Reading the “Port Huron Statement” | A Primary Source Close Read w/ BRI

0:00 Hello and welcome to another edition of the Bill of Rights Institute’s Primary Source Close Reads. My name is Kirk Higgins. If you’re new to the channel, all these Close Reads, we go through important documents and primary sources from American history and unpacking them for important ideas and themes that are both interesting and important to discuss. This week, we’re looking at an important

0:21 document from the 20th century, the Port Huron Statement, which was issued by the Students for a Democratic Society, or SDS, in 1962. And help me with unpacking that document. I am fortunate to be joined by my colleague, Josh Schmid. Hello Josh. Hey Kirk. Thanks for joining me. Yeah, glad to be here. Absolutely.

0:43 So, as always with these primary sources, we don’t have time to go through the entire document, which in the case of the Port Huron statement is pretty long. It’s about 25,000 words. So we’re only going to look at a few selections. But I hope through these selections that we can really kind of get a taste for what the document contains and start to see why this is such an important part of American history in the 20th century.

1:06 So let’s take a look. So, in looking at the Port Huron on Statement, first I should say we’re looking at a primary source text, and at the Bill of Rights Institute, we really try to preserve the texts as much in their original language as possible. So occasionally, in looking at these documents, we may come across words that are not

1:27 in common usage today or even may seem offensive. It’s really important to keep that historical context in mind, and we’re going to talk a little bit about that historical context in a second. But before we do so, I think it’s important to lay out a few things, sort of our guideposts for what we’re going to look at today. And with this statement, again, because we’re only looking at selections of it, I think we’re going to keep it pretty high level and pretty basic.

1:49 So, Josh, if you’re okay with this, this is kind of what I think our agenda can be. I want to kind of figure out what the statement is. So you may have heard of this statement, you may not have, but I kind of want to know just what is the Port Huron Statement? Maybe even why they called the Port Huron Statement? Who wrote it? So maybe a little bit more about the Students for a Democratic Society, what its purpose was,

2:11 what they were trying to accomplish with this thing and what it’s arguing. So if there is an argument, what are they trying to say? What are they trying to get us to understand? And finally, what does it say broadly about America in the early 1960s? What can we learn historically from looking at this one individual document? So with that, Josh, can you just give us a little bit of that historic context.

2:32 So we know it’s 1962, it’s in the United States. But what’s going on? What brought about the authoring of this statement? Yeah, definitely. So as we know from historical studies, the 1960s were a very tumultuous time domestically in the United States.

2:54 So the civil rights movement, which we tend to classify as beginning roughly in the mid 1950s with the Montgomery bus boycott, that’s in full swing at this point. African Americans are fighting hard and successfully to some extent for ending

3:15 desegregation in order to create a more equal society in the United States. Internationally, the Cold War is also in full swing. The US has been the head of the free block of countries since the end of World War II and the Soviet Union, the head of the communist block of countries and President John F.

3:38 Kennedy by 1962 has been ramping up US involvement in the country of Vietnam. So not technically a war yet, but definitely on the horizon. So in this context there is a new group called Students for a Democratic Society.

3:58 As you mentioned, they were formed in 1960 as an offshoot of a previous socialist group and they decided to meet in Port Huron Michigan in 1962 in order to create a manifesto to lay out their beliefs and the direction basically that they wanted

4:23 the country to go towards and how they hope to accomplish that. And this document is generally seen by people as one of the foundations of what we call the New Left. So just a political group that starts to emerge during this time. Great. So the New Left as opposed

4:43 to the Old Left, which would have been, I guess more like New Deal Democrats and that kind of thing, is that generally the way that that’s thought about? Yes exactly. So more, I guess FDR, people who economically support social

5:03 welfare programs but not much dabbling in social progressivism yet. So not super big on civil rights, not big on environmentalism, things like that. That’s where the New Left is going to step in. Okay, interesting from that, we’re talking about a document here that is rooted in politics and paying

5:27 particular attention to both domestic affairs and things that they’re seeing is important, as well as foreign affairs and how those foreign relation things are playing into domestic policy and that kind of thing. Great. So diving in then we’re going to just jump right at the beginning of the document. So if you’ve watched a few of these

5:47 before, I love starting at the beginning of things because I think it’s important. And so the opening lines of the poor here on statement start with this statement about we are people of this generation bred in at least modest comfort housed now in universities, looking uncomfortably to the world we inherit.

6:09 So this statement really struck me as immediately saying sharing the perspective of those who are writing the document. And it seems both that perspective is really important for what they’re going to say. And also that this seems to be the starting point, that they’re wanting their audience to understand that that perspective is important and they want to share it.

6:37 Yeah definitely. We can kind of start to get to see what their perspective is just even from this first sentence, bread in at least modest comfort. So they’re openly recognizing that it seems like they’re generally middle class or above.

6:58 So they’re saying we’re not necessarily the most underprivileged or oppressed group of people. And I think that’s important that we recognize keep that in mind as we go along because it’s going to affect how they frame this entire statement. Yeah. In looking at how they’re framing things, this is really the generation that would

7:22 have been born, we’re thinking 1962, if we go 20 years before that. We’re talking about children being born during the Second World War. Just after the Second World War, when the US. Was sort of sitting as a world power and it seemed as though we had come out of the Depression. And so both economically and from an international perspective, things are pretty stable.

7:44 And then they use this word of complacency, which I think is really interesting. Many of us begin maturing in complacency. First of all, Josh, can you help me understand what is that complacency? What does that mean? What do you think they were trying to say with using that particular word here? Yeah, so to be complacent means to just

8:09 live by the status quo and maybe not even necessarily realize that you’re living in the status quo, not be aware that there are other issues. Or if you do openly recognize their issues, you’re definitely complacent if you don’t try and change those issues. So going back to that first line, they recognize, we grew up in modest comfort.

8:36 We grew up in the wealthiest and strongest country. We had the atomic bomb, so we’re kind of on top of the world. But they say that being on top of the world made them complacent. Being middle class, they’re in college, so they’re obviously generally higher up on the social tier.

8:58 They weren’t fully living in a problematic part of society that would necessarily open their eyes to injustice. Yeah. And so I think that comfort blinded them, I think, a little bit, to other problems that were still present within society that they felt like it needed to be addressed.

9:19 I think they were starting to see the motivation for why they wanted to write this statement, what that perspective is lending itself to. And here they start in this next passage still in the introduction, they start talking about how they came out of that complacency, which I think is interesting. The permeating and victimizing fact

9:42 of human degradation civilized by the Southern struggle against racial bigotry. So seeing the horrific events unfolding in the south, in the civil rights movement, people pushing against that oppressive system. So domestically, being pulled out of complacency and then the other side, other nations, namely the Soviet Union getting the bomb

10:03 and now suddenly feeling this feeling, as they say, we might die at any time. I think that’s sort of like we were complacent and we shouldn’t have been because these problems are still going on. We’re now in this very uncertain time where we’re concerned about a lot of different things, civil rights being an important one domestically,

10:25 but also instability on the foreign front that seems to pull them out in a sense. It makes them want to take action and do what they can, I think, to help, as they would see it, I think, help move society forward. Right. And them list saying the two joint issues

10:45 of the Cold War and segregation shows where they’re coming from. So the people who wrote this probably felt alienated from the mainstream politics at the time. Both Republicans and Democrats at the time were fully behind the Cold War.

11:05 I don’t want to say fully, but the vast majority of them were hardline anticommunists. We need to stop it spread. And then as far as domestic segregation, especially the Southern Democrats, were completely in favor of segregation still at this time. So the people who wrote this were probably

11:27 just struggling to have their voices be heard, and that’s why they dropped it. And so then they go on, I think, to really show how much this pulled them out of their own complacency and how important it was for them to have their voices heard like you were just talking about. While these other problems either directly

11:49 oppressed us or rank our consciences and became our own subjective concerns, we began to see complicated and disturbing paradoxes in our surrounding America. And those paradoxes become really important for them. And that seems to be the focus of where they want to correct the nation. Looking at the paradoxes that are seen in a nation for all created equal,

12:12 and yet we have this racial bigotry and that we’re proclaiming the peaceful intentions of the United States, and yet we’re now getting involved in military excursions around the world and fighting communism. And that seems to contradict both of those things. Right? Yeah exactly. What really stood out to me was quoting

12:34 the declaration here and just pointing to what we see in the modern day is obvious that segregation was a violation of the promise of the Declaration. And they’re recognizing it here. In the fact that they feel they have to say this, it shows that they believe

12:58 the public is very complacent with segregation. Yeah absolutely. And part of the reason they really want to weigh in and have their voices be heard in this conversation. And so then they go on to discuss these paradoxes even more, talking about nuclear energy,

13:21 talking about war, talking about all of these things that seem to be really frustrating them and really conserving them. The world population doubling in 40 years. It seems like they’re making a case for getting out of this complacency because if these things are going to come to fruition, then it’s really important that we start addressing these problems.

13:44 Otherwise, those problems are going to grow and create even more instability and erode the rights and liberties of even more people in the nation. Yes, and complacency continues to be a theme here. In the last sentence, america’s goals are ambiguous and tradition bound.

14:07 They’re accusing the country of not recognizing the new situation. And even if they do recognize things change, they’re just so stuck in tradition that they’re kind of apathetic to whatever new challenges exist. Yeah, in pretty cutting language, too, right? Saying that America is tradition bound instead of informed and clear.

14:31 Its democratic system apathetic and manipulated rather than of buying for the people. Which. Again. Calling on and this is where I think it’s really interesting from a historical perspective calling on history and the words that have come in American History channeling. Both the Preamble and the Constitution there. And Lincoln’s Second Inaugural.

14:52 And even Daniel Webster’s second response to Webster Haney debates to say. Look. There’s a promise of democracy that this group is seeing as being denied. And now laying out a political platform for how it is that they can achieve

15:13 that and how it is that they can ensure that the democratic future. I think is in their name is made more possible for the people of the United States. So now we’re jumping ahead and. Think this section is really talking about the university. So that was all in the introduction, just getting things going and then

15:34 the next few thousand words, which I wish we had time to go into, but we don’t, are going through and analyzing all of those problems, talking about those paradoxes. And then the section that we come to here is about the university and I think it’s titled The University and Social Change which is interesting. So we’re talking about a political document, but it seems that they’re thinking about civil society more broadly and in particular what the role

15:59 of the university is within civil society, how it is that the society is part or that universities are a part of that larger social landscape. And they start off by saying there’s perhaps a little reason to be optimistic about the above analysis. Right. Well, this was pretty heavy and they think

16:20 it’s important because they’re really worried about it, but it was pretty dark and so they’re basically there saying so where do we go from here? And their answer is the university because it’s located in a permanent position of social influence, which I find really interesting. They’re identifying the university as something that isn’t existing outside

16:42 of politics because they say it informs it, but as a place where ideas can be discussed and talked about, hopefully in a way that gets that clear vision for the nation that they were talking about the introduction. Yeah definitely. They just left a lot of reasons to defend

17:05 using the university as a way to influence politics. And it’s interesting why they look to the university. They say it’s an overlooked seat of influence. So it’s this idea of, okay, if society is complacent, how do we fix that? And

17:26 they obviously think there are not adequate avenues in the political process, it would seem, otherwise things would be changing on some level. So they’re looking to universities as a new way to really influence political discussions in the country

17:46 which, based on my limited understanding, they always were a way you could influence minds and ideas. But to really drive it home this hard I think is a pretty unique statement. Yeah, in a really concise one I think they’re making too.

18:11 I think it’s interesting that they called call it sort of the central institution for organizing, evaluating and transmitting knowledge. Right. So there’s something known that happens in university but also the fact that they say universities are open to all points of view right at the beginning and that participation

18:32 is pretty open so that you can have these different ideas going at each other and hopefully coming on the other side of that very strong, clear, positive policies that are going to fight against some of the things that they’re seeing as immoral practices or failings of the government in the present day.

18:55 Yeah. And they go on to detail that even more. So here’s the line I was jumping ahead a little bit, but the university is the only mainstream institution that is open to the participation by individuals of nearly every viewpoint. I think that’s really powerful and these at least are facts.

19:15 No matter how dull the teaching or how paternalistic the rules, how irrelevant the research that goes on social relevance, the accessibility to knowledge and internal openness, these together make the university a potential base in agency in a movement of social change. I think that’s really interesting that it seems to me that they’re seeing

19:41 the sharing of knowledge to be really important within society and it seems to me that they’re arguing that the light of truth can emerge and I think it’s really interesting that they’re saying that the light of truth or positive influence can emerge from this not political.

20:04 But this sort of intermixing and interplay of ideas and that eventually will transmit into powerful social change. Yeah. And if you look forward just a couple of years in history from this point you can start to see colleges really being the base,

20:30 as they call it, a social change, just thinking about protesting against the Vietnam War and the battle for civil rights, things like that. What they lay out here really did come to fruition to a large extent. Yes. And that it’s a changing like you had mentioned earlier,

20:50 it’s a changing position for universities and that the nature of universities changes a bit because of this too, which I think is interesting. Again, thinking about the importance of this document. So then they go on to talk about the New Left and sort of what the New Left is going to be and how it’s approached.

21:15 I thought this is really interesting. I think they’re very straightforward with what they’re wanting to lay out and they’re very clear about how they want to establish it or sort of what sort of idealistic thing that they’re wanting to move towards. Yeah. What really stood out to me was the third bullet here.

21:38 It needs to consist of younger people who matured in the post war world and I think that’s a direct reference to being against the Old Left. They’re arguing that old left that we talked about earlier, kind of the New Dealers, they’re not sufficient in the 1960s.

22:03 They might be correct on some economic justice ideas of labor laws and more higher taxes on the wealthy, things like that, but they just don’t seem to have a grasp on they would argue they don’t have a grasp on how detrimental

22:24 the Cold War is or how detrimental segregation is. Yeah, and I think the last bullet talks about that too, talking about looking for a political synthesis within the university. It’s really interesting. They’re not starting with a political solution or even a statement to that regard. They’re basically, to me at least, it seems like they’re saying, look,

22:45 we’ve got to get together, we’ve got to think about these things in universities. Discuss, debate, and figure out then where we can get to a place where we can advance a political agenda that’s going to serve or solve what they’re seeing as the major problems that are facing the nation at this point. And I think that’s also reflected in .6 here.

23:07 A New Left must transform modern complexity into issues that can be understood and felt close up by every human being. To me, that’s pretty concise, pretty direct and hits at the importance to this movement that what

23:27 they’re doing is affecting individual human lives on a very personal level. That it’s not just aspirational and idealistic thinking about a theory, but they’re wanting to really hone in on these individuals and how things are going. What they’re saying is things that are wrong in the nation are affecting individual lives.

23:51 Right? Yeah. And they get back to that kind of complacency theme here talking about they kind of recognize there’s going to be an uphill battle because they say it’s a time of supposed prosperity and they can’t rely on aching stomachs. So they’re saying, yes, America is generally affluent.

24:13 People aren’t going to be fighting in the streets over food or anything like that. But that doesn’t mean that there aren’t issues. That just means we need to work even harder to get people to see what’s problematic. Here. They talk about why this is going to be so

24:33 important too, but we do not indulge I love this line. We need not indulge in illusions. The university system cannot complete a movement of ordinary people making demands for a better life. So they’re tempering a little bit, but I think what they’re trying to say here is, look, this is going to be something that we need to commit to and over time it’s going to make a change.

24:55 But that change may not be immediate, but that there is this fundamental connection between the university and what they call bridge to political power that they are going to build and that over time is going to grow into what they’re seeing as this new movement that is working to correct those paradoxes that they had pointed out earlier.

25:18 Yeah, they really framed themselves here as kind of like a vanguard, that the power of students and faculty united has shown its ability to create reform movement in both the south and the north, they point out. And the New Left needs to create an awakening in a community of allies.

25:43 So they’re kind of framing this as you need young people who have fully experienced this from only a young person’s point of view. They’re the only ones who can see why this is problematic. And again, people who are older, not from this generation, are not going to see it that way.

26:04 And that’s why it’s even more imperative that they do this in order to enlighten others, in order to bring about justice. Yeah absolutely. And then their concluding statement, I think, is really powerful and really right to the point. If we appear to seek the unattainable, as it has been said,

26:27 then let it be known that we do so to avoid the unimaginable, which I think is very much framing up what they’re they see, I think, continuing down this road and not addressing these paradoxes as leading to an unimaginable horrific kind of a future. And so pulling this together, though it may seem unattainable from

26:48 when they’re writing this in 1962, it seems that they’re saying sort of positioning themselves as this is a higher goal. I think on the last slide they said that this struggle for justice that’s always ongoing, they seem to be putting themselves in that camp and saying, look, we know this is lofty. That’s almost why we have to do it, because this is so important

27:09 from our perspective of what we want to accomplish. Yeah, well said. I think, too, it’s important to remember that there are other sort of intellectual, political movements that are starting to emerge at this point, too. So the New Left is emerging in 1962, around the same time there’s lots of social change happening. And that’s also

27:30 the rise of a new conservative movement is also taking place around the same time, other movements, other reactions to all of the social change. It’s really a vibrant period, so we should always keep mine. This isn’t the only thing that’s emerging here. I think that there’s a lot of strands of political thinking and intellectual thinking that are all emerging at the same time.

27:50 But sticking just to this statement, we’ll check in on our central questions, Josh. So I think we kind of figured out so the Port Huron statement is really a statement by this group that is the Student for Democratic Society that are representing this New Left and wanting to set out. And both show the analysis of what they see is wrong with the nation.

28:11 Where these paradoxes are grappling or are facing the nation and setting out a method for solving that. So who wrote it? It’s that students from Democratic Society, what was their purpose? I think showing both what the New Left can promise and also highlighting the problems that they’re seeing in the nation. And then it argues that a really good way to do that is to go to the university

28:35 and let these ideas of both liberalism and socialism I think they talked about grapple with one another and figure out where we can get to this new build, this bridge, this political bridge to advancing change. And so, Josh, I’ll leave us with this. What does this statement tell us about America in the 1960s?

28:59 What do you think this is beginning to talk about? We tried hard not to peer beyond 1962 in this, but what is this reflecting for you? Yeah, it shows that a lot of change is in the making. It would seem that there is this new generation of young people who are really

29:22 explicitly trying to contrast their situation with the previous generations and talking about how new situations require new methods, basically. And so if we look to what’s going to be coming in the coming years, again, I think that interpretation largely plays

29:44 itself out as the new life gains political traction in the country. Well, Josh, thank you so much for joining me. And thank you, everyone, for tuning in. Remember, if you liked this video, please be sure to subscribe to our channel. We put out new videos every other Tuesday and Thursday on all things US history and civics related, including these Close

30:07 Reads, but also other homework help videos, other conversations with scholars. We look at image primary sources as well. So if you’re interested in any of that or you found something interesting in this video, please do be sure to like and subscribe. Our next primary source close read is going to be about the case of Bush v. Gore. So that’s really exciting,

30:28 really a landmark case, really complicated, really interesting, looking at the role of the court and how that case played out. So we really hope you’ll join the conversation on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram. Let us know what you want to hear from. And also, if you’re signed up there, you can get all the updates of what we’re going to be releasing and what we’re going to be talking about. So please reach out, let us know, be in touch, and until next time, bye.

30:51 Thank you so much.