Unleashed: John Lindsay and the Vietnam War The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Sanzone, Robert Zachary. Unleashed: John Lindsay and the Vietnam War.
Master's thesis, Harvard University Division of Continuing Education. Citable link https://nrs.edu/URN-3:HUL.INSTREPOS:37367689 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.edu/urn-3:HUL.terms-of- use#LAA Unleashed: John Lindsay and the Vietnam War Robert Zachary Sanzone A Thesis in the Field of History for the Degree of Master of Liberal Arts in Extension Studies Harvard University March 2021 Copyright 2021 Robert Zachary Sanzone Abstract This thesis examines New York City Mayor John Lindsay’s calculated decision to side with the Vietnam anti-war movement as part of his re-election strategy in 1969 and how that stance influenced the pro-war movement’s role in the Hardhat Riots in May of 1970. Through examining New York City-based newspapers, particularly the Daily News, and the New York Times, as well as other periodicals written at the time such as Time Magazine, the research focused specifically on Mayor John Lindsay’s order to lower all American flags atop municipal buildings on October 15, 1969—Moratorium Day—and how the pro-war movement exploited that decision to further their own efforts to support President Richard Nixon’s foreign policy. This thesis concludes that the pro- war movement exploited Lindsay’s flag edict by manipulating his motive for issuing the order.
Lindsay’s edict enabled his enemies to consolidate support for Nixon and his Vietnam War policy in a way that undermined Lindsay’s tenure, and emboldened the pro- war movement to take violent measures against those they saw as a threat to American values. It also made it easier for pro-war advocates to change the narrative in a way that made conservatives look and sound more positive and patriotic, which served to undercut the growing anti-war movement. Acknowledgements There are too many people to thank for the love and support shown to me during my years at Harvard but I’m going to try to recognize them anyway in no particular order. I wish to start with my loving parents, Bud and Marguerite, my sisters Kathryn, Mary, Bill, and Fritz, my siblings-in-law Carol, Scott, and Nora, and my many nieces and nephews.
I’d also like to thank my cousin Helen McHarris. My family supported my studies, and I will always love and appreciate them for it. I’ve received constant support from the faculty, staff, and student body at St. Mary of the Annunciation School in Danvers, MA.
Hearing “Are you done yet?” and “How’s the thesis?” month after month for the last four years in an endearing and supporting tone helped sustain my motivation. I’d like to thank Ryanne Colella, Theresa Saulnier, and Principal Sharon Burrill in particular for their unconditional professional and personal support. My best friend, Chris Cooper, always followed anything I said about Harvard with the question, “Wait, you go to Harvard?” before laughing hysterically. He loves to tease me about how much pride I take in being a Harvard man, but it comes from a very special kind of friendship and for that I’m thankful.
Former ’69 Mets Art Shamsky and Ron Swoboda took time to talk to me about that historic season and I’ll always appreciate their time and support. Special thanks to Emma Taylor and the fine people at proof-reading-service.com for working with me to revise and correct my thesis. I’d also like to thank Michele iv Maniscalco for taking the time to read through my thesis and offer advice and feedback. Their feedback and advice were very valuable.
Angela Fazio deserves a very special place here. We met in the spring of 2019 at Art Shamsky’s book talk and she told me all about the 1969 Mets season that she personally witnessed as a fan. Her feedback, information, and stories have had a significant impact on the work I’ve done about the Vietnam War. We’ve swapped dozens and dozens of emails, cried together on the phone (most recently with the passing of Tom Seaver) and I’ll always be in debt to her.
Thank you so much for your love, generosity and trust in me. An enormous thanks and debt of gratitude to Professor Fredrik Logevall, my thesis director and professor. His Vietnam War course at Harvard put me on the path towards writing a thesis about the war. His encouraging advice and guidance were always a huge source of encouragement for me.
I also like to thank Professor Donald Ostrowski for his guidance through the thesis proposal process, as well as patiently answering my many questions as I navigated through my thesis. Special thanks to Karen McCabe for taking the time to schedule my meetings with Professor Logevall and sharing her candy with me. I’d also like to thank Stephen J. Blinn, Gail Dourian, and Daniel Mongeon at Harvard for all of their help and guidance through Harvard Extension School.
I want to thank Tom Horrocks, Lindsay Mitchell, Serhii Plokhii, and Robert Allison, whose courses I took through Harvard Extension that gave me such a wonderful experience. Finally, special thanks to Thomas Schaffner, a classmate and good friend who always took the time to have a drink with me after class or proof-read one of my papers. My time at Harvard has given me tremendous personal and professional fulfillment in my life. v I owe a big thanks to Beth Rossano, John Versteeg, Travis Cos, Jen Lunsford, Derek Drilon, Tyler Wood, Bill Leftwich, Debbie Pugh, Pam Morrow, Joel Linscott, Elaine Henessey, Sarah Anais Mejia, Anna Lee, David Jordan, Cindy Cobb, Kade Johnson, Chap Ivey, Angelo Pacheco, BJ Alfaro, Matt Hartnett, BJ Alfero, Bill Webster, Jason Ocker, Brandon Gill, Chris Ostrowski, Erik Sherman, Peter Golenbock, Jason Fleshman, Michael Leahy, Aaron Oberman, Susan and Rod Godley, Jason and Rachel Snapper Godley, Cherilyn Lacy, Peter Wallace, Mieko Nishida, and so many others that I am failing to mention.
For those who do not see their name listed here, please do not interpret your omission from this list as my way of saying I’m not grateful. vi This thesis is dedicated to my two biggest cheerleaders, my sister Kathryn, and my cousin Helen vii “We don’t smoke marijuana in Muskogee We don’t take no trips on LSD We don’t burn no draft cards down on Main Street We love living right, and being free” -Merle Haggard, “Okie from Muskogee” “Tin soldiers and Nixon’s comin’. We’re finally on our own. This summer I hear the drummin’.
Four dead in Ohio.” -Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young, “Four Dead in Ohio” viii Table of Contents Abstract. 67 ix Introduction This thesis aims to tell the story of how the political aspirations of a mayor exacerbated violent reactions to the anti-war movement in New York City. It is an analysis of New York City Mayor John Lindsay’s role in Vietnam War-related protests that took place in New York City on October 15, 1969, also known as Moratorium Day, and its long-term effects on Vietnam War demonstrations, particularly the Hardhat Riots in May of 1970. My initial idea for this thesis focused on the hypothesis that the anti-war movement was much stronger because its members maintained a consistent message— which was to leave Vietnam—while American forces’ inability to achieve a decisive victory challenged pro-war advocates to reconsider their position.
I based this hypothesis on the U. military’s inability to achieve a strategic victory in Vietnam by 1969 that drove more Americans to side with the anti-war movement as casualties increased. This failure not only reflected an unwillingness to appreciate their enemy’s military capabilities, but an inability to accomplish their objectives. Despite these ongoing challenges, many Americans continued to support the war effort and argue that anti-war protestors were hindering President Nixon’s efforts to bring the war to a dignified close.
The research questions based on this initial hypothesis focused on examining what the actions of pro and anti-war protestors on Moratorium Day revealed about sentiments concerning the Vietnam War in New York City, as well as what key events of the Vietnam War affected American despondency between 1965 and 1969. Other questions regarding how historians have discussed Americans’ feelings about the Vietnam War since 1969, and whether the Mets’ 1969 World Series victory influenced Americans’ feelings about the Vietnam War, were considered, but did not yield much information. Those questions did though, albeit inadvertently, lead me to focus more closely on New York City Mayor John Lindsay’s participation in Moratorium Day activities and how that anti-war stance affected his tenure as mayor. Therefore, the focus of this thesis shifted away from my initial premise towards examining how pro-war advocates exploited Mayor Lindsay’s support for Moratorium Day to build a strong coalition to counter future anti-war demonstrations in New York City by specifically focusing on his order to lower the flags to half-staff on the city’s municipal buildings.
That change in focus led to the discovery of information giving additional insight into the decisions that President Richard Nixon made in 1969 and 1970 regarding the Vietnam War that can be traced to his fallout with Mayor Lindsay at the 1968 Republican National Convention. This discovery led to the conclusion that Nixon’s decision not to choose Lindsay as a running mate in 1968 allowed Lindsay to take more liberal political positions including an intensified stance against the Vietnam War that helped in his re- election as New York City Mayor in 1969. While Nixon pursued plans to end the Vietnam War through what he called Vietnamization, or “peace with honor,” Lindsay’s anti-war stance incurred intense anger from Nixon’s supporters who saw Lindsay as someone undermining the president while directly disrespecting the American flag by ordering that all city flags be flown at half-staff on Moratorium Day. This interpretation of Lindsay’s order reflected a larger and more unifying idea among pro-war advocates who believed that anti-war rhetoric in any form was harmful to American society.1 In 1 Sandra Scanlon, The Pro-War Movement: Domestic Support for the Vietnam War and the Making of Modern American Conservatism (Amherst: Univ.
of Massachusetts Press, 2013), 9. 2 their view, this order blatantly desecrated the very flag that many of them had fought for in World War II and the Korean War, suggesting that Lindsay supported a pro- Communist and anti-American movement. Their anger towards Lindsay for using the flag for what they saw as a political move concentrated itself into a violent response directed at anti-war protestors later in May of 1970 in the Wall Street district of the city known as the Hardhat Riots. These riots marked the culmination of resentment towards Mayor Lindsay, who for months had failed to anticipate his foes’ responses to his agenda partly because he likely did not think they would employ such extreme measures in an effort to defeat him.
While it is problematic to blame Lindsay for the methods his political opponents and constituents alike resorted to, Lindsay’s repeated failures to anticipate how they would react to his policies, as well as his refusal to take them seriously, significantly obstructed his attempts to effectively implement many of his policies. Overall, the research reached several conclusions. The success of the Moratorium Day demonstrations reflected strong planning and organization powered by a growing number of Americans’ ever-increasing disillusionment with the war. Approximately two million people across the United States—250,000 in New York City alone—took part in Moratorium Day activities.2 The organizers largely avoided hostile conflicts by taking into account previous demonstrations that had turned violent, like the 1968 Democratic National Convention.
The demonstrations had broad appeal because they validated 2 Derek Seidman, “Fifty Years Ago Today, US Soldiers Joined the Vietnam Moratorium Protests in Mass Numbers,” October 15, 2019, https://www.com/2019/10/vietnam- war-moratorium-protest-gi-movement. 3 people with different views on the war. Moratorium Day also reflected widespread disapproval that signaled a shift in views on the war that were becoming increasingly difficult to justify or ignore.