Scarlet and Black, Volume Three: Making Black Lives Matter at Rutgers, 1945-2020

Scarlet and Black

Scarlet and Black

Volume 3

Making Black Lives Matter

at Rutgers, 1945–2020

EDITED BY MIYA CAREY,

MARISA J. FUENTES, AND

DEBORAH GRAY WHITE

Library of Congress in Publication Control Number: 2016955389

ISBN 978-1-9788-2732-5 (cloth)

ISBN 978-1-9788-2731-8 (paper)

ISBN 978-1-9788-2733-2 (epub)

A British Cataloging-in-Publication record for this book is available from the British Library.

This collection copyright © 2021 by Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey Individual chapters copyright © 2021 in the names of their authors

All rights reserved

No part of this book may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without written permission from the publisher. Please contact Rutgers University Press, 106 Somerset Street, New Brunswick, NJ 08901. The only exception to this prohibition is fair use as defined by U.S. copyright law.

The paper used in this publication meets the requirements of the American National Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1992.

www.rutgersuniversitypress.org

Manufactured in the United States of America

In Memory of Our Colleague

Cheryl A. Wall

The Board of Governors Zora Neale Hurston Professor of English

CONTENTS

Introduction

DEBORAH GRAY WHITE

PART I

Prelude to Change

1Twenty-Twenty Vision: New Jersey and Rutgers on the Eve of Change

ROBERTO C. OROZCO, CARIE RAEL, BROOKE A. THOMAS, AND DEBORAH GRAY WHITE

2Rutgers and New Brunswick: A Consideration of Impact

IAN GAVIGAN AND PAMELA WALKER

3Tell It Like It Is: The Rise of a Race-Conscious Professoriate at Rutgers in the 1960s

JOSEPH WILLIAMS

4Black and Puerto Rican Student Experiences and Their Movements at Douglass College, 1945–1974

KAISHA ESTY, WHITNEY FIELDS, AND CARIE RAEL

PART II

Student Protest and Forceful Change

5A Second Founding: The Black and Puerto Rican Student Revolution at Rutgers–Camden and Rutgers–Newark

BEATRICE J. ADAMS, JESSE BAYKER, ROBERTO C. OROZCO, AND BROOKE A. THOMAS

6Equality in Higher Education: An Analysis of Negative Responses to the Conklin Hall Takeover

KENNETH MORRISSEY

7The Black Unity League: A Necessary Movement That Could Never Survive

EDWARD WHITE

8We the People: Student Activism at Rutgers and Livingston College, 1960–1985

CARIE RAEL AND BROOKE A. THOMAS

PART III

Making Black Lives Matter beyond Rutgers, 1973–2007

9It’s Happening in Our Own Backyard: Rutgers and the New Brunswick Defense Committee for Assata Shakur

JOSEPH KAPLAN

10 Fight Racism, End Apartheid: The Divestment Movement at Rutgers University and the Limits of Interracial Organizing, 1977–1985

TRACEY JOHNSON

11 Hell No, Our Genes Aren’t Slow!: Racism and Antiracism at Rutgers during the 1995 Controversy

MEAGAN WIERDA AND ROBERTO C. OROZCO

12 Pure Grace: The Scarlet Knights Basketball Team, Don Imus, and a Moment of Dignity

LYNDA DEXHEIMER

Epilogue: Scarlet and Black: The Price of the Ticket

DEBORAH GRAY WHITE

Acknowledgments

Notes

List of Contributors

About the Editors

Scarlet and Black

Introduction

DEBORAH GRAY WHITE

Chair of the Committee on the Enslaved

and Disenfranchised in Rutgers History

In 1967 when I came to Rutgers, it was the year of the rebellion. When I came onto the campus, all the walls were white, all the faculty was white, all the students were white. And sometime during the getaway (they called it freshman camp), I ran into at least one other black person who was part of the kitchen staff, cooking at the camp. And then about two weeks in, I was walking across the campus and I saw a skinny brown man … It happened to be Richard Roper. And he was the first person that I had seen who was black. It was that stark. And … he told me that there was a meeting of the NAACP, and having come out of the civil rights movement and being newly black nationalist, of course I went to the meeting with the intent, No, we’re not going to do this, we’re going to do something a little bit more militant … That was the beginning.¹

These words were spoken in 2019, by Vickie Donaldson, one of the liberators who occupied Conklin Hall in 1969. The skinny brown man she spied, Richard Roper, was president of the campus chapter of the NAACP. Roper’s recollection of the beginning corroborated Donaldson’s. According to Roper, 1967 was when black students at Rutgers–Newark—all 20 or 25 of them—decided that the campus chapter of the NAACP was no longer relevant. It was not the vehicle through which we could voice our dissatisfaction with the status quo. We were ready to move and to make a big noise in the process.²

These remembrances of late 1960s Rutgers reveal a very different university than the one described by President Obama in his memorable 2016 commencement address. On that crisp, sunny spring day, Obama described Rutgers as an intellectual melting pot, where ideas and cultures flow together among what might just be America’s most diverse student body. He said that America converges here, and in so many ways, the history of Rutgers mirrors the evolution of America—the course by which we became bigger, stronger, and richer and more dynamic, and a more inclusive nation.³

Obama’s depiction of Rutgers as a multicultural, ethnically diverse powerhouse is the way Rutgers boosters like to think about their university. In fact, Rutgers’s website uses the U.S. News and World Report and Best Value Colleges assessments of Rutgers–Newark as the most diverse school in the nation as a recruitment tool to attract students.⁴ However, the sharply contrasting descriptions given by Donaldson and Obama should give us pause. They speak to the importance of change over time and force us to reflect on the process that brought about such a cataclysmic transformation. In this respect we do well to think about Obama’s observation that Rutgers’s history mirrors the evolution of America. Indeed, much had happened in the country and at Rutgers between the time Donaldson and Roper walked onto a mostly lily-white campus and the time when the first black president of the United States landed his Marine One helicopter on this once undiversified campus. This third volume, Scarlet and Black: Making Black Lives Matter at Rutgers, 1945–2020, explores this history. It places Rutgers University in the thick of the profound changes in higher education that came about as a result of the mid-to-late-twentieth-century black freedom struggle, and it examines the university both before and after that change. In doing so, it adds historical perspective to the meaning of Black Lives Matter and shows just how high the stakes have been at Rutgers.

Thanks to the changes covered in this volume, we now can document what one historian has called the black revolution on campus and what another has dubbed the black campus movement.⁵ Before the midcentury freedom struggle, what black people did—their epistemologies and ways of thinking, their contributions to world progress—seldom, if ever, made its way into classrooms or academic texts.⁶ At Rutgers, as at other American universities, black lives did not matter. African Americans were the subject of study only when used as a counterpoint to demonstrate the superiority of Anglo-Saxon culture and physiology. As demonstrated in the first two volumes of Scarlet and Black, professors, students, and administrators demeaned and ridiculed black life. They provided the ideological foundation for enslavement, for debasement, and for Jim Crow laws—the legal separation of the races. Before the freedom struggle hit college campuses, black Americans merited consideration only as objects of humiliation; as demonstrated in volume 2, the very few who were allowed to attend Rutgers and other historically white colleges and universities (HWCUs) were forced to endure that humiliation while participating in campus activities meant to inculcate white Anglo-Saxon Protestant culture.⁷ But along with the sit-ins, picketing, boycotts, and marches that desegregated public spaces; the voter registration campaigns that opened ballot boxes; the court cases that expanded the workplace and housing; and the demonstrations of pride that undergirded their demand for power, both on and off America’s campuses, young black Americans demanded a recognition of black lives. They insisted on an unbiased investigation of America’s contemporary and historic oppression of black people and an objective examination of world history that included Africa as the beginning and center of world civilization. On campuses and off, young black people protested against discriminatory college admissions procedures and their exclusion from financial aid protocols and from campus cultural activities. And, as Roper proclaimed, they made a big noise doing it.⁸

That noise reverberated at Rutgers and universities across the country. Part of the Black Power phase of the freedom movement, the black revolution on campus occurred when the civil rights movement shifted its locus out of the South to northern locales that had never been as open in their racism as the South but were nevertheless just as segregated and hostile to African Americans and other minorities. Black Power focused on the shortcomings of the nonviolent, direct-action movement that began in the immediate aftermath of World War II. By 1967, when Donaldson and Roper walked their isolated paths across Rutgers–Newark, public spaces in the South had been desegregated and blacks were allowed to vote in most southern states. However, across the nation police assaults were rife; redlining kept African Americans, even veterans, from obtaining government-secured loans and mortgages; blacks were still forced to take dead-end jobs; housing, especially in areas outside of the South, was substandard; and the schools in black neighborhoods reflected the black plight. African Americans shifted to Black Power because its strategy of self-help made blacks less dependent on white acceptance and participation, instilled race pride and self-respect, and emphasized black political power.

In essence, when teenagers and young adults like Donaldson and Roper arrived on predominantly white campuses in the mid-1960s, the first political move they made was to push the university to admit more students who looked like them. Across the United States this usually meant protesting for changes to admissions criteria and for financial aid. By insisting on the legitimacy of African American studies and on the intellectual capacity of a black professoriate, this desegregation generation disrupted the notion that only Europeans produced knowledge worth learning, and that only whites possessed the savoir faire to teach it.⁹ As stated by historian Martha Biondi, in the late 1960s black student activists asserted the right to attend college, especially public ones. Moreover, student protests stimulated demand for black faculty and sparked the desegregation of college curriculums with the creation of hundreds of African American studies departments and programs. More than the protests against the Vietnam War, black students’ demands for inclusion in the late ’60s produced the most lasting change in higher education.¹⁰ According to historian Ibram X. Kendi, black student activists forced the rewriting of the racial constitution of higher education.¹¹ In doing so, says Biondi, the academic community would never be the same.¹²

The depth and extensiveness of the black student movement cannot be overstated. In the early 1960s, federal troops were needed to fend off white mobs and protect the few black students who were admitted to southern schools like the University of Georgia (1961), the University of Mississippi (1962), and the University of Alabama (1963). Rutgers was among the schools that responded to the mounting pressure from the civil rights movement by initiating a program in 1963 to recruit a small contingent of black students. Once Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (which gave government agencies the right to withhold federal money from schools that discriminated), and then the Higher Education Act of 1965 (which provided federal funds to schools and financial assistance for students), colleges and universities started admitting more African Americans. Across the country, attendance by black students at HWCUs in 1965 shot up by 70 percent, or about 200,000 out of 4.5 million (4.5 percent). By 1967, black enrollment at HWCUs had increased to 5.15 percent.¹³ Rutgers’s black enrollment mirrored the national numbers. There were about one hundred undergraduates in 1965; by 1968, their numbers had grown to more than 400, or 3 percent of the undergraduate enrollment. Across the country, from 1970 to 1974, college enrollments for African Americans grew by 56 percent, compared to a 15 percent increase for whites. Rutgers enrollments again mirrored the change. According to historian and former Rutgers College dean Richard McCormick, by 1974, the university’s full-time black undergraduate population numbered over 2,500, slightly more than 10 percent of the total student enrollment. Additionally, there were nearly 1,000 black men and women attending Rutgers graduate and professional schools, and 1,100 more were registered in the evening divisions of the university.¹⁴

Pressure brought by black students not only changed admissions policies but also the campus culture and curriculums. Before 1965 there was not a single African studies program in the country and almost no courses on African Americans.¹⁵ When, in 1966, black students at San Francisco State created the first black student union and then created the first black studies department, they simultaneously disrupted the normalization of white college culture and the institutionalized idea that the only education that was valuable was that which began and ended with European paradigms. Black student unions legitimized African American arts and culture on white campuses, and black studies courses and departments legitimized scholarship by and about black Americans. In insisting that black people mattered—as subjects and as professors, in all areas of academic inquiry from the classics to the biological and physical sciences—campus activists demanded the broadening of the knowledge base that undergirded progress and protested the marginalization of all black scholars.

As at most schools, the founding of black student unions and black studies curriculums happened at Rutgers in the late 1960s and early 1970s. After attending a meeting on black empowerment at Columbia University, black men at Rutgers–New Brunswick created the Student Afro-American Society in late 1966.¹⁶ True to Donaldson’s and Roper’s prediction, shortly after its first meeting in September 1967, the Rutgers–Newark NAACP chapter returned its charter to the national headquarters and created the Black Organization of Students (BOS). About the same time, black students at Rutgers–Camden launched the Black Student Unity Movement (BSUM). In March 1968, Douglass College women created the Black Students Committee. Other black organizations emerged, as did broadsheets like Black Voice.

These mouthpieces spurred change at Rutgers. In 1969, the Board of Governors initiated an Urban University Program (UUP) for so-called disadvantaged undergraduates. Preceding that program was the longer-lasting 1968 Educational Opportunity Fund (EOF) created by the New Jersey Department of Higher Education. The EOF provided financial aid as well as remedial courses, special counseling, social and cultural activities, and grievance mechanisms.¹⁷ Not long after that, between 1968 and 1971, African American studies courses and programs were created on all Rutgers campuses. Along with course and curriculum changes, students lobbied for black faculty and staff, and very slowly the black population at Rutgers increased.

Although some white students allied with African Americans, Puerto Rican students were the staunchest supporters of diversification. In 1974, Puerto Ricans constituted 7 percent of New Jersey’s population but only 2 percent of the college students of New Jersey.¹⁸ Puerto Rican students not only supported black students in their crusade for change but they also created independent organizations to lobby for their own specific issues. The Puerto Rican Organization at Newark (1969), the United Puerto Rican Student Organization at Rutgers (UPRS, 1969), the Organization of Puerto Rican Students at Camden (1970), and the Douglass Puerto Rican Students (a chapter of the UPRS) all pressured the university to hire Puerto Rican faculty and staff. Puerto Rican students demonstrated and protested for bilingual staff to assist with academic counseling, recruitment, and retention, and they pressured the university to create a Puerto Rican studies department, which it did at Livingston College—first as a program in 1970 and then as a department in 1973.¹⁹ And just like the African American students, they were relentless in their push to bring in and support more students, faculty, and staff who looked like them.

The explosion of black and Puerto Rican student protest on college campuses across the country in the late 1960s would suggest some coordinated movement with a centralized leadership, but nothing could be further from the truth. For sure, students were galvanized by the philosophy of Black Power, but each campus that saw black and other minority students take over buildings, occupy administrative offices, lead successful student strikes, and present governing boards with demands had their own indigenous leadership that grew from the local circumstances of oppression. In 1968 and 1969 alone there were nearly 200 organized black student protests across the country, and in each case, says Biondi, students formed their own campus organizations and led their own struggles, even as they traveled to other campuses and learned from each other.²⁰

In fact, students did not think in unison but learned from an assortment of black leaders and thinkers. In the late 1960s, James Farmer, Roy Innis, and Floyd McKissick of the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE) addressed students at Rutgers–New Brunswick, as did Andrew Young of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC), the Black Muslim minister Jeremiah Shabazz, the heavyweight boxer Muhammad Ali, and the first black congresswoman, Shirley Chisholm. Students were also addressed by noted authors Ralph Ellison and Louis Lomax and humorist and political activist Dick Gregory. Aside from Malcolm X’s campus visit in November 1961, few black leaders of any political persuasion had been invited to Rutgers before the late ’60s. Still, more than any uniform political philosophy, students were brought together by, as McCormick noted, their sense that they were strangers in a white-controlled environment, that their numbers were too few, that there was too little in the social and academic spheres with which they could readily identify, and that changes had to be made.²¹

At Rutgers, as elsewhere, black and Puerto Rican students brought their neighborhoods to college with them; they did not want to have to divorce their community, culture, or race to get a college education. There was a community that embraced us because we embraced it, said Vickie Donaldson. We brought it with us every day when we came to the university; we didn’t leave it at home and say, ‘Oh, we’re going to college today.’²² It was no coincidence that black students at Rutgers–Newark turned their NAACP chapter into the Black Organization of Students the semester following the five-day 1967 summer rebellion in Newark that left twenty-six people dead, more than 200 seriously injured, and property damage of more than $10 million.²³ Almost immediately after its founding, the BOS petitioned the Rutgers–Newark administration to tear down the fence that separated Newark’s white campus from the black neighborhood that surrounded it. To black Rutgers students, the fence was tangible evidence that Rutgers–Newark wanted nothing to do with black people.²⁴ At Rutgers–Camden, the Black Student Unity Movement was a direct offshoot of the Black People’s Unity Movement, a community activist group that lobbied for fair housing, education, employment, and law enforcement. The BSUM wanted Rutgers–Camden to serve, not occupy, the surrounding community by creating a cultural center, a community foundation, and community access to campus facilities.²⁵

This history and more is the subject of Scarlet and Black: Making Black Lives Matter at Rutgers, 1945–2020. Whereas the first volume showed us how Rutgers’s founders grew rich from the profits of slavery, how they justified black debasement, and how New Brunswick African Americans resisted white control, and volume 2 showed us how the first black students navigated the exclusive white campus population and culture, volume 3 now demonstrates how African American students at Rutgers defied the status quo and made the university racially and culturally diverse. Unlike other studies of Rutgers University, this volume and the two preceding it look exclusively at Rutgers’s institutional racism as it relates not only to African Americans but also to other groups affected by systemic exclusion.²⁶

Largely because Rutgers experienced such tremendous expansion in the twentieth century—to five locations in the New Brunswick area, as well as north to Newark and south to Camden—this study of blacks at Rutgers from 1945 to the present is hardly comprehensive, but limited to what we, the editors, consider the highlights of Rutgers history with African Americans and other minorities during this period. It is divided into three parts. The articles in the first part explore Rutgers before the late 1960s. Really an extension of the second volume of Scarlet and Black, it continues the discussion of what life was like at Rutgers when only a handful of blacks and people of color attended. It also introduces the Newark and Camden campuses and communities, and discusses the way race as a subject of inquiry was handled on the New Brunswick campus. The articles in part 2 focus on the Conklin Hall takeover at Newark and the process by which multiculturalism was introduced at the New Brunswick, Newark, and Camden campuses. In part 3 we focus on incidents of racial tension that occurred toward the end of the twentieth and beginning of the twenty-first centuries—namely, demonstrations against South African apartheid, activist Assata Shakur’s arrest and imprisonment, President Lawrence’s bell curve remarks, and Don Imus’s insulting comments about the Scarlet Knights women’s basketball team. The epilogue speaks to Rutgers’s embrace of cultural diversity and African American excellence by introducing the twenty-first president of the university, Dr. Jonathan Scott Holloway, an African American whose scholarly expertise is African American culture and history.

Although this volume marks the close of the written portion of the Scarlet and Black Project, we hope that this work inspires students’ confidence in their ability to bring about change.²⁷ As we finish this project in the midst of the Covid-19 pandemic and worldwide protests over the murders of blacks by paramilitary police forces, we are enthused by the millions of young people who are demonstrating against inequality and who are once again declaring that black lives matter. Right now, monuments to the Confederacy are being dismantled and exposed as the symbols of hate that they are. This nation’s history of inequality is being exposed for purposes of reconciliation and healing, and at least for now it seems that the logjams against police-reform legislation have been broken. We want to urge everyone, especially young Americans, to embrace this moment and this history, if only for what they say about students’ abilities to effect change and truly make black lives matter. This project grew out of a 2015 student demand for inclusion, the same kind of demand that motivated students in the late 1960s. In 2015, students wanted to feel less alienated by Rutgers’s environment and wanted this story of the institution’s past to serve as the prologue to its future. It is in this spirit that we undertook this study and it is with great pride that we now hand it back to those who can use it to implement change. We want it to be inspirational. We expect Rutgers University to do more than advertise its diversity; we expect Rutgers to lead with it and be intentional about making diversity meaningful.

PART I

Prelude to Change

Circa 1944–1970

DEBORAH GRAY WHITE

It was small, by today’s standards, said historian and former School of Arts and Sciences dean Douglass Greenberg during his opening remarks at the 2015 Black on the Banks Conference. The symposium, held during the 250th-anniversary celebration of Rutgers’s founding, was convened to remember the experiences of 1960s black Rutgers students. During his opening remarks, Greenberg drew a picture of the landscape traversed by the few blacks who braved the campuses of Rutgers and Douglass College. In contrast to the 21,000 undergraduates in the 2015 New Brunswick School of Arts and Sciences and the overall 45,000 students at Rutgers–New Brunswick, in 1968 there were only 10,000 undergraduates between Rutgers (6,500) and Douglass College (2,800). In the 1960s, Rutgers was segregated by gender (women went to Douglass and men to Rutgers College), but the university and the city of New Brunswick were also segregated by race, said Greenberg. Although the university did not begin to collect data on race until 1968—and then only because the federal government mandated it—all versions of the vague numbers "tell about the same story … of deep seeded [sic] and intransigent institutional racism. In 1968, Rutgers College, all four classes, was 1.4 percent African American. There were fewer than one hundred young black men out of 6,500 undergraduates, and almost half of them were freshmen. The graduating class of Rutgers College in 1968 had only eighteen black men; the class of 1969 had only fourteen. Douglass was 4 percent African American, but most were first- and second-year students. The graduating class of 1968 had only four African American women. In 1968 there were three African Americans on the faculty of Rutgers College and only one at Douglass. Greenberg concluded his remarks with this description: Rutgers of fifty years ago was small, provincial, and very highly regarded for its academics both at Rutgers College and at Douglass. We were called a ‘public ivy’ and we were proud to say that. He added, Rutgers wasn’t for ‘whites only’ in the ’60s, but it was surely for ‘whites mostly.’"¹

That first weekend of November 2015 was spent remembering, reflecting, evaluating, and analyzing what it meant to be a black student on Rutgers–New Brunswick’s mostly white campuses in the 1960s. The consensus was aptly characterized in a Rutgers Magazine feature article a year later titled Alone Together. In essence, almost all of the black students remembered Rutgers fondly—but not because Rutgers was welcoming or because they felt welcomed; it was because the few in attendance made their own community, and nurtured and mentored each other.

This was especially true for those who entered before 1968. Tom Ashley’s (RC ’64) remembrances were typical. The only black person on the basketball team for all four of his years at Rutgers, he felt especially isolated. When he saw another black person he would go up to them, introduce himself, and find out where they lived. We were segregated from each other, he remembered. Days would go by and you did not see an African American person at all. And you learned to adjust but at the same time you wanted more, and at the end of the day and by the time I graduated I realized that there was never any more. Juanita Wade Wilson (DC ’66) spoke similarly of loneliness. She remembered being in the first class at Douglass that let black and white young women live together. As she recalled, her roommate could not understand why Wade was angry about race relations, and she had to educate her white roommate about the civil rights movement. Although she and her roommate subsequently became good friends, Wade said movingly, I don’t know how to express the loneliness. By the time he was a junior, Frank McClellan (RC ’67) couldn’t take it anymore. Describing his life at Rutgers as a search for blackness, he recalled deciding that he was tired of the disregard Rutgers paid to the lives of black students. He gathered a few others and told them, We got to fight … we can’t just leave this university with a degree and leave this place the way it was when we came.² McClellan’s resolution to do something about the isolation of Rutgers and Douglass students resulted in the formation of the Student Afro-American Society in late 1966—a Rutgers College organization that Douglass’s black women participated in.³

If the experiences of these Rutgers–New Brunswick students sound much like those experienced by Vickie Donaldson and Richard Roper at Rutgers–Newark, it is because all campuses of the state university of New Jersey were similarly mostly white.⁴ Indeed, until the late 1960s, Rutgers was like most predominantly white schools in that it had only a handful of black and minority students and venerated an exclusionary culture that reproduced white Anglo-Saxon Protestant ideals.⁵ And New Jersey was like most states that closed off opportunities to its black and brown communities by blocking them out of home and business loans, cordoning them off from the white-only suburbs, and locking them into dead-end jobs from which there was no escape. These students, politicized by their isolation and a new vision of the possible, would not tolerate the stasis at Rutgers or let its various campuses remain mostly white islands of opportunity.

This first part of Scarlet and Black: Making Black Lives Matter at Rutgers, 1945–2020, focuses on New Jersey and Rutgers before Rutgers admitted more than a handful of minority students. Though hardly comprehensive, it examines communities like Newark, Camden, and New Brunswick and suggests the kinds of concerns students brought with them. It also looks at the level of racial consciousness that existed at Rutgers College and Douglass before the late 1960s and explores whether these institutions had the capacity to change. The essay Twenty-Twenty Vision: New Jersey and Rutgers on the Eve of Change begins this section with a look at the general landscape of New Jersey and Rutgers in the 1950s and 1960s. It explains the impact of migration and the 1944 Servicemen’s Readjustment Act (GI Bill), while also reminding us of the lack of racial and cultural diversity at Rutgers before the 1970s. The authors of Rutgers and New Brunswick: A Consideration of Impact move from the general to the local with a more targeted look at some of the changes that occurred in New Brunswick in the late 1960s. Although New Brunswick was largely segregated and, like many New Jersey towns, had right-wing tendencies, there were pockets of left-wing activity that drew in area activists, including students at Rutgers. This essay’s analysis of the All You Can Eat alternative newspaper suggests the kinds of ideas that were a possible influence on a portion of students who matriculated at Rutgers in the late 1960s. Ultimately, this essay considers what impact, if any, Rutgers had on the black citizens of New Brunswick in the late 1960s.

The last two selections look closely at the Rutgers and Douglass campuses. ‘Tell It Like It Is’: The Rise of a Race-Conscious Professoriate at Rutgers in the 1960s explores the thinking of Rutgers faculty and staff on racial matters. By examining the Rutgers Faculty Newsletter from 1958 through the takeover of Newark’s Conklin Hall in 1969, it tracks the racial climate on the Rutgers–New Brunswick campus as expressed by its faculty and administrators. It analyzes not just the policies they endorsed and the intellectual work they undertook but also the language that reflected the feelings and thoughts of the white faculty and administrators about black people. It also notes student, faculty, and administrative work on racial matters prior to the cataclysmic changes that occurred in the late 1960s and analyzes the faculty response to the black student demand for inclusion, including their insistence on African American studies. Black and Puerto Rican Student Experiences and Their Movements at Douglass College, 1945–1974 looks mostly at Douglass College before it changed its admittance policies. It examines the few black women who matriculated before the late 1960s and shows how they built community and managed the white campus culture. It examines their isolation and how things changed when more black students arrived. It also examines the few Puerto Rican women who matriculated at Douglass. Although there seems to have been only three of them, their experiences underscore how radically different Douglass was before the late ’60s and early ’70s.

In all, the articles in this part sketch the landscape of New Jersey and New Brunswick’s Rutgers and Douglass Colleges. Although its chronology explores the reaction to the Conklin Hall takeover at Newark and the student protests that took place on all the Rutgers campuses, its predominant focus is on the period before the disruptures of the late 1960s.

1

Twenty-Twenty Vision

New Jersey and Rutgers on the Eve of Change

ROBERTO C. OROZCO, CARIE RAEL,

BROOKE A. THOMAS, AND DEBORAH GRAY WHITE

In her book on the black student movement, historian Martha Biondi notes that black student activism took observers by surprise.¹ Few seemed to know where the demand for the enrollment of more minority students or the hiring of minority faculty came from. Indeed, colleges and universities across the country were caught off guard by the demand for inclusion and diversity in the student body and faculty, and also in the types of courses that were taught and the kinds of social causes the university embraced. That it came as a surprise suggests that until the late 1960s, universities, even those located in predominantly black neighborhoods, were ivory towers in more ways than one.

Although the black student revolution that took place on college campuses in the late 1960s and 1970s was as national as racism, the shape it took on individual campuses grew organically from regional and local issues. With that in mind, this essay briefly reviews New Jersey and its state university on the eve of what historian and former dean of Rutgers College Richard McCormick called the black student protest movement at Rutgers.² Although hindsight is, as they say, twenty-twenty vision, one could argue that, given state and local circumstances, it did not take a crystal ball or otherworldly visionary abilities to predict that change was inevitable at Rutgers.

Demographic Shifts

The demographic shifts of the post–World War II era helped set the stage for the transformation of Rutgers. Central to the changes that took place across the state was the influx of new people from Puerto Rico and the American South. An examination of Latinx and black migration to New Jersey suggests the kinds of changes that would eventually take place at Rutgers.

The post–World War II period brought more Puerto Ricans to the New York and New Jersey area than ever before. The exact numbers are difficult to decipher because from 1950 to 1979 the census only recorded people of Spanish origin. Not until 1980 did the census differentiate Latinx people. Still, a state agency reported a large influx of Puerto Ricans between 1950 and 1954; in 1954, 26,000 reportedly lived in New Jersey on a yearly basis, and an additional 8,000 seasonal farmworkers were brought in that year for the harvest season.³ According to the Puerto Rican Congress of New Jersey, by 1970, the Puerto Rican population in Newark totaled about 27,000; in Camden, it totaled about 7,000; and in New Brunswick, Puerto Rican residents totaled 1,400. Statewide, by 1970, Puerto Ricans numbered 138,896.⁴

Part of the reason for Puerto Rican migration had to do with the reorientation of Puerto Rico’s economic base from agriculture to manufacturing. Operation Bootstrap, a series of policies in the 1940s and 1950s that sought to modernize Puerto Rico by switching to an export-based economy, created job shortages on the island. This led to a mass migration to the United States, with a large number of migrants first settling in New York and then relocating to New Jersey and the surrounding areas.⁵ Puerto Ricans were officially declared US citizens in 1917, and in 1952 the island was officially declared a commonwealth of the United States.⁶ This unique relationship between the United States and Puerto Rico not only streamlined Puerto Rican migration but also made it easier to exploit Puerto Rican workers.⁷ In the 1950s, Camden’s Hispanic population grew from 125 to 6,000.⁸ By 1954, for example, there were 8,298 Puerto Rican farm laborers in all of New Jersey.⁹ Despite the protections that the Puerto Rican government tried to impose on New Jersey farm owners, workers complained that owners often refused to pay the stipulated wages, forced workers to work additional hours, and often provided inadequate food and housing.¹⁰

The many non-farmworkers who migrated to New Jersey also dealt with challenging circumstances. Although American citizens at birth, their Spanish language, rural background, poverty, and, for some, their dark complexion made life hard. Landlords overcharged for tiny apartments, police harassed them, and some bars refused to serve them. For example, when Ismael Acevedo bought a house in Dover, New Jersey, the seller advised that he not visit the house during the day, not tell anyone he was buying it, move in at night, and bring as few people with him as he could. When Acevedo asked why, the seller said, Because that way they [referring to the neighbors] can’t reject you.¹¹ Maria Agront, another migrant to Dover, expressed compassion for Puerto Rican men who, she said, were arrested for any little thing. They arrest them for walking or for standing. If they were in groups of three or more, they were arrested. From Agront’s perspective, these men were lonely, single men, with no place to go on their days off, who tired of their furnished rooms, went out for fresh air and to talk to one another. But because rumor had it that Puerto Rican males were a dangerous lot who carried knives and picked fights at the slightest provocation, they were harassed and arrested.¹²

At the same time that Puerto Ricans were increasing their numbers in New Jersey, so too were African Americans. Black Americans had been present in the area since the arrival of European settlers in New Brunswick in the late eighteenth century. But between 1945 and 1970, the number of black Americans in the state consistently rose as blacks flowed in from Georgia, South Carolina, Virginia, and North Carolina. In 1940, African Americans were only 5.5 percent of New Jersey’s population, but by 1970, that percentage had nearly doubled as blacks composed 10.7 percent of the population. Whereas in 1940 black Americans made up 6.3 percent of the New Brunswick population, by 1970, that number had more than tripled to 22.7 percent.¹³ During the 1950s, Camden’s black population grew by 58.6 percent, making blacks 25 percent of the city’s population by 1960.¹⁴ By 1970, Newark was a black-majority city.¹⁵

Opportunities were not as plentiful as blacks would have wanted. In 1943, Herbert Cartman became the first black police officer in New Brunswick and Herman Marrow established a dental office on George Street.¹⁶ By 1945, the city had a chapter of the Urban League. But rapid growth in the years following the Second World War did not ameliorate racism in the city. Alice Archibald Jennings, the first black graduate of the Rutgers Graduate School of Education, was born and raised in New Brunswick and graduated from New Brunswick High School in 1923. She recalled experiences of racial segregation in New Brunswick movie theaters in the pre–World War II years.¹⁷ And these experiences continued into the mid-1960s when, as she recalled, one could still find a pool on Livingston Avenue open only to the members of the all-white Sun and Splash club.¹⁸

Other parts of New Jersey were similarly racially segregated. As blacks moved beyond Atlantic City’s segregated beach to enjoy the Jersey Shore, white bathers decamped for nearby all-white towns. In 1965, Newark’s Olympic Park amusement center closed its doors as more blacks frequented the park, and throughout the state, blacks fought tooth and nail for educational equality. Despite the 1947 amendment to the state constitution that forbade segregation of schools on grounds of race, creed, or color, there remained overwhelmingly black and overwhelmingly white schools because housing patterns kept the races apart.¹⁹ Two Newark reports issued in 1959 signaled the dismal state of things. One of them, Economic Development of the Greater Newark Area: Recent Trends and Prospects, noted the growth of