DOCSLIB.ORG

Curtailing of Student Deferment in the Late 1960S As a Motivation for Violent Student Protests at Columbia University

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Curtailing of Student Deferment in the Late 1960S As a Motivation for Violent Student Protests at Columbia University Curtailing of Student Deferment in the Late 1960s as a Motivation for Violent Student Protests at Columbia University The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Bailey, Lisa M. 2016. Curtailing of Student Deferment in the Late 1960s as a Motivation for Violent Student Protests at Columbia University. Master's thesis, Harvard Extension School. Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:33797340 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.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#LAA Curtailing of Student Deferment in the Late 1960s as a Motivation for Violent Student Protests at Columbia University Lisa Marie Bailey A Thesis in the Field of History for the Degree of Master of Liberal Arts in Extension Studies Harvard University May 2016 ii Abstract When President Lyndon Baines Johnson escalated the Vietnam War in 1965, he ordered more man to fight. The Director of Selective Service System, General Lewis B. Hershey, ordered local draft boards nationwide to curtail the granting of student deferment in order to induct more men to the military. In 1965 to 1968, many college students saw themselves being reclassified. In 1966, when General Hershey reissued the dormant Selective Services Qualifying Test (SSQT) for registrants who wanted to keep their student deferments, angry students began disruptive, war-related protests. On October 26, 1967, Hershey sent his “Hershey’s Directives” to local and appeal boards nationwide, in order to punish registrants who protested against the Vietnam War and the changing draft laws. This thesis will address this primary question: Were students at Columbia motivated to take part in demonstrations because of “Hershey’s Directives?” In addition, the secondary questions are: Were student activists motivated to act violently and disruptively because they were suspended for participating in previous demonstrations? Did local boards send disciplined students to Vietnam? This historical case study of student activism at Columbia in the late 1960s focus on four issues such as the loss of student deferments, General Hershey’s attitude toward student deferments, arguments for and against student deferments, and war-related student protests. This thesis concludes that a majority of Columbia students, as well as a majority of students throughout the iii United States, were motivated to take part in demonstrations because of “Hershey’s Directives” and the changing draft laws since 1967. iv Acknowledgements I would like to thank my thesis advisor, Dr. Donald Ostrowski, PhD, of Harvard University Extension School for being available when I needed to see him during his office hours, for ample advice in thesis writers’ meetings, and for quick responses to my emails during the process of my research and writing a thesis. I also want to give thanks to Brett Flehinger, PhD, of the History Department in Harvard University, for agreeing to act as my thesis director, and to Candace Kant, PhD and a Professor Emerita of College of Southern Nevada, for looking at my thesis proposal draft and then giving me advice and tips. In addition, I would like to express gratitude to my friends, Lisa D. Quinlan and Madeline McDownell for agreeing to read my drafts and for their very valuable comments. Finally, I must express my gratitude to my friends, professors, and teaching assistants for providing me with support and continuous encouragement throughout my years of study and through the process of researching and writing this thesis. This accomplishment would not have been possible without them. Lisa M. Bailey Cambridge, MA May 2016 v Table of Contents Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................ v Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 1 Methods ...................................................................................................................................... 4 I. Background of Problem and Review ........................................................................................ 7 II. General Hershey’s Flawed Argument for the Selective Service System ........................... 16 Arguments against the Selective Service System and the Draft Laws ............................... 27 Arguments for Student Deferments ...................................................................................... 35 Pentagon Bias Against Volunteers ........................................................................................ 46 III. The Curtailment of Student Deferments from 1965 to 1969 .............................................. 73 Draft Resistance Movement and the Hershey’s Directives ................................................. 89 IV. Mark Rudd's Journey Before the Violent Student Protests at Columbia ......................... 122 Before the Violent Student Protests at Columbia University ............................................ 132 A Week of Crisis at Columbia ............................................................................................. 135 Paul Vilardi’s Side of the Story as a Counter-Demonstrator ............................................ 139 Why President Kirk Refused to Grant Amnesty ................................................................ 147 Disciplinary Proceedings at Columbia ................................................................................ 157 Motivations of Radical SDS Leaders at Columbia ............................................................ 164 Aftermath at Columbia ......................................................................................................... 168 V. Conclusion ........................................................................................................................... 173 Appendix ........................................................................................................................................ 185 vi Appendix A ........................................................................................................................... 185 Appendix B............................................................................................................................ 186 Appendix C............................................................................................................................ 188 Appendix D ........................................................................................................................... 190 Appendix E ............................................................................................................................ 191 Appendix F ............................................................................................................................ 193 Appendix G ........................................................................................................................... 195 Appendix H ........................................................................................................................... 198 Appendix I ............................................................................................................................. 202 Appendix J ............................................................................................................................. 207 Appendix K ........................................................................................................................... 210 Appendix L ............................................................................................................................ 215 Appendix M ........................................................................................................................... 216 Appendix N ........................................................................................................................... 218 Appendix O ........................................................................................................................... 219 Works Cited .................................................................................................................................... 221 vii Introduction [A]fter a long and fruitless effort at discussion and negotiation by officers of the administration, many devoted faculty members and helpful persons from outside the university, it became clear that either grant student demands, including full amnesty for all participants, or we could request the City police to remove the students by force. We were not willing under any circumstances to grant amnesty for these illegal acts, so we began to make the necessary arrangements for police action.1 Grayson Kirk, June 1, 1968 In 1966, General Lewis B. Hershey, Director of the Selective Service System, ordered draft boards nationwide to curtail the granting of deferments, particularly student deferments. When Hershey reissued the dormant Selective Services Qualifying Test (SSQT) for registrants who wanted to keep their student deferments, angry students began disruptive, war-related protests. On October 26, 1967, Hershey sent his “Hershey’s Directives” as a letter to local and appeal boards,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Essential Chomsky
    CURRENT AFFAIRS $19.95 U.S. CHOMSKY IS ONE OF A SMALL BAND OF NOAM INDIVIDUALS FIGHTING A WHOLE INDUSTRY. AND CHOMSKY THAT MAKES HIM NOT ONLY BRILLIANT, BUT HEROIC. NOAM CHOMSKY —ARUNDHATI ROY EDITED BY ANTHONY ARNOVE THEESSENTIAL C Noam Chomsky is one of the most significant Better than anyone else now writing, challengers of unjust power and delusions; Chomsky combines indignation with he goes against every assumption about insight, erudition with moral passion. American altruism and humanitarianism. That is a difficult achievement, —EDWARD W. SAID and an encouraging one. THE —IN THESE TIMES For nearly thirty years now, Noam Chomsky has parsed the main proposition One of the West’s most influential of American power—what they do is intellectuals in the cause of peace. aggression, what we do upholds freedom— —THE INDEPENDENT with encyclopedic attention to detail and an unflagging sense of outrage. Chomsky is a global phenomenon . —UTNE READER perhaps the most widely read voice on foreign policy on the planet. ESSENTIAL [Chomsky] continues to challenge our —THE NEW YORK TIMES BOOK REVIEW assumptions long after other critics have gone to bed. He has become the foremost Chomsky’s fierce talent proves once gadfly of our national conscience. more that human beings are not —CHRISTOPHER LEHMANN-HAUPT, condemned to become commodities. THE NEW YORK TIMES —EDUARDO GALEANO HO NE OF THE WORLD’S most prominent NOAM CHOMSKY is Institute Professor of lin- Opublic intellectuals, Noam Chomsky has, in guistics at MIT and the author of numerous more than fifty years of writing on politics, phi- books, including For Reasons of State, American losophy, and language, revolutionized modern Power and the New Mandarins, Understanding linguistics and established himself as one of Power, The Chomsky-Foucault Debate: On Human the most original and wide-ranging political and Nature, On Language, Objectivity and Liberal social critics of our time.
    [Show full text]
  • A Tale of Prosecutorial Indiscretion: Ramsey Clark and the Selective Non-Prosecution of Stokley Carmichael
    South Carolina Law Review Volume 62 Issue 1 Article 2 Fall 2010 A Tale of Prosecutorial Indiscretion: Ramsey Clark and the Selective Non-Prosecution of Stokley Carmichael Lonnie T. Brown Jr. University of Georgia School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/sclr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Lonnie T. Brown, Jr., A Tale of Prosecutorial Indiscretion: Ramsey Clark and the Selective Non-Prosecution of Stokley Carmichael, 62 S. C. L. Rev. 1 (2010). This Article is brought to you by the Law Reviews and Journals at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in South Carolina Law Review by an authorized editor of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Brown: A Tale of Prosecutorial Indiscretion: Ramsey Clark and the Select A TALE OF PROSECUTORIAL INDISCRETION: RAMSEY CLARK AND THE SELECTIVE NON-PROSECUTION OF STOKELY CARMICHAEL LONNIE T. BROWN, JR.* I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 1 II. THE PROTAGONISTS .................................................................................... 8 A. Ramsey Clark and His Civil Rights Pedigree ...................................... 8 B. Stokely Carmichael: "Hell no, we won't go!.................................. 11 III. RAMSEY CLARK'S REFUSAL TO PROSECUTE STOKELY CARMICHAEL ......... 18 A. Impetus Behind Callsfor Prosecution............................................... 18 B. Conspiracy to Incite a Riot..............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Registered with Selective Service and They Are Especially Keen to Comply with the Law
    The R EGISTE R Spring 2017 SELECTIVE SERVICE SYSTEM WELCOMES THE AGENCY’S 13TH DIRECTOR Senator Donald reduce expenditures dramatically while at the same M. Benton was time doubling citizen participation in some of their appointed by programs. He was responsible for preserving more acres President Donald of critical habitat in one year than any other year during J. Trump to be the program. All of these records were accomplished the 13th Director while reducing taxpayer cost by more than 30 percent. of the United A prolific entrepreneur, Director Benton started his first States Selective company with his sister Nancy when he was 17 years Service System old. Over the years since, he has built and sold several on April 11, successful companies and provided countless jobs to 2017. Supreme Americans. Court Justice Mr. Romo presenting Mr. Allard with award. Samuel Alito A staunch supporter of veterans and veterans affairs, administered Director Benton is most proud of the fact that he is the his oath of office author of and the driving force behind, the legislation in the Supreme that built the magnificent WWll Memorial on the state Court two days capitol campus in Washington State. Additionally, he is a later on April 13. Prior to the Director’s appointment to past-President of the Jaycees and was an American Red lead the Selective Service, President Trump named him Cross volunteer and Board Chairman for many years. He as a Senior White House Advisor. The President directed has been an Assistant Scout Leader and Merit Badge him to lead the transition team at the Environmental Counselor in the Boy Scouts of America for the last ten Protection Agency (EPA) where he managed the years and has two sons who attained the rank of Eagle seamless transition of power to the new administration Scout.
    [Show full text]
  • General Lewis Hershey Will Continue in September 2007
    Part I-The Self-made Man: Lewis B. Hershey by Sir Knight John D. Meyers, Jr., KYCH 1. Lewis B. Hershey was born on September 12, 1893, in his parents' home on their farm near Angola, Indiana, that is located in Steuben County, which is nestled in the extreme northeastern part of the Hoosier state. It is bound on the north by Michigan and on the east by Ohio. The General declared humorously, "If Michigan had taken four miles off of Indiana like they did from Ohio. I would have been born in Michigan." The second and younger son of Latta Freleigh and Rosetta (Richardson) Hershey and grandson of George R. and Joanna Latta (Freleigh) Hershey and Lewis and Frances (Hutchins) Richardson, his Swiss ancestors migrated to the United States in 1709, settling near Lancaster, Pennsylvania. "In our day, the 'horse-poor farmer eked out a meager, but substantial living on an austerity type budget. Laboring in a 12-15 hour working day, which started before dawn and lasted until long after dusk, seven days a week. This was the kind of work schedule the farmer and his family endured in our day." In addition to the farmhouse, barn and smokehouse, the Hershey homestead comprised some 140 acres of land of which less than 100 were actually farmed. Forty acres contained marshland, timber and two lakes. Another six acres located on steep slopes made this ground untenable. Before the age of ten, young Lewis had already learned the expressions "gee" and "haw" (horse language for right and left). He was plowing, mowing, raking, harrowing, and cultivating the fields, and he was driving the horse team with the dexterity of an adult.
    [Show full text]
  • Page 1 of 5 Benjamin Spock Conspiracy 7/25/2009
    Benjamin Spock Conspiracy Page 1 of 5 excerpt from It Did Happen Here by Bud and Ruth Schultz (University of California Press, 1989) The Conspiracy to Oppose the Vietnam War, Oral History of Benjamin Spock The Selective Service Act of 1948 made it a criminal offense for a person to knowingly counsel, aid, or abet someone in refusing or evading registration in the armed forces. In 1968, Dr. Benjamin Spock and four others were indicted for conspiring to violate this act. Evidence of the conspiracy was to be found in the public expressions of the defendants: hours of selectively edited newsreel footage of press conferences, demonstrations, and public addresses they made in opposition to government policy in Vietnam. What could better symbolize the damage such prosecutions made on the free marketplace of ideas? Why were they charged with conspiracy to counsel, aid, and abet rather than with the commission of those acts themselves? Conspiracy, Judge Learned Hand said, is "the darling of the modern prosecutor's nursery."' It relaxes ordinary rules of evidence, frequently results in higher penalties than the substantive crime, may extend the statue of limitations, and holds all conspirators responsible for the acts of each. The conspirators may have acted entirely in the open, they may never have met; they may have agreed only implicitly; they may never have acted illegally. It's enough that they were of a like mind to do so. When applied to political activity, writing, and speech, a conspiracy charge has virtually no limits. Government attorneys could have included as co-conspirators the publishers of Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Jessica Mitford
    Jessica Mitford: An Inventory of Her Papers at the Harry Ransom Center Descriptive Summary Creator Mitford, Jessica, 1917-1996 Title Jessica Mitford Papers Dates: 1949-1973 Extent 67 document boxes, 3 note card boxes, 7 galley files, 1 oversize folder (27 linear feet) Abstract: Correspondence, printed material, reports, notes, interviews, manuscripts, legal documents, and other materials represent Jessica Mitford's work on her three investigatory books and comprise the bulk of these papers. Language English. Access Open for research Administrative Information Acquisition Purchase, 1973 Processed by Donald Firsching, Amanda McCallum, Jana Pellusch, 1990 Repository: Harry Ransom Center University of Texas at Austin Mitford, Jessica, 1917-1996 Biographical Sketch Born September 11, 1917, in Batsford, Gloucestershire, England, Jessica Mitford is one of the six daughters of the Baron of Redesdale. The Mitfords are a well-known English family with a reputation for eccentricity. Of the Mitford sisters, Nancy achieved notoriety as a novelist and biographer. Diana married Sir Oswald Mosley, leader of the British fascists before World War II. Unity, also a fascist sympathizer, attempted suicide when Britain and Germany went to war. Deborah became the Duchess of Devonshire. Jessica, whose political bent ran opposite to that of her sisters, ran away to Loyalist Spain with her cousin, Esmond Romilly, during the Spanish Civil War. Jessica eventually married Romilly, who was killed during World War II. In 1943, Mitford married a labor lawyer, Robert Treuhaft, while working for the Office of Price Administration in Washington, D.C. The couple soon moved to Oakland, California, where they joined the Communist Party. In California, Mitford worked as executive secretary for the Civil Rights Congress and taught sociology at San Jose State University.
    [Show full text]
  • Vol. 1, No. 2 February 1968 Dr. Bejnarn1n Spock, Reverend William Sloane Coffin Jr., Marcus Raskin, Mitchell Goodman, and Michae
    Vol. 1, No. 2 6324 Primrose Avenue February 1968 Los Angeles, Calif., 90028 Dr. Bejnarn1n Spock, Reverend William Sloane Coffin Jr., Marcus Raskin, Mitchell Goodman, and Michael Ferber were indicted on Friday, January 5, 1968, by the Rederal government on char~s of encouraging draft evasion. '!he following is a national staterrent that has been released in support of the five rren: "We stand beside the men who have been indicted for support of draft resistance. If they are sentenced, we too must be sentenced. If they are imprisoned, we will take their places and will continue to use what rreans we can to bring this war to an end. We will not stand by silently as our government conducts a criminal war. We will con­ tinue to offer support, as we have been doing, to those who refuse to serve in Viet Nam, to these indicted rren, and to all others who refuse to be passive accOl1'plices in war crimes. 'Ihe war is illegi­ timate and our actions are legitimate." Reverend Robert McAfee Brown Demise Leverton Noam Chcmsky IMight Macdonald Mary Clarke Herbert Magidson Reverend John Colburn Eason Monroe Reverend Stephen Fritchman Reverend William Moreman Paul Goodman Reverend Roy Ockert Florence Howe Ava Helen Pauling Professor Donald Kalish Professor Linus Pauling Louis Kampf Sidney Peck Reverend Martin Luther Ling, Jr. Hilary Putnam Lavid Krech Father Louis Vitale, O.F.M. Frederick Krews Arthur Waskow Reverend Tom Lasswell Reverend Harlan 1. Weitzel Paul Lauter Howard Zinn Reverend Speed Leas (Partial list of signers) I join in the above statement.
    [Show full text]
  • Lessons of 1969'S US Selective Service Amendment
    Vol. 8(7), pp. 175 - 184, October 2014 DOI: 10.5897/AJPSIR2013.0643 Article Number: 34D130747333 African Journal of Political Science and ISSN 1996-0832 Copyright © 2014 International Relations Author(s) retain the copyright of this article http://www.academicjournals.org/AJPSIR Review Lessons of 1969’S US Selective Service Amendment Act: Explaining US babyboomers’ civil war George Steven Swan North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University, 1601 East Market Street, Greensboro, NC 27411 USA. Received 16 September, 2013; Accepted 16 August 2014 Studies of opinion cleavages among Americans born 1946 to 1964 are informed via Erikson and Stoller’s 2011 analysis of the impact of the December 1, 1969 Vietnam War draft lottery (which prioritized men vulnerable to 1970 callup). The scope of discussion therein and herein includes asessments of political socialization research from 1965, 1973, 1982 and 1997. Enabled there was the interpretive method, herein, of laying unfavorably numbered, vintage-1948 men’s opinions and behavior (which both mutated) within a detailed, contemporary military policy-context. This contextual perspective fleshes out, historically, that 2011 review. The results thereof revealed that those unfortunate men’s abrupt hostility to defense of South Vietnam and to public figures associated therewith (for example, President Richard M. Nixon of the Republican Party) as too “hawkish” (that is, assertively anticommunist) proved ironic. For Nixon’s prelottery Vietnam War policy already had executed the high-profile “dove” platform-plank rejected by the 1968 Democratic National Convention. Also appreciated is how published 2013 data on attitudes influenced by the Great Recession evidenced implicitly the dramatic durability of the draft lottery’s effect.
    [Show full text]
  • The Judicial Antidote to Judge Julius Hoffman Challenging Claims of Unilateral Executive Authority
    Loyola University Chicago Law Journal Volume 50 Issue 4 Summer 2019 Article 12 2019 Judge Damon Keith: The Judicial Antidote to Judge Julius Hoffman Challenging Claims of Unilateral Executive Authority Ellen Yaroshevsky Follow this and additional works at: https://lawecommons.luc.edu/luclj Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Ellen Yaroshevsky, Judge Damon Keith: The Judicial Antidote to Judge Julius Hoffman Challenging Claims of Unilateral Executive Authority, 50 Loy. U. Chi. L. J. 989 (). Available at: https://lawecommons.luc.edu/luclj/vol50/iss4/12 This Symposium Article is brought to you for free and open access by LAW eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Loyola University Chicago Law Journal by an authorized editor of LAW eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Judge Damon Keith: The Judicial Antidote to Judge Julius Hoffman Challenging Claims of Unilateral Executive Authority Ellen Yaroshefsky* From some of the highly-publicized trials of the 1960s—namely the trials of the Chicago Eight, Panther Twenty-One, and Weathermen—we can draw indispensable lessons about the role of the judges in upholding and promoting a fair justice system. The contrast to Judge Julius Hoffman’s notorious injudicious conduct in the Chicago Eight case is the courageous, thoughtful Judge Damon Keith, in the less publicized White Panther case in Detroit in the early 1970s. Judge Keith’s overriding sense of fairness exemplified the best of judicial independence in considering President Nixon’s claims of unilateral executive authority in United States v. Ayers and United States v. U.S. District Court. Judge Keith’s exemplary judicial conduct is an embrace of judicial independence that provides inspiration in current times.
    [Show full text]
  • Citizen-Civilians: Masculinity, Citizenship, and American Military Manpower Policy, 1945-1975
    ABSTRACT Title of Dissertation: CITIZEN-CIVILIANS: MASCULINITY, CITIZENSHIP, AND AMERICAN MILITARY MANPOWER POLICY, 1945-1975 Amy Jennifer Rutenberg, Doctor of Philosophy, 2013 Dissertation directed by: Professor Robyn Muncy Department of History “Citizen-Civilians” argues that military manpower policies between the end of World War II in 1945 and the shift to the All-Volunteer Force in 1973 separated military service from ideals of masculine citizenship in the United States. Manpower policies, especially those that governed deferments, widened the definition of service to the state and encouraged men to meet their responsibilities for national defense as civilians. They emphasized men’s breadwinner role and responsible fatherhood over military service and defined economic independence as a contribution to national defense. These policies, therefore, militarized the civilian sector, as fatherhood and certain civilian occupations were defined as national defense initiatives. But these policies also, ironically, weakened the citizen-soldier ideal by ensuring that fewer men would serve in the military and equating these civilian pursuits with military service. The Defense establishment unintentionally weakened its own manpower procurement system. These findings provide context for the anti-war and anti-draft protest of the late 1960s and early 1970s. Vietnam exacerbated points of friction that already existed. The war highlighted assumptions about masculinity and citizenship as well as inequities in the draft system that had existed for a generation. This dissertation, therefore, explains the growth of the mechanisms that allowed men to avoid military service, as such avoidance became relatively simple to accomplish and easy to justify. Thus, when draft calls rose in order to support a war that many Americans did not agree with, men used the channels that the Defense establishment had already created for them to avoid serving in the armed forces.
    [Show full text]
  • On October 16, 1967, a Loosely-Knit Coalition Known As the Resistance Launched a Day National Day of Action Intended to Bring Th
    ABSTRACT Title of Dissertation: A DISSIDENT BLUE BLOOD: REVEREND WILLIAM SLOANE COFFIN AND THE VIETNAM ANTIWAR MOVEMENT Benjamin Charles Krueger, Doctor of Philosophy, 2014 Dissertation Directed By: Professor Robert N. Gaines Department of Communication A long and bloody conflict, United States military action in Vietnam tore the fabric of American political and social life during the 1960s and 1970s. A wide coalition of activists opposed the war on political and religious grounds, arguing the American military campaign and the conscription of soldiers to be immoral. The Reverend William Sloane Coffin Jr., an ordained Presbyterian minister and chaplain at Yale University, emerged as a leader of religious antiwar activists. This project explores the evolution of Coffin’s antiwar rhetoric between the years 1962 and 1973. I argue that Coffin relied on three modes of rhetoric to justify his opposition to the war. In the prophetic mode, which dominated Coffin’s discourse in 1966, Coffin relied on the tradition of Hebraic prophecy to warn that the United States was straying from its values and that undesirable consequences would occur as a result. After seeing little change to the direction of U.S. foreign policy, Coffin shifted to an existential mode of rhetoric in early 1967. The existential mode urged draft-age men to not cooperate with the Federal Selective Service System, and to accept any consequences that occurred as a result. Federal prosecutors indicted Coffin and four other antiwar activists in January 1968 for conspiracy aid and abet draft resister in violation of the Selective Service Act. Chastened by his prosecution and subsequent conviction, Coffin adopted a reconciling mode of discourse that sought to reintegrate antiwar protesters into American society by advocating for amnesty.
    [Show full text]
  • Curtailing of Student Deferment in the Late 1960S As a Motivation for Violent Student Protests at Columbia University
    Curtailing of Student Deferment in the Late 1960s as a Motivation for Violent Student Protests at Columbia University The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Bailey, Lisa M. 2016. Curtailing of Student Deferment in the Late 1960s as a Motivation for Violent Student Protests at Columbia University. Master's thesis, Harvard Extension School. Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:33797340 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.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#LAA Curtailing of Student Deferment in the Late 1960s as a Motivation for Violent Student Protests at Columbia University Lisa Marie Bailey A Thesis in the Field of History for the Degree of Master of Liberal Arts in Extension Studies Harvard University May 2016 ii Abstract When President Lyndon Baines Johnson escalated the Vietnam War in 1965, he ordered more man to fight. The Director of Selective Service System, General Lewis B. Hershey, ordered local draft boards nationwide to curtail the granting of student deferment in order to induct more men to the military. In 1965 to 1968, many college students saw themselves being reclassified. In 1966, when General Hershey reissued the dormant Selective Services Qualifying Test (SSQT) for registrants who wanted to keep their student deferments, angry students began disruptive, war-related protests. On October 26, 1967, Hershey sent his “Hershey’s Directives” to local and appeal boards nationwide, in order to punish registrants who protested against the Vietnam War and the changing draft laws.
    [Show full text]