In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

21. ‘‘The Fight for Men’s Minds’’ ∏ ∏ ∏ ∏ ∏ ∏ ∏ ∏ ∏ ∏ ∏ ∏ ∏ ∏ ∏ ∏ ∏ ∏ ∏ ∏ ∏ ∏ ∏ ∏ ∏ ∏ ∏ ∏ ∏ ∏ T en days after the riot in the fall of 1962, a Scripps-Howard reporter concluded that in ‘‘the one battlefield that counts most: The fight for men’s minds,’’ desegregationists had won a major battle at Ole Miss. They had demonstrated dedication, intelligence, and a ‘‘willingness, if not an inclination, to martyrdom.’’ On the other side, the leaderless, ‘‘hodge-podge ‘troops’ ’’ of the segregationists seemed ‘‘as much anti-authority as anti-negro’’ and ‘‘manage[d] to terrorize even other Southerners.’’ Refusing to be provoked , James Meredith ‘‘did not gloat’’ and did not make ‘‘a single public relations mistake,’’ while his opponents reacted with ‘‘obscene shouts’’ and ‘‘choked-up fury.’’ In the ‘‘psychological warfare,’’ Meredith, the naacp, and the Kennedys seemed to have prevailed. In early October, however, the struggle over public opinion had not ended. The immediate public relations contest involving disputes over the causes and meaning of the Oxford disaster and e√orts to allot responsibility for it continued for months. At the same time, a larger, more important struggle occurred in the minds of whites grappling with desegregation. As Gunnar Myrdal had observed in 1944, the American race problem was essentially a problem in the white mind. In the face of federal forces, Ole Miss and Mississippi whites had acquiesced in Meredith ’s enrollment, but the ultimate fight over their accommodation to, or acceptance of, racial equality would last much longer and produce more ambiguous results.∞ In the fall of 1962, arguments developed over blame for the riot. Though Barnett’s critics did not agree on everything, they generally deplored violence, called for obedience to the law and the Constitution, criticized his leadership, and defended the Kennedys’ actions. The opposing position, which dominated the discussion in Mississippi, praised Barnett’s defense of states’ rights and the southern way of life, excoriated the Kennedys for what they saw as violation of the Constitution, and blamed the marshals for precipitating the riot. Though many Barnett defenders rejected violence, they remained defiant in their opposition to integration. Conducted largely through the media, the first rounds of the debate by commentators, civilian organizations, and citizens, as well as participants in the events, produced polarized exchanges.≤ 426 f o r t r e s s o f s e g r e gat i o n fa l l s One of the first to speak out was William H. Mounger, the president of Lamar Life Insurance Company. At 7:40 a.m. on Monday, October 1, he interrupted the regular broadcast of his company’s Jackson television station to speak extemporaneously for eight minutes. He deplored the violence and declared, ‘‘We are a part of the United States of America, and we must obey the laws of the United States of America.’’ In addition to calling for the arrest of all rioters, he wanted the state’s leaders to reveal any agreements made with the federal government and to explain ‘‘the basic law upon which they are proceeding.’’≥ The next day Mounger’s moderation received support from 127 bankers, lumbermen, attorneys, farmers, industrialists, and politicians meeting in Jackson . Convened by Mounger and other Jackson civic leaders, they expressed grief over events at Ole Miss, advocated law and order, wanted an investigation of the riot, and defended the university. The pillars of corporate life also called for unity so the state could ‘‘continue to march forward’’ and sustain its ‘‘tremendous—almost unbelievable—progress.’’ They reasserted that the Brown decision ‘‘was morally and legally wrong.’’∂ Their temperate stance did not prevail. Soon after the riot, state and national leaders began trading charges about the melee. On Monday the state’s congressional delegation, except for Frank Smith, blamed it on the federal courts, the Kennedy administration, and the marshals. In reply the Justice Department defended the marshals and pointed to Barnett’s failure to maintain law and order, especially when the state patrol left the campus Sunday night. Monday evening during an interview on national television, the governor justified his actions, and early Tuesday morning Assistant Attorney General Burke Marshall responded on The Today Show. At a news conference in Jackson later that day, Paul Johnson and other state o≈cials rebutted Marshall, and on Wednesday a resolute Barnett on statewide television called for calm and patience but also proclaimed, ‘‘We will oppose this illegal invasion by every legal means. . . . [and] we shall, in the end attain victory.’’∑ The Kennedy administration continued to back...

Share