy of Witch-Hunts.” Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization 15, no. 2 (1999): 503-525. https://www.jstor. org/stable/3555065.

Nagl, John and Octavian Manea. “The Uncomfortable Wars of the 1990s.” In War, Strategy and History: Essays in Honour of Professor Robert O’Neill, edited by Daniel Marstonand Amara Leahy, 127-154. Canberra: Australia National University Press. https://www.js tor.org/stable/j.ctt1dgn5sf.15.  

“Oklahoma City Bombing,” History: Famous Cases and Criminals, Federal Bureau of Investigation, accessed December 1, 2024, https://www.fbi.gov/history/famous-cases/oklahoma-city-bombing.

Raphael, Stephen and Michael A. Stoll. “Assessing the Contribution of the Deinstitutionalization of the Mentally Ill to Growth of the U.S. Incarceration Rate.” The Journal of Legal Studies 42, no. 1 (2013): 187-333. https://doi.org/10.1086/667773.

Roiblatt, Rachel E. and Maria C. Dinis. “The Lost Link: Social Work in Early Twentieth‐Century Alcohol Policy.” Social Service Review 78, no. 4 (2004): 652-674. https://doi.org/10.1086 /424542.

Russell, William B., III. “The Art of Teaching Social Studies with Film.” The Clearing House 85, no. 4 (2012): 157-164, https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.2012.674984.

Sarantakes, Nicholas Evan. “Cold War Pop Culture and the Image of U.S. Foreign Policy: The Perspective of the Original Star Trek Series.” Journal of Cold War Studies 7, no. 4 (2005): 74-103. https://doi.org/10.1162/1520397055012488

Stoddard Jeremy D. and Alan S. Marcus. “More Than “Showing What Happened”: Exploring the Potential of Teaching History with Film.” The High School Journal 93, no. 2 (2010): 83-90. https://doi.org/10.1353/hsj.0.0044.

“The Unabomber,” History: Famous Cases and Criminals, Federal Bureau of Investigation, accessed December 1, 2024, https://www.fbi.gov/history/famous-cases/unabomber.

Thompson, Heather Ann. “Why Mass Incarceration Matters: Rethinking Crisis, Decline, and Transformation in Postwar American History.” The Journal of American History 97, no. 3 (2010): 703-734. https://doi.org/10.1093/jahist/97.3.703.

Thomson, Irene Taviss. “Culture, Class, and American Exceptionalism,” in Culture Wars and Enduring American Dilemmas, 175-216. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 2010.

Upton, Bryn. Hollywood at the End of the Cold War: Signs of Cinematic Change. London: Rowman and Littlefield, 2014.

“Weather Underground Bombings,” History: Famous Cases and Criminals, Federal Bureau of Investigation, accessed December 1, 2024, https://www.fbi.gov/history/famous-cases/weather-underground-bombings.

Weinstein, Paul B. “Movies as the Gateway to History: The History and Film Project.” The History Teacher 35, no. 1 (2001): 27-48. https://doi.org/10.2307/3054508

 “World Trade Center Bombing 1993,” History: Famous Cases and Criminals, Federal Bureau of Investigation, accessed December 1, 2024, https://www.fbi.gov/history/famous-cases/world-trade-center-bombing-1993.


[1] The Borg are a cybernetic collective in the Star Trek universe that are controlled by the Borg Queen, who conquer planets in order to steal their technology and forcibly assimilate different civilizations into their collective hive mind. Their ultimate goal is to achieve perfection by adding the knowledge and technologies of other civilizations to their own.

[2] Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, season 1, episode 1, “Emissary, Part 1,” directed by David Carson, written by Ira Michael Piller and Rick Berman, featuring Avery Brooks, Terry Farrell, and Siddig El Fadil, aired January 3, 1993, in broadcast syndication, 0:00-4:33, https://www.paramountplus.com/shows/video/zbYJuXEpNDasxVJf48I7BRo3v g5ogjuF/. Siddig El Fadil changed his name to Alexander Siddig in 1995, which was reflected in the show starting in season 4, episode 1.

[3] Star Trek: Deep Space Nine chronicles events on the space station Deep Space 9. The stationorbits the planet Bajor, a non-Federation planet that was working to achieve Federation membership, resulting in both Bajoran and Federation officers onboard, and is commanded by Federation Commander (later Captain) Benjamin Sisko with Bajoran first officer Major (later Colonel) Kira Nerys. The station’s significance is its location next to a stable wormhole that connects the Federation in the Alpha Quadrant to the otherwise unreachable Gamma Quadrant. The wormhole is also home to an alien species that exists outside of time who the Bajoran people identified as their gods that they named the Prophets. For the duration of this paper, Deep Space Nine will refer to the title of the show while Deep Space 9 will refer to the station in the series.

[4] Star Trek: The Original Series details the adventures of the crew of the starship USS Enterprise, led by Captain James Kirk. The original pilot of Star Trek: The Original Series, “The Cage,” will only be considered through the flashbacks incorporated into the two part episode “The Menagerie” given that it was not released in its entirety until 1988.

[5] James W. Ceaser, “The Origins and Character of American Exceptionalism,” American Political Thought 1, no. 1 (2012): 3-28, https://doi.org/10.1086/664595. Irene Taviss Thomson, “Culture, Class, and American Exceptionalism,” in Culture Wars and Enduring American Dilemmas (Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 2010): 181-187.

[6] It is important to note that there is a production period for television shows that results in a delay between contemporary events and the release of episodes that provide commentary on those events. For the sake of this analysis, commentary on specific events is considered within a time frame of approximately six months to a year before an episode is aired. However, there are also larger themes, concerns, and ongoing conflicts analyzed in this paper that impact public opinion which are considered within the context of the entire decade and do not follow the same time frame restrictions as specific dated events.

[7] Kevin M. Kruse and Julian E. Zelizer, Fault Lines: A History of the United States Since 1974 (W. W. Norton & Company, 2019), 1-8.

[8] Tom Engelhardt, The End of Victory Culture: Cold War America and the Disillusioning of a Generation, Rev. ed., (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 2007), 3-15.

[9] Thomas Doherty, Cold War, Cool Medium: Television, McCarthyism, and American Culture, (New York: Columbia University Press, 2003): 4.

[10] Doherty, 2, 15-18.

[11] Jim Cullen, From Memory to History: Television Versions of the Twentieth Century, (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 2021), 1-15.

[12] Bryn Upton, Hollywood at the End of the Cold War: Signs of Cinematic Change, (London: Rowman and Littlefield, 2014), 1-15.

[13] Upton, 171-176.

[14] Jeremy D. Stoddard and Alan S. Marcus, “More Than “Showing What Happened”: Exploring the Potential of Teaching History with Film,” The High School Journal 93, no. 2 (2010): 83-90, https://doi.org/10.1353/hsj.0.0044; Paul B. Weinstein, “Movies as the Gateway to History: The History and Film Project.” The History Teacher 35, no. 1 (2001): 27-48, https://doi.org/10.2307/3054508; and William B. Russell III, “The Art of Teaching Social Studies with Film The Clearing House 85, no. 4 (2012): 157-164, https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.2012.674984.

[15] Kruse, 113-122.

[16] Kruse, 180-222.

[17] David M. Kennedy, “What the New Deal Did,” Political Science Quarterly 124, no. 2 (2009): 253-254, https://www.jstor.org/stable/25655654.

[18] Heather Ann Thompson, “Why Mass Incarceration Matters: Rethinking Crisis, Decline, and Transformation in Postwar American History,” The Journal of American History 97, no. 3 (2010): 706, 731-733, https://doi.org/10.109 3/jahist/97.3.703.

[19] Julilly Kohler-Hausmann, “Welfare Crises, Penal Solutions, and the Origins of the ‘Welfare Queen,’” Journal of Urban History 41, no. 5 (2015): 757, https://doi.org/10.1177/0096144215589942.

[20] Stephen Raphael and Michael A. Stoll, “Assessing the Contribution of the Deinstitutionalization of the Mentally Ill to Growth of the U.S. Incarceration Rate,” The Journal of Legal Studies 42, no. 1 (2013): 190, https://doi.org/10.1 086/667773.

[21] Kruse, 234-235.

[22] The episode began with the ship’s doctor, Leonard McCoy, accidentally injecting himself with a medication that caused acute psychosis. In his delusional state, he teleported to a nearby planet and when the captain and command crew went to rescue him, they encountered the Guardian of Forever, an entity that controlled a gateway to any moment in history. McCoy jumped through the portal to the year 1930 resulting in the erasure of the universe as they knew it. Captain Kirk and Commander Spock followed him back in time to retrieve McCoy and preserve the proper timeline.

[23] Star Trek: The Original Series, season 1, episode 28, “The City on the Edge of Forever,” directed by Joseph Pevney, written by Harlan Ellison, featuring William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, DeForest Kelley, and Joan Collins, aired April 5, 1967, in broadcast syndication, 22:04-23:08, https://www.paramountplus.com/shows/video/117912351 1/.

[24] Rachel E. Roiblatt and Maria C. Dinis, “The Lost Link: Social Work in Early Twentieth‐Century Alcohol Policy,” Social Service Review 78, no. 4 (2004): 652-654, https://doi.org/10.1086/424542.

[25] Roiblatt 661-666.

[26] Hubert H. Humphrey, “The War on Poverty,” Law and Contemporary Problems 31, no. 1 (1966): 6-7, https://doi.org/10.2307/1190526.

[27] Humphrey, 8.

[28] James A. Hijiya, “The Conservative 1960s,” Journal of American Studies 37, no. 2 (2003): 222-223, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021875803007072.

[29] “Lawrence J. McAndrews, “Promoting the Poor: Catholic Leaders and the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964,” Catholic Historical Review104, no. 2 (2018): 319, https://doi.org/10.1353/cat.2018.0027.

[30] While trying to teleport from their ship, the USS Defiant, to Earth, Commander Benjamin Sisko, Lt. Commander Jadzia Dax, and Doctor Julian Bashir were accidently sent to their destination, San Francisco, but at a different point in time. While they tried to get back, they accidently altered the timeline and needed to fix it on their own while they waited for the rest of their crew to figure out how to rescue them.

[31] Richard L. Berke, “THE 1992 CAMPAIGN: THE AD CAMPAIGN; Clinton: Getting People Off Welfare,” New York Times, September 10, 1992, https://www.nytimes.com/1992/09/10/us/the-1992-campaign-the-ad-campaign-clinton-getting-people-off-welfare.html, and Kruse, 235.

[32] Berke, “1992 Campaign,” and “The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996,” Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, US Department of Health and Human Services, August 31, 1996, https://aspe.hhs.gov/reports/personal-responsibility-work-opportunity-reconciliation-act-1996.

[33] Thompson, 727-729.

[34] Raphael 219.

[35] Raphael, 191.

[36] Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, season 3, episode 11, “Past Tense, Part 1,” directed by Reza Badiyi, written by Ira Steven Behr and Robert Hewitt Wolfe, featuring Avery Brooks, Terry Farrell, and Siddig El Fadil, aired January 2, 1995, in broadcast syndication, 22:23-24:10, https://www.paramountplus.com/shows/video/Y2jFFEXQw2hrGX5mr GX90zqkzR4vi7G/ .

[37] Kohler-Hausmann, 766.

[38] “Past Tense, Part 1,” 19:42-19:59.

[39] “Past Tense, Part 2,” 20:22-

[40] In the episode, it is revealed that Starfleet and the Federation ceased to exist in the future after Gabriel Bell was killed.

[41] John Nagl and Octavian Manea, “The Uncomfortable Wars of the 1990s,” in War, Strategy and History: Essays in Honour of Professor Robert O’Neill, ed. Daniel Marstonand Amara Leahy (Canberra: Australia National University Press, 2016), 149, https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1dgn5sf.15.

[42] Kruse, 184-187.

[43] Jangir Arasly, “Terrorism and Civil Aviation Security: Problems and Trends,” Connections 4, no. 1 (2005): https://www.jstor.org/stable/26323156.

[44] Erin Miller, “Patterns of Terrorism in the United States, 1970-2013: Final Report to Resilient Systems Division,

DHS Science and Technology Directorate,” National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START), Department of Homeland Security, (2014): 9, https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publicatio ns/OPSR_TP_TEVUS_Patterns-of-Terrorism-Attacks-in-US_1970-2013-Report_Oct2014-508.pdf

[45] “Weather Underground Bombings,” History: Famous Cases and Criminals, Federal Bureau of Investigation, accessed December 1, 2024, https://www.fbi.gov/history/famous-cases/weather-underground-bombings.; “The Unabomber,” History: Famous Cases and Criminals, Federal Bureau of Investigation, accessed December 1, 2024, https://www.fbi.gov/history/famous-cases/unabomber.; and “Oklahoma City Bombing,” History: Famous Cases and Criminals, Federal Bureau of Investigation, accessed December 1, 2024, https://www.fbi.gov/history/famous-cases/oklahoma-city-bombing.

[46] “World Trade Center Bombing 1993,” History: Famous Cases and Criminals, Federal Bureau of Investigation, accessed December 1, 2024, https://www.fbi.gov/history/famous-cases/world-trade-center-bombing-1993, and “1993 World Trade Center Bombing,” Latest Stories, U.S. Department of State, February 21, 2019, https://www.state.gov/1993-world-trade-center-bombing/.

[47] Kruse, 220-221.

[48] H. Bruce Franklin, “Star Trek in the Vietnam Era,” Film and History 24, no. ½ (1994): 36-46, https://doi.org/10.1353/flm.1994.a395002.

[49] Nicholas Evan Sarantakes, “Cold War Pop Culture and the Image of U.S. Foreign Policy: The Perspective of the Original Star Trek Series,” Journal of Cold War Studies 7, no. 4 (2005): 74-103, https://doi.org/10.1162/1520397055 012488 .

[50] Kruze, 220.

[51] Star Trek: The Original Series, season 2, episode 15, “The Trouble with Tribbles,” directed by Joseph Pevney, written by David Gerrold, featuring William Shatner, James Doohan, and Walter Koenig, aired December 29, 1967, in broadcast syndication, 21:43-25:57, https://www.paramountplus.com/shows/video/1226188697/.

[52] Vai-Lam Mui, “Information, Civil Liberties, and the Political Economy of Witch-Hunts,” Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization 15, no. 2 (1999): 503-504, https://www.jstor.org/stable/3555065.

[53] Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, season 1, episode 20, “In the Hands of the Prophets,” directed by David Livingston, written by Robert Hewitt Wolf, featuring Avery Brooks, Nana Visitor, Colm Meaney, Rosaland Chao, and Louise Fletcher, aired June 20, 1993, in broadcast syndication, 1:47-1:50, https://www.paramountplus.com/shows/video/gg7 NOUqKNrbke8RtQxpzYx9teVPy22Hz/.

[54] The former Kai, Kai Opaka, was killed in season 1, which meant that a new religious leader needed to be appointed by the religious community. It is also important to note that Commander Sisko was identified as the Emissary of the Prophets and is, unwillingly, connected to the Bajoran faith.

[55] Federal Bureau of Investigation, “World Trade Center Bombing 1993.”

[56] The Deep Space Nine (DS9) station was a former Cardassian military and labor space station that the Bajoran Provisional Government took control of after the end of the Cardassian occupation of Bajor.

[57] Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, season 5, episode 4, “…Nor the Battle to the Strong,” directed by Kim Friedman, written by Brice R. Parker, and René Echevarria, featuring Cirroc Lofton and Alexander Siddig, aired 21 October 1996, in broadcast syndication, https://www.paramountplus.com/shows/video/M0Jzs5X8tCYk_8WOjuCwArnwUfh MEsZD/.

[58] The Federation was engaged in a war with the Klingon Empire as a result of the infiltration of the Dominion changeling leaders into their government. During “Nor the Battle to the Strong,” the Klingons had broken an agreed upon cease-fire with the Federation, which resulted in Dr. Bashir’s diversion to the field hospital on Ajilon Prime.

[59] “…Nor the Battle to the Strong,” 43:03-43:38.

[60] Kruse, 219-220.

[61]Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, season 7, episode 8, “The Siege of AR-558,” directed by Winrich Kolbe, written by Ira Steven Behr, and Hans Beimler, featuring Avery Brooks, Aron Eisenberg, Armin Shimerman, and Alexander Siddig, aired November 10, 1998, in broadcast syndication, https://www.paramountplus.com/shows/video/mIdm1Lc eoK_eeqSuaO8_jl7G_QNJuhi6/.

[62] Commander Sisko was promoted to Captain in season 3, episode 26. Additionally, Nog is the first Ferengi Member of Starfleet and Jake Sisko’s best friend.

[63] The Jem’Hadar were a genetically engineered clone species that the Dominion bred to fight wars for them.

[64] Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, season 7, episode 10, “It’s Only a Paper Moon,” directed by Anson Williams, written by David Mack, Ronald D. Moore, and John J. Ordover, featuring Avery Brooks, Aron Eisenberg, and James Darren. Aired December 30, 1998, in broadcast syndication, https://www.paramountplus.com/shows/video/C4tVIj7ZzLXaN yd1NAVh71SEN85fkPP2/.

[65] In the Star Tek universe, the characters use holosuites to create fictional worlds and characters they can immerse themselves in to live out fantasies as part of the story. Vic Fontaine is a hologram who is fully sentient, which means that he is aware of the real world and its events, that runs a casino and lounge in Las Vegas in the year 1962.

[66] “It’s Only a Paper Moon, “38:40-38:50.

[67] Kruse, 187-188.

[68] Russel, 158-161.


The John W. Jones Story

Reprinted with permission from https://www.johnwjonesmuseum.org/the-john-w-jones-story

John W. Jones became an active agent in the Underground Railroad in 1851. In 1854, the Northern Central railroad tracks from Williamsport, Pennsylvania to Elmira, New York were completed. Jones made an arrangement with Northern Central employees and hid the fugitives in the 4 o’clock “Freedom Baggage Car,” directly to Niagara Falls via Watkins Glen and Canandaigua. Most of Jones’s “baggage” eventually landed in St. Catharines, Ontario.

By 1860, Jones aided in the escape of 800 runaway slaves. He usually received the fugitives in parties of six to ten, but there were times he found shelter for up to 30 men, women, and children a night. It is believed Jones sheltered many in his own home behind First Baptist Church. Of those 800, none were captured or returned to the South.

Jones became the sexton for Woodlawn Cemetery in 1859. One of his primary roles was to bury each deceased Confederate soldier from the Elmira Prison Camp. Of the 2,973 prisoners who Jones buried, only seven are listed as unknown. Jones kept such precise records that on December 7, 1877, the federal government declared the burial site a national cemetery.

Historically, the house was the private residence of John W. Jones and his family, changed ownership several times, and was last used as rental property that fell into disrepair. Condemned by the City of Elmira in 1997, Lucy Brown brought it to the public’s attention and with a group of concerned citizens, saved it from demolition. The building currently stands on Jones’ original farm property and the site will continue to be visually interpreted as a farm.

The museum highlights the history of African Americans who settled in New York and the activity of local abolitionists, emphasizing Elmira’s role as the only regular agency and published station on the Underground Railroad between Philadelphia and St. Catharine’s, Canada, and explore Mr. Jones’ community involvement and his relationship with his contemporaries.

John W. Jones was born a slave June 21, 1817, on a plantation south of Leesburg, Virginia. He was owned by the Ellzey family, an influential family who treated their slaves with perhaps more kindness than some plantation owners did. Miss Sarah (Sally) Ellzey was fond of John and was a good friend to him. But she was getting on in years and John was concerned about what would happen to him once she passed away.

On June 3, 1844, at the age of 27, John fled north to the place his mother had told him about “where there is no slavery.” It took one month for John, his two half-brothers, George and Charles, and Jefferson Brown and John Smith from an adjoining estate to walk from Virginia to Elmira, New York, a distance of about 300 miles. The route they followed was part of the Underground Railroad coming up through Pennsylvania and into New York by way of Williamsport, Canton, Alba and South Creek. In South Creek they reached the farm of Dr. Nathaniel Smith, where they crawled into the hay mow of his immense barn and went to sleep, more dead than alive. They remained there over night. Mrs. Smith discovered them and cooked food and took it to them. This is the Mrs. Smith whose grave in Woodlawn Cemetery, just beyond the Langdon plot, always had fresh flowers on it and no one knew where they came from. After John Jones died, there were no more mysterious fresh flowers.

John Jones was an ambitious man and never idle. The first thing he did when he arrived in Elmira was to offer to cut wood in exchange for 50¢ for Mrs. John Culp, Colonel John Hendy’s daughter. Another early job he took was in a tallow and candle store working for Seth Kelly. John wanted to get an education, but was refused at first because he was black. Judge Arial Standish Thurston befriended him, realized his potential and made it possible for him to receive an education – in fact, at the same school where before he had been turned down. As a result, John went to school in the winter and worked as janitor for Miss Clara Thurston’s school for young ladies on Main Street. In October, 1847, he was appointed sexton or caretaker of the first church building of the First Baptist Church that had been constituted in 1829 under the name of the Baptist Church of Southport and Elmira. The first members gathered in homes, but as the membership grew they met in a schoolhouse in Southport. By 1832, the membership had grown to the point where they decided to build their own church building. They were sold the piece of land where the Baptist Church still is today for $1.50 by Jeffrey and Elizabeth Wisner who were in-laws of the first pastor, Rev. Philander Gillett. The first building was a barn-like structure constructed at a cost of $954.

By 1848, 16 years later, the Baptists had outgrown that building and decided to build something larger. The 1863 City Directory says this building was constructed of wood, stucco and cost $8000. Mr. Jones was sexton of this second church building for the 42 years that it was in existence.

In 1854 he bought the “yellow house next to the church” from an Ezra Canfield for $500. Two years later, John Jones married Rachel Swails. Rachel’s brother was Stephen Swails, a Lieutenant in the 54th Massachusetts Regiment. If you have ever seen the movie Glory, you know the story of this famous regiment.

By 1859, Jones was already very active in Underground Railroad work. An article in The Liberator (Boston) signed J.W. Jones, Sec. said: “Resolved, That we, the colored citizens of Elmira, do hereby form ourselves into a society for the purpose of protecting ourselves against those persons, [slave-catchers] prowling through different parts of this and other States since the passing of the diabolical act of Sept. 18th, 1850, which consigns freemen of other States to that awful state of brutality which the fiendish slaveholders of the Southern States think desirable for their colored brethren, but are not willing to try it themselves.”

Arch Merrill said in his book on the UGRR, “Jones quietly took command of the Underground in Elmira, a gateway between the South and the North. It became the principal station on the ‘railroad’ between Philadelphia and the Canadian border. Jones worked closely with William Still, the chief Underground agent in Philadelphia, who forwarded parties of from six to 10 fugitives at a time to Elmira.

“Jones had many allies in Elmira. Mrs. John Culp hid runaways in her home. Other Underground leaders were Jervis Langdon; Simeon Benjamin, the founder of Elmira College; Thomas Stanley Day; S. G. Andrus; John Selover; Riggs Watrous and others. The station master concealed as many as 30 slaves at one time in his home—exactly where, he never told. He carried on his operations so secretly that only the inner circle of abolitionists knew that in a decade he dispatched nearly 800 slaves to Canada. “John Jones demonstrated his winning ways in encouraging the railroad baggage men to stow away the hundreds of men, women, and children who were spirited away to freedom.

“In 1854 the railroad from Williamsport to Elmira was completed and Jones received many more fugitives by train, to ship away in the 4 a.m. ‘Freedom Baggage Car,’ directly to Niagara Falls via Watkins Glen and Canandaigua, where the car was shifted to the New York Central. Most of Jones’s ‘baggage’ eventually landed in St. Catharine’s.”

His house right next to the church was the UGRR station of which Mr. Jones was station master. I often wonder about his wife, Rachel, who never knew how many were coming for dinner. I have also wondered if on those nights when he had 30 or more people to hide, if the church building, which he had access to, gave them shelter. There is no record that tells us this, but still, I wonder.

If you stand at the corner of West Church Street and Railroad Avenue and look north toward the Erie depot, you can envision the journey of the fugitives in the middle of the night as they go from Mr. Jones’s home, where the parking lot of First Baptist is now, up Railroad Avenue to the depot.


Wm. Still’s book about the UGRR is full of stories by the actual people involved in the work. In October, 1855, a lady wrote to Still asking, “Please give me again the direction of Hiram Wilson and the friend in Elmira, Mr. Jones, I think.” [Still, page 40]

Here is a letter written by John W. Jones to William Still:
Elmira, June 6, 1860.
Friend Wm Still:


The Black Plague: A Positive Spin on Death?

How can mass mortality be viewed in a positive light? This is a question that arises when it comes to contemporary discussions of the fourteenth-century Black Death epidemic which wiped out nearly one-third of the population of Europe.[1] It is difficult to understate the immediate negative consequences of the Plague as it dismembered families, ripped apart social structures, and threw the economy into shock. Yet, some historians have now come to see the depopulation of the continent as a sort of necessary evil. Shortages of resources and job opportunities were prevalent by the beginning of the fourteenth century, especially in England, the country this paper will focus on.[2] In contrast, the Plague eliminated the shortages caused by overpopulation which immediately increased demand for workers. This led to increased wage growth and the widening of options of employment for average civilians. So, did the Black Death have a more positive or negative short-term impact on the English labor force? This essay argues that while the epidemic brought about a period of brief devastation, it ultimately eased the shortages of the years that preceded it leading to rapid labor reform which can be seen in first-hand accounts and the post-plague policies aimed at curtailing it.

            The advancements made by laborers as a result of the Black Death can most obviously be seen by comparing their circumstances from before and after the Plague’s onset. As mentioned previously, it is therefore important to begin by establishing the former. This can be done by analyzing “The Statute of Labourers,” a 1351 policy put in place by the English government which attempted to maintain the social structure that was present before the epidemic. In so doing, the law continuously reverts back to the conditions of the “20th year of the king’s reign” which refers to 1346, just one year before the onset of the Black Death.[3] One of the Statute’s stipulations is that most employees, especially in agricultural fields could not be hired for periods less than a year, or other extended tenures that existed beforehand.[4] This severely limited the options of laborers and forced them to remain in jobs that might not pay as well as others. Therefore, not only were there severe shortages of jobs in England during the beginning of the fourteenth century, but workers were often unable to switch jobs, being signed for lengthy terms of service. Furthermore, the Statute makes it clear that virtually no benefits were offered by employers. Laborers were therefore expected to work for their dwindling salaries alone.[5] This shows a circumstance in which there was such a high supply of workers, that employers did not need to create many incentives to fill their openings.

            Karakacili furthers the image of pre-Plague life that the Statute of Labourers provides. Her findings show that the majority of workers in England at the time were farmers. And just as the provisions of the Statute mandated certain tenures of service for employees, Karakacili claims that much of the labor by said farmers was completed by serfs. In addition, Karakacili applies the Malthusian crisis she explains earlier to the predicament of English laborers. As such, she claims that “the average output of a farm worker did not suffice…to feed him or herself.”[6] Therefore, wages were so low, and resources were so scarce, that the majority of people were not able to provide for themselves. But workers remained in their struggling positions because it was likely the best they could achieve.[7] So, in this situation as well, workers were limited in their ability to leave their jobs, both because they were legally prevented from doing so, and because there were very few other viable options.

All aspects of society were affected by the Black Death, and limitations for employees in England were no exception. To this point, Alfani and Murphy explain in “Plague and Lethal Epidemics” that “an inequality decline after a severe mortality is what we should expect.”[8] By this, they mean that various economic consequences of epidemics contribute to a narrowing of the wage gap. This is because as the population declines, so does the supply of labor. And the general rule of economics that Alfani and Murphy outline is that as a resource becomes scarcer, it becomes more expensive.[9] This was clearly the case with the Black Death as it had one of the highest mortality rates of any epidemic in history. Therefore, the mortality of the Plague diminished the supply of workers which immediately led to increased wages and competition between employers for laborers.

            The increase in competition for English laborers can be seen in various accounts of serfs leaving their old employers behind as there were finally better options available. As such, after the Black Death, there are abundant instances showing the diminishing disconnect between serfs and their masters as the former could now achieve sustainable compensation. An account of the East Riding estates of Meaux Abbey in the 1350s outlines several examples of serfs discovering new opportunities in the wake of the Plague. In one instance, the account describes a series of serfs bound to the church in the town of Wawne. However, it goes on to ridicule them saying that despite their long history of being bound to serve the church, they have declared themselves free of their service. Still, it does not say that they just left to wander about the country. Rather, they called themselves servants of the king as they “apparently considered it more glorious to be…royal serfs.”[10] Another example of this trend comes in the Durham hallmoot book of 1350-55 which discusses the experiences of a lord in northern England whose serfs abandon him. These farmers are described as “malicious” as their actions were seen as a betrayal of the master they were bound to. Again though, they are not seen as completely leaving their jobs altogether, but with the intention to “tak[e] holdings elsewhere.”[11] This shows the occurrence of the pattern that Alfani and Murphy discuss. The Black Death wiped out so many workers that demand for them increased dramatically thereby widening the prospects of the labor force. As a result, workers who previously had no hope of ever leaving their insufficient circumstances, could now easily find work elsewhere and for better wages. The serfs of Wawne and Durham are emblematic of this trend as they departed their old livelihoods for better ones in the wake of the Black Death upheaval.

            The Black Death’s economic consequences can be seen not only in firsthand accounts, but also in the legislation instituted by governments following it. Leading Plague historian Samuel Cohn discusses such legislation in his article “After the Black Death: Labour legislation and attitudes towards labour” in which he outlines the motivation behind it and its differences throughout Europe. Cohn explains that these policies were put in place to stimy the supposed advancements that laborers were making as a result of the fear and anxiety that accompanied the great mortality.[12] As Herlihy explained, the Black Death represented an unalterable shift in the labor dynamics of the fourteenth century[13] and this perception was felt throughout Europe just as Cohn describes. Therefore, the reverberations of the Plague on English labor can be seen in post-epidemic policies aimed at curtailing them.

            An example of these post-Plague policies is that of Simon Sudbury who as the Archbishop of Canterbury in the 1370s was the foremost religious leader in England behind the Pope. In a 1378 letter to the Bishop of London, Sudbury lays out both his displeasure with the changes in labor, and his solution to them. He thus begins by describing his own priests as “infected with the sin of greed” for they had been selling their services for “vastly inflated salaries” outside the church.[14] In response, the Archbishop raises the wages of the priests in order to get them to stay, but also imposes strict penalties for those would still not adhere to the new salaries.[15] Sudbury’s letter thus proves that post-plague advancements were not only occurring for farmers and serfs, but also for members of the church. This situation widens the scope of Black Death reform from the lowliest peasants to include the clergy as well.

            The hallmark of English post-Plague labor legislation came in the form of the aforementioned 1351 Statute of Labourers which attempted to return the social order to the characteristics it embodied five years earlier.[16] It therefore made it illegal for workers to sign employment contracts that were binding for less than a year, instituted strict salaries for various jobs that were not to be exceeded, and required that employers offer no benefits to their laborers.[17] Its fears of workers making advancements are confirmed by the various accounts of individuals being charged for violating it. In a 1353 case in the town of Lincoln, a ploughman named John Skit is described as fleeing to “distant parts,” fearing his prosecution for accepting a new job under better working conditions before his contract was concluded.[18] In a similar 1360 case from Bolingbroke, a bishop named Alan is recorded as being charged forty pence for leaving his employment to a figure known as “Lady Roos” before his term of service was over.[19] Another case from 1374 describes a so-called “vagabond” named Richard Rote as being placed in stocks until he agreed to work again. However, the case also claims that two people attempted to free Rote, openly defying the provisions of the Statute of Labourers.[20] There are countless examples of violations of the Statue, thereby showing how labor reform was in fact taking place.

            It is not at all difficult to point out the destructive repercussions of the Black Death. By eliminating one-third of the population of Europe, it tore apart institutions, families, and impacted nearly every corner of society. However, there has emerged a sound argument for the Plague having a positive effect on English labor. Before the epidemic ravaged the country, England, like most places in the continent, was suffering immense shortages in both resources and job opportunities. However morbidly, the Black Death’s mortality ended this crisis and opened up the job market. As there were now shortages of workers, employers were forced to raise wages and benefits, and laborers could now leave their jobs (albeit illegally according to the Statutes) as there were other viable options. This trend was not without resistance and the English government attempted to stimy the advancements of employees in order to maintain the social structure. But, these policies prove that reform was indeed taking place, especially since there are many documented violations of them. As such, these circumstances beg the question, was the English workforce more positively or negatively affected by the Black Death? By ending the Malthusian Crisis of the early fourteenth century, the Plague opened up the job market increasing wages and opportunities for average English workers in a way that would not be seen again for centuries.

            At this point, it seems appropriate to ask, so what? What does an epidemic from the fourteenth century have to do with your classroom today, 700 years later. Well, especially considering the events of the last few years, it seems almost more relevant than ever before. The Coronavirus Pandemic we all experienced is perfect fodder for a compare and contrast activity. A clear example is the fact that the Coronavirus was classified as a pandemic but was less deadly. Why was this the case? What were the characteristics of each that they were classified differently? Furthermore, one could easily conduct a simulation with this lesson. It might be a good idea to have the students imagine the methods they would use to handle the Black Death epidemic which might rationalize some of the actions taken by Plague doctors. And if you’re looking for a lesson specifically concerning the labor reforms discussed in this article, consider tying it in with your economics unit. It’s a clear example of supply and demand. There is definitely no shortage of options for lessons on this topic, which could be an eye-opening, yet relatable subject for your class.

Alfani, Guido, and Murphy, Tommy. “Plague and Lethal Epidemics in the Pre-Industrial World.” The Journal of Economic History 77, no. 1 (2017): 314–43.

Bardsley, Sandy. “Women’s Work Reconsidered: Gender and Wage Differentiation in Late Medieval England.” Past & Present, No. 165 (Nov. 1999): 3-29

Cohn, Samuel. “After the Black Death: Labour Legislation and Attitudes Towards Labour in Late-Medieval Western Europe.” The Economic History Review 60, no. 3 (2007): 457–85

Herlihy, David. “The New Economic and Demographic System.” In The Black Death and the Transformation of the West (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1997), pp. 39-57

Karakacili, Eona. “English Agrarian Labor Productivity Rates before the Black Death: A Case Study.” The Journal of Economic History 64, no. 1 (2004): 24–60.

Rosemary Horrox, ed. and trans., The Black Death (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1994).

“Difficulties in finding tenants,” pp. 326-331

“Rebellious Serfs at Wawne,” pp. 331-338

“A selection of cases from Lincolnshire,” pp. 319-320

Simon Sudbury, “Simon Sudbury increases priests’ wages,” pp. 311-312

“The Statute of Labourers,” pp. 312-316


[1] Guido Alfani, and Tommy E. Murphy. 2017. “Plague and Lethal Epidemics in the Pre-Industrial World.” The Journal of Economic History 77 (no. 1), 318.

Alfani and Murphy discuss the Black Death’s emergence in the Himalayas in the 1330s and its recognition by the Mongols in control there. From central Asia, it traveled west eventually reaching the shores of the Black Sea, the Hellespont, and then the Mediterranean. Because of the wide area affected by the disease, mortality rates ranged from place to place. The one-third rate discussed in the first paragraph of this essay refers to that of Europe at large and is estimated to be closer to two-thirds in some regions throughout the continent.

[2] Eona Karakacili. “English Agrarian Labor Productivity Rates before the Black Death: A Case Study.” The Journal of Economic History 64, no. 1 (2004), 25.

[3] “The Statute of Labourers” in The Black Death, ed. and trans. Rosemary Horrox (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1994), 312.

[4] Ibid., 313

[5] Ibid.

[6] Karakacili, 26.

[7] Ibid.

[8] Alfani and Murphy, 334.

[9] Ibid.

[10] “Rebellious Serfs at Wawne” in Horrox, The Black Death, 332

[11] “Difficulties in finding tenants” in Horrox, The Black Death, 327

[12] Samuel Cohn. “After the Black Death: Labour Legislation and Attitudes Towards Labour in Late-Medieval Western Europe.” The Economic History Review 60, no. 3 (2007), 457

[13] Herlihy, 40

[14] Simon Sudbury, “Simon Sudbury increases priests’ wages” in Horrox, The Black Death, 311

[15] Ibid., 312

[16] “The statute of labourers,” 312

[17] Ibid.

[18] “A selection of cases from Lincolnshire,” in Horrox, The Black Death, 320

[19] Ibid.

[20] Ibid.


 

The Cost of Conformity: The Lavender Scare & Cold War Masculinity

In 1951 a book by Jack Lait and Lee Mortimer titled “Washington Confidential” was released. This book observed Washington D.C. at the time, and closely perceived the city from a unique lens. Lait and Mortimer referred to many different types of “problems”, but in Chapter 15 “The Garden of Pansies” a specific group of people who reside in Washington D.C. are then described as “fairies” and “mannish women.”[1] This book paints a picture of how society perceived people who were gay in the early fifties, specifically in the nation’s capital. Lait and Mortimer wrote, “There is no geographic section where [these] degenerates generally live. That is part of the general picture, everything, everywhere, in Washington.”[2] They were seen as people who infiltrated the city and were not to be trusted. Another word for an infiltrator is a spy, a word that Joseph McCarthy used all too well in his speeches about communists in the United States, ones that sparked the Second Red Scare in the late 1940s.  

The Second Red Scare was propelled by conservative republican Senator Joseph McCarthy of Wisconsin, who argued that he knew of 205 card holding communists working in the State Department during a speech in Wheeling, West Virginia.[3] A social panic began, as there were already fears of communists infiltrating within the government prior to this speech. Following this, John Peurifoy, the Deputy Undersecretary of State for Administration in 1950, argued that there were not any communist employees within the State Department, but instead 91 known homosexuals who worked in the department.[4] While the public’s main focus remained on communists and the Cold War, gays and lesbians were equally targeted as some feared they posed security risks in an era of panic. This was the start of the Lavender Scare, a phrase first coined by author and historian David K. Johnson.

Through accumulation and analysis of research from primary sources and historians, multiple questions about the Lavender Scare can be asked. The first is how did government intervention through the Lavender Scare both create fear from the public and also stem from public response? This not only creates concerns of how the government, specifically Congressional Subcommittees, decided to act on the information of gays and lesbians who worked within the government but how the public was informed on this information and the actions that were taken. In simpler terms the government and public were in a rotation of push and pull, which created and sustained an atmosphere of fear during the Lavender Scare. The second question that came to mind was, in what ways did the changing views of masculinity at the start of the Cold War contribute to the firing of thousands of gay men and women in the late 1940s and early 1950s, which is now known as the Lavender Scare?  The exaggerated focus on ideas of Cold War masculinity in the late 1940s and 1950s reflected the concerns of America in the early phases of the Cold War, especially when looked at through the Lavender Scare. Finally, it should also be noted that the Lavender Scare directly led to the start of the Gay Rights Movement seen starting during the scare, and can be followed into the present day.

The Lavender Scare is a direct reflection of the government’s fears at the start of the Cold War, similar to the Second Red Scare that occurred at this time. While investigations of gays and lesbians differed from the ways that potential communists were investigated, the government used its resources to find and investigate gays and lesbians who worked in government positions. The public’s fears of the time influenced these investigations by the government, but as years of investigations went on the government also emphasized the fears of the public. It essentially created a push and pull effect, where the government felt pressured by outside forces and the public was forced to respond to what the government found.

The Senate is where much discourse in the government occurred about gays and lesbians who worked in Federal Government. A Congressional Report from March 31, 1950 showcased the homophobic atmosphere surrounding the Senate. Republican Senator Bridges from New Hampshire said, “The President of the United States knows that the only thing I want to sabotage is the enemies of the United States. Who are they? They are the appeasers; they are the subversives; they are the incompetents; they are the homosexuals, who threaten the security of this country and the peace of the world.”[5] Senator Bridges’ rhetoric in this congressional report shows the fear that is aimed to be pushed out to the public as he paints gays and lesbians as enemies, but also the democrats as well referring to them as appeasers. Senator Miller from Nebraska added to this report, “You must know what a homosexual is. It is amazing that in the Capital City of Washington we are plagued with such a large group of those individuals. Washington attracts many lovely folks. The sex crimes in the city are many.”[6] The connotations here paint homosexuals as perverts, like they were years before, but now with the threat of national security. This Congressional Report shows how the 1950s was where homophobic ideology was able to dominate government concerns.

Fear of gays and lesbians who held positions in the government was executed further by local newspapers. One of the most notable newspapers to inform and alert the public was the Washington Evening Star, as it provided updates on the estimated amount of people who were gay and held a job in government. In April of 1950, the newspaper reported that “charges have been aired that there are about 5,000 perverts in this city, many in Federal Employment.”[7] This is the initial public news report about what has been discussed within the government about the concerns of gays and lesbians. The explanations in the news report radiates the fear that the government officials at the time had experienced, onto the public. At the end of May 1950, the same newspaper published a lengthy report about gays and lesbians involved in government employment. It is crucial to note the Congressional Subcommittee of Senators Wheely and Hill, who were the first to investigate government agencies to rid them of gays and lesbians. This specific news report notes their argument for a full investigation of homosexuals employed by the federal government, as they pend Senate approval, and the suspected numbers in all sectors of government, which included the military.[8] This report reflected the way that both the government and public felt like gays and lesbians infiltrated the government, in such a way that needed quick and direct intervention to prevent any threats.

            While the Lavender Scare itself reflects the fear of gays and lesbians in government and society due to the potential security risk they posed, it also deeply reflected the concerns of masculinity in politics during the time period. Joeseph McCarthy was a man who had a strong sense of the ideal masculinity. His masculinity was something new and different, as he aimed to portray himself “as a fighter, gambler and womanizer” which intrigued many people both in government and the public in general.[9] He set a standard on how to respond to threats, in this case communism and homosexuality, through the way he carried himself as a man. Supervisor of the Foreign Service Files, Helen Balog notes during the McCarthy Hearings that many people refer to McCarthy as “a big, bad wolf” and “a dragon of some kind.”[10] Her description of him emphasizes his dominant disposition in government. Additionally, masculinity is an important factor in how gays were received in society as well, especially since they were stereotyped as having qualities and traits that were not typically associated with their gender. The focus on gender during the Lavender Scare is essential to recognize as it aligns completely with the political ideologies that were presented against communism and homosexuality during this time.

            During the McCarthy Era, gender was deeply intertwined with and attributed to politics. The discourse that connected to the fight against communism, and homosexuality in government, was woven into the way that politicians carried themselves. Historian K.A. Cuordileone said, “The power of hard/soft opposition in political discourse lay here, in the gendered symbolic baggage that gave such imagery meaning and resonance.”[11] The public began to associate hardness and excessively masculine traits with a hardness against communism and other security threats, which were gays and lesbians. The public also associated softness, often attributed to liberal politicians, with an unwillingness to take down potential enemies, and a possible contribution or affiliation to the threat itself.[12] This created a split within government, as politicians used this as a strategy against one another as they continued their fight against threats of national security. This new political atmosphere also pushed politicians to strive for a hardness against these threats, so that they aligned with the fight to ease the publics fears.

            While the way someone presented their masculinity in government was commonly used as a political strategic tool, homophobia was as well, no matter how hard or soft the politician was. McCarthy, commonly described as being a hard politician with uncontrolled masculine traits, had his own run in with suspicions of his sexuality.[13] Hank Greenspun, a reporter, had published numerous reports that labeled McCarthy as a homosexual, and suspicion about McCarthy’s sexuality began to run throughout both the public and the government.[14] As McCarthy’s masculinity was debated, Cold War liberals who experienced the sting of softness on their political careers, jumped in on the allegations against McCarthy, to essentially ruin McCarthy’s career through the emphasis that he was not to “be trusted to defend his nation’s interest.”[15] In their efforts to destroy McCarthy through his sexuality, liberal politicians were able to show their stance on the matter of sexuality, which was that it did pose a threat to national security and was able to be hidden even behind the mask of strong masculinity.

            While these politics charged by the notions of gender are important to consider, it is also crucial to weigh the impact on gays and lesbians themselves, who were the direct targets of politicians at the time, and how they were perceived by society. Stereotypes were commonly used to determine whether or not someone was gay. David K. Johnson stated, “Gay men were more likely to be targeted due to lesbians having less access to public space leading to them not being arrested as much as men. It was more typical for women to be close to other women, whereas there were more lines drawn within relationships with men.”[16] This not only reflects the government’s concerns of gays in federal employment, but the attributes of gender in the same sense. The connections between the fear of softness, and the fear of gays and lesbians infiltration in government positions is one that connects and reflects how both gender and sexuality drove the political landscape during the early years of the Cold War.

            The Lavender Scare and the focus on virile masculinity created a ripple effect that is still felt in the society of the United States today. The forced removal of thousands from their careers altered lives, as the government’s interference touched each person who was a part of the gay community. The removal process of gays and lesbians from their federal jobs was done in a quiet manner, so that many of the people removed from their jobs would remain outcasted from society.  When suspicion arose, suspected gays and lesbians would be investigated and questioned about their sexuality, afterwards being asked to resign.[17] It was common that coworkers of government employees would simply disappear, one day at work and the next gone with no explanation.[18] After resignation, many people also fled to other parts of the world where there might have been more acceptance.[19] John E. Matson, a special agent in the State Department’s Division of Security, said, “This particular man is Thomas Hicock. Unfortunately, this man a week later committed suicide, so he is out of the picture. He had been in the Foreign Service for over eighteen years.”[20] While this is one example of what happened after someone was forced from their job, there is much that is still unknown and hidden within history.

Since these removals deeply altered the way of life for gays and lesbians that worked for the government, many acted against the discrimination. The Mattachine Society that was formed in Los Angeles was created by Henry Hay, a gay man and communist, in 1950. The group would become known as one of the first instances where response and retaliation arose against the discriminatory actions of the government. The FBI had a strong focus on the group and their magazines, Mattachine Review and One, which were published to spread their message of equality for gays and lesbians. The FBI looked for subversives throughout the group, but concluded that “the aim of the organization was to educate legislators and educators with respect to homosexuality.”[21] However, this is early in the investigation of the Mattachine Society of Los Angeles, and two more parts to the investigation proceeded this one which showed the desperateness to find something within the group that posed as a threat.

The group’s foundation of communism deeply influenced their agenda for advocacy and equality for gays and lesbians, which created some problems within the organization. Historian James Kirchick said, “Within a few years of its formation, however, the Society decided to distance itself from Hay and others with politically dicey affiliations.”[22] One of the groups to come out of this split was The Mattachine Society of Washington, created by Frank Kameny, an astronomer who worked in government and was fired from his job in 1957. Kameny differed from many others who were asked about their sexuality while at their government job, and fought against his forced removal through court cases that went all the way to the Supreme Court. There he argued that he and 15 million other Americans were treated as “second-class citizens.”[23] The Mattachine Society of Washington D.C. formed after his petition to the Supreme Court was denied. However, Kameny did not let this stop his advocacy, and he continued to lobby government officials and encouraged judicial cases in his fight for equality.[24] Kameny continued to remain at the forefront of the gay rights movement, and never stopped his fight for the change needed to grant equality to gays and lesbians around the country.

At a glance, the impact of these groups does not seem to promote that much change, as discrimination against gays and lesbians continued. The groups that formed from the Lavender Scare created a voice that was not heard often. Additionally, the counterculture that appeared in the sixties featured activism that was never seen before and “challenged American society at its core” which allowed for more people to join the fight against discrimination in all senses. [25] While different groups had dissimilar ideas about how to advocate, each one nevertheless worked toward a common goal of gay and lesbian acceptance in society.

While the Lavender Scare involved the forced removal of thousands from careers in the federal government, it created a political landscape that has been often overlooked in history. As discrimination developed over the years, the government allowed fear to permeate both the political landscape and the public lens especially at the start of the 1950s when the Cold War began. This created a push and pull effect from both sides, where action of removal was the only apparent solution. As gays and lesbians posed a security risk, and were attributed with stereotypical notions of gender, the political landscape began to hyperfocus on both sexuality and gender, mainly in terms of masculinity. The idea of masculinity had a strong influence on both the government and public, which therefore led to a control on the legislative decisions that were made during the Lavender Scare.

The groups that formed from the government’s maltreatment were created out of a response from the prejudiced actions of the government. The Mattachine Societies that began to appear across the country reflected the ambition and need for change. People advocated through speeches, directly to the government or through magazine publications where they were able to draw more people into their cause. They advocated for change, and for an ability to be themselves in society. These groups that arose in a time where fear ran rampant through communities set the stage and provided a framework for the groups to come in the later years. Through the resilience and solidarity of each of these groups, change was able to happen.

The Lavender Scare is still a recently discovered aspect of history, and is one that is often overlooked. The forced removal of thousands of gay men and women from their careers is one that is left relatively unknown, as the second Red Scare dominates this era of history. But the years that followed the harsh 1950s created more and more opportunities for gay men and women. Still, it is only recently that people who are queer have had the opportunities to fully reenter into society, as same-sex marriage was legalized less than 10 years ago by the Supreme Court. However, there are still many people who do not receive the same treatment due to their sexuality or the way the present themselves in society. It is important to understand how deeply rooted homophobia is in the United States society, as it has been since the early twentieth century. By ignoring the hidden history of the LGBTQIA+ community, one is ignoring the current problems at hand. If resolution and reparations are to be made to those who were discriminated against, one has to look back on the past, reflect, and take action.

Lait, Jack, and Lee Mortimer. Washington Confidential. New York: Crown Publishers, Inc., 1951.

McCarthy, Joseph. “Speech in Wheeling, West Virginia.” February, 1950. Accessed through University of Oregon.

Congressional Report. Vol 96, Part 4. 4513-4527. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-CRECB-1950-pt4/pdf/GPO-CRECB-1950-pt4-3.pdf

Evening Star, “Initial Report Drafted on Sex Case Hirings” Washington D.C.: W.D. Wallach & Hope, April 28, 1950. From Library of Congress. https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn83045462/1950-04-28/ed-1/seq-27/

Evening Star, “Senator Hill Proposes Complete Inquiry Into Hiring of Undesirables.” Washington D.C.: W.D. Wallach & Hope, May 20, 1950.  From Library of Congress. https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn83045462/1950-05-20/ed-1/seq-35/  

Executive Sessions of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of the Committee on Government Operations. 1953. https://www.senate.gov/about/resources/pdf/mccarthy-hearings-volume1.pdf

Mattachine Society: Part 01 of 03. FBI Records: The Vault. July 14, 1953. Accessed November 6, 2024. 15.

Cuordileone, K.A. ““Politics in an Age of Anxiety”: Cold War Political Culture and the Crisis in American Masculinity, 1949-1960”. The Journal of American History 87, no. 2 (2000): 515-545. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2568762.

Eaklor, Vicki F. Queer America: A People’s GLBT History of the United States. New York: The New Press, 2008.

Friedman, Andrea. “The Smearing of Joe McCarthy: The Lavender Scare, Gossip, and Cold War Politics.” American Quarterly 57, no. 4 (2005): 1105–29. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40068331

Johnson, David K. The Lavender Scare: The Cold War Persecution of Gays and Lesbians in the Federal Government. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2004.

Kirchick, James. Secret City: The Hidden History of Gay Washington. Henry Holt and Co., 2022.

Shibusawa, Naoko. “The Lavender Scare and Empire: Rethinking Cold War Antigay Politics.” Diplomatic History. 36, no. 4 (2012): 723-752.


[1] Ibid, 90-92.

[2] Ibid, 92.

[3] Joseph McCarthy, “Speech in Wheeling, West Virginia,” February, 1950, Accessed through University of Oregon.

[4] David. K. Johnson, The Lavender Scare: The Cold War Persecution of Gays and Lesbians in the Federal Government, (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2004), p. 1.

[5] Senator Bridges, Congressional Report. Vol 96, Part 4. 4513. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-CRECB-1950-pt4/pdf/GPO-CRECB-1950-pt4-3.pdf

[6] Miller, Congressional Report. Vol 96, Part 4. 4527. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-CRECB-1950-pt4/pdf/GPO-CRECB-1950-pt4-3.pdf

[7] Evening Star, “Initial Report Drafted on Sex Case Hirings” Washington D.C.: W.D. Wallach & Hope, April 28, 1950. From Library of Congress. https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn83045462/1950-04-28/ed-1/seq-27/

[8] Evening Star, “Senator Hill Proposes Complete Inquiry Into Hiring of Undesirables,” Washington D.C.: W.D. Wallach & Hope, May 20, 1950, From Library of Congress, https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn83045462/1950-05-20/ed-1/seq-35/

[9] Andrea Freidman, “The Smearing of Joe McCarthy: The Lavender Scare, Gossip, and Cold War Politics,” American Quarterly 57, no. 4 (2005): 1108, http://www.jstor.org/stable/40068331.

[10] Executive Sessions of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of the Committee on Government Operations. 1953, 187. https://www.senate.gov/about/resources/pdf/mccarthy-hearings-volume1.pdf

[11] K.A Cuordileone, ““Politics in an Age of Anxiety”: Cold War Political Culture and the Crisis in American Masculinity, 1949-1960,” The Journal of American History 87, no. 2 (2000): 516, https://www.jstor.org/stable/2568762.

[12] Ibid, 521.

[13] Andrea Freidman, “The Smearing of Joe McCarthy: The Lavender Scare, Gossip, and Cold War Politics,” American Quarterly 57, no. 4 (2005): 1112, http://www.jstor.org/stable/40068331.

[14] Ibid, 1112.

[15] Ibid, 1123-1124.

[16] David K. Johnson, The Lavender Scare: The Cold War Persecution of Gays and Lesbians in the Federal Government. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2004, 155.

[17] David K Johnson, The Lavender Scare: The Cold War Persecution of Gays and Lesbians in the Federal Government, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2004, 2.

[18] Ibid, 150-151.

[19] Naoko Shibusawa, “The Lavender Scare and Empire: Rethinking Cold War Antigay Politics,” Diplomatic History, 36, no. 4 (2012): 748.

[20] Executive Sessions of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of the Committee on Government Operations. 1953, 166. https://www.senate.gov/about/resources/pdf/mccarthy-hearings-volume1.pdf

[21] Mattachine Society: Part 01 of 03, FBI Records: The Vault, July 14, 1953, Accessed November 6, 2024, 15.

[22] James Kirchick, Secret City: The Hidden History of Gay Washington, Henry Holt and Co., 2022, 155.

[23] David K. Johnson, The Lavender Scare: The Cold War Persecution of Gays and Lesbians in the Federal Government. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2004, 181.

[24] Ibid, 192.

[25] Vicki F Eaklor, Queer America: A People’s GLBT History of the United States, (New York: The New Press, 2008), 108.