Michael Kilmartin, (pictured from left to right:) Lou Fumbanks, Bess, Michael Kilmartin, Chuck Kickbusch, 1954-1955, photograph, Wakkanai, Japan
The inclusion of African Americans within the United States military marked a critical point for the advancement of Civil Rights movement. However, there was a split in opinion in terms of whether this was progress or not. In Phillips’ article of “Did the Battlefield Kill Jim Crow” she cites that “Walter White declared that the Korean War had killed Jim Crow” but “William Worthy concluded that these GIs have died in vain, utterly in vain” (Phillips 3). In this case, I believe both historians are wrong. For the sake of my argument I am going to put Worthy and White on opposing sides. Neither argument is that simple but I believe when comparing them Phillips portrays them in that fashion. I would highlight that there is no middle ground between the two sides, with Walter that racism ceased to be and with Worthy that African American’s died in vain. Racism still persists today but more importantly to say that African American soldiers died in vain is an extremely arrogant and ignorant belief. The most significant achievement in my opinion was the relationships that formed between white and black soldiers and locals under American occupation during the Korean War.
I would christen this period as the development of the Civil Rights movement. As Hohn argues in their article, “Historians have traditionally worked within narrowly defined disciplines or geographical and chronological boundaries” (Hohn 5). There were no battlefield lines or territories owned by “racists” or “civil right activists” It was the persona experiences of the African American soldiers which would help to form what would be the Civil Rights movement back in the United States. “William Gardner Smith realized that, after being treated as social equals in postwar Germany, African American GIs would “never go back to the old way again,” in Germany African American GI’s found support from locals and would begin to form the progenitor Civil Rights groups (Hohn 1). After finding support abroad, African American veterans would go on to return stateside and help to fight for African American (and minority) rights. After arriving home, veterans along with “radical pacifists, and civil rights activists… sought new forms of organizations and leadership that built and perpetuated progressive and revolutionary movements for social change” (Hohn 16). The beginnings of the Civil Rights movement cannot be pinned down to one particular sport but the support for African Americans overseas and their relations with oversea citizens can and should be remembered for the crucial impact they had.
My grandfather, Michael Kilmartin, was a Staff Sergeant in the United States Airforce from 1954-1955, and worked as a radio operator during the occupation of Japan. In an oral interview with him two years ago I asked him about a variety of topics during his time as an occupation soldier. The following quotes were his beliefs and observations during the Korean War period. For his specific deployment he was “transferred up to Wakkanai, a fairly remote fishing village, in Northern Hokkaido. Kilmartin had arrived in Wakkanai, he was in a unique scenario as not all of the military had been integrated yet; “They (the military) had not yet integrated, the particular barracks they assigned me to, there were 11 African Americans, I was the first white person in the barracks. It was a great experience” A native of Maine, “The Japanese really I don’t believe showed any difference in the way they dealt with African Americans and white Americans.” He believed unlike in the States, there was not any distinguishable differences in treatment between African American and White soldiers. African American soldiers found more equality among members of another race in another nation. The picture above is taken from my grandfather’s photo album and in it was a his good friend Bess who along with my Grandfather would go work together, drink together, and spend time together with. I think that in terms of studying this particular time period there needs to be a greater focus upon the personal experiences of those involved rather than politicians and political organizations who only give a small and what I believe to be a skewed glimpse of the time period.
I agree that with looking back on this time period the personal stories need to be collected and told, however I do not think that there needs to be a greater focus on personal stories than politicians and political organizations. I think that the political side shows how laws were governed and the hatred and changing minds. When it comes to personal stories as historians we have to make sure they are historically accurate and avoid speculation, and people will change the story to appear as a better person. The way history is presented now has started to incorporate personal and political stories and facts together. The cohesion is better than than having a bigger focus on one over the other.
I believe that war furthers society and culture in many ways. Through victory and defeat cultures are shaped by how they fight wars, and often there is no turning back once a movement is in place. For civil rights, the wars of the 50s and 60s was a good staging point for the black community to fight foe equality. It is ironic though that African-Americans were treated more fairly in what was once Nazi Germany than they were with the country they had fought and died for. I feel this realization awoke many to the issues at hand.
I really liked your stance on these readings and how you wrote your argument. You did a great job explaining your position and provided great evidence. I think that it is interesting how other historians will debate the effects wars have on a societies culture. It would be interesting to see more first hand accounts of soldiers who served during the desegregation period.