Segregating Integration

As the Deep South settles down to face the tremendous problems of racial integration, the temptation increases on the part of eager politicians to exploit inevitable clashes for political gain. Already, in the regrettable Miss Lucy affair, remarks by certain candidates for national office show that it is not difficult to turn the harsh noises from the South into appealing words for the Northern voter. These statements are certain to damage the cause of interstatements are certain to damage the cause of integration, and if the candidates are unable to keep their discussion of the problem restrained, the whole subject of integration of schools should be removed from the coming Presidential campaign.

Admittedly any judgment on political motives is difficult to make. Stevenson and Eisenhower, by urging a moderate approach to the problem and by questioning the need for Federal action at this time, may be making as much of a play for the Southern vote as Harriman and Nixon are for the Northern urban vote. Motives aside, however, when Harriman condemed the President for taking the riots over Miss Lucy "so lightly," and when Nixon credited a great Republican Chief Justice with engineering the Supreme Court decision, the two Presidential aspirants did both their parties and the progress of integration great disservice.

The statements of the four party leaders show clearly that opinions on integration do not divide along party lines. Stevenson and Eisenhower are certainly closer on this question than either is to the less moderate elements in his own party. And while Warren may be a "great Republican," the Court's unanimous segregation decision clearly transcended party loyalties. Even moderate spokesmen in the South itself are pretty much divided between Republicans and Democrats.

Since party divisions are generally meaningless in a discussion of integration, it would be foolish indeed for either party to drag the problem into the political ring; it would also be extremely dangerous for the cause of integration, since integration will make progress as a legal, not as a political, issue. Those working effectively for integration in the South are emphasizing not that the Court decision is right, but that it is now the supreme law of the land and must be obeyed. Once the ruling on integration is lowered from its judicial pedestal, the decision will lose what sanctity it now has and the task of desegregating schools will become almost insurmountable.

The Court certainly realized the prestige value of law when it left the implementation of the decision in the hands of the district judges. In the same decree, Washington recognized another problem which is equal cause for keeping debates on integration out of politics--the innumerable local variations that preclude any one formula for successful desegregation. Any candidate who commits himself to one road toward integration will probably find that his statements are pretty valueless when applied to any particular local situation.

Not only would the statements have little value in the South, but they would, more importantly, hamper the future President's effectiveness when he has to deal with the problem. As integration proceeds during the next few years, federal action may from time to time be necessary. In any event, the President must not speak as the candidate who favored rapid integration or slow integration, but as a President who is administering the law.

Naturally, if too many issues are banned from the coming electoral contest, there will not be much of a campaign. But there are peculiarly sensitive problems involved in desegregation which demand that candidates either discuss the subject with utmost moderation or else avoid discussion entirely.