Should LBJ Be Ranked Alongside Lincoln?
Robert Caro, the esteemed biographer of Lyndon Baines Johnson, talks on the Shakespearean life of the 36th president
- By Ron Rosenbaum
- Smithsonian magazine, May 2012, Subscribe
(Page 5 of 6)
In the light of LBJ’s echoing Martin Luther King’s “we shall overcome,” I asked whether Caro felt, as King put it, that “the moral arc of the universe bends toward justice”?
“Johnson’s life makes you think about that question,” Caro says. “Just like Martin Luther King’s life. And I think a part of it to me is that Obama is president.
“In 1957, blacks can’t really vote in the South in significant numbers. When LBJ leaves the presidency, blacks are empowered, and as a result, we have an African-American president, so what way does the arc bend? It’s bending, all right.”
I didn’t want to spoil the moment but I felt I had to add: “Except for the two million or so Vietnamese peasants who [died]...”
“You can’t even get a number [for the dead in Vietnam],” he says. “For the next book I’m going to find—”
“The number?”
“You look at these picture spreads in Life and Look of LBJ visiting the amputees in the hospital and you say, you’re also writing about the guy who did this.”
Caro is really taking on the most difficult question in history, trying to find a moral direction in the actions of such morally divided men and nations. If anyone can do it, he can.
Before I left, before he had to go back to his galleys and chapter notes, I wanted to find out the answer to a question about Caro’s own history. When I asked him what had set him on his own arc, he told me an amazing story about his first newspaper job in 1957, which was not at Newsday, as I thought, but a little rag called the New Brunswick [New Jersey] Daily Home News. It’s a remarkable tale of his own firsthand experience of political corruption and racism that explains a lot about his future fascination with power.
“This was such a lousy newspaper that the chief political writer—an old guy; he actually covered the Lindbergh kidnapping—would take a leave of absence every election—the chief political writer!—to write speeches for the Middlesex County Democratic organization.”
“I see,” I said.
“So he gets a minor heart attack but he has to take time off, and it’s right before...the election. So he can’t do this job which pays many times the salary. And he has to have a substitute who’s no threat to him. So who better than this young schmuck?
“So I found myself working for the Middlesex County Democratic boss. At New Brunswick there was a guy named Joe. Tough old guy. And I was this guy from Princeton. But he took a real shine to me.
“Oh God,” Caro interrupts himself, “I hadn’t thought of this [for a long time]. So I write the speeches for the mayor and four council members, and he says, ‘Those were good speeches.’ He pulls out this roll of fifty-dollar bills. And he peels off—I was making, my salary was $52.50 a week, and he peels off all these fifty-dollar bills and he gives them to me! And I didn’t know...all this money.
Single Page « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next »
Subscribe now for more of Smithsonian's coverage on history, science and nature.









Comments (42)
+ View All Comments
I cannot beleive a man from Texas is responsible for the civil rights fiasco that wasted trillions on supposed equality and against poverty and we are now more impoverished than ever before! ,!!
Posted by on February 12,2013 | 07:01 PM
I can't believe I just came across this ridiculous question, "Should LBJ be Ranked Alongside Lincoln". I'm flabbergasted that I even see such an idiotic question posted any place! Amazing! LBJ should have been locked in prison where he belonged. Where he would have rightly been if not for his interference and manipulation of political events. LBJ is without question, the worst President of my lifetime, a National embarrassment and fraud. One that has yet to be given his true place in history of scorn and disgust. I have faith that in time, even greater facts will be revealed implicating LBJ's crimes.
Posted by on October 25,2012 | 07:38 PM
Lincoln did not start The civil War, he asked the south to stay in the union in his first Inaugural address. It was the south that started the war by firing on Ft. sumter, a FEDERAL FORT. Was Lincoln supposed to allow this treason to stand? That's ridiculous. Lincoln did not ruin limited government, just because he believed that slavery should not be allowed in the U.S.!! Sounds like we have some bizarre confederate sympathizers on here that have no historical clue!! South Carolina's Ordnance of secession, considered the Declaration of Indepence for the confederacy is rife with complaints about attacks on slavery and the rigghts of slaveholders, so don't bother us with the ignorant statements about how the confederacy wasn't fighting for slavery, but merely "states rights." They were happy with the federal govenment when the supreme court gave the south the Dred Scott decision, allowing slavery throught the country.Dred Scott case was opposed to state's rights, in that states were not to recognize any rights of slaves. The slaveholder's rights trumped state's rights, as a matter of U.S. constitutional law per the Dred Scott decision that the south so loved.
Posted by Liti-Gator on July 3,2012 | 01:25 PM
"...coerced the obstructionist, racist-dominated Senate to pass the first civil rights bill since Reconstruction." This is an incorrect statement. The first piece of civil rights legislation passed after Reconstruction was the Civil Rights Act of 1957, passed under the Eisenhower administration. It was voting rights legislation.
Posted by Robert W. on June 13,2012 | 11:16 AM
"he goes down to teach in this Mexican-American town, in Cotulla. ... I wrote the line [that] summed up my feelings: ‘No teacher had ever cared if these kids learned or not. This teacher cared.'" Yes, no doubt all previous teachers before LBJ had been raving racists who did not care if their kids learned and that was why they went into teaching and worked all day at it for low pay.
Posted by Thomas Michael Andres on May 25,2012 | 12:21 AM
LBJ has been fingered as the kingpin in the kennedy asassination by non other than super slueth e howard hunt in newly released videos and recordings his son st john hunt has released.also he faked 'false flagged'the gulf of tonkin event to start vietnam war.he is a war criminal and a murderer and should not be compared to Lincoln.
Posted by michael peck on May 6,2012 | 12:38 AM
Richard III; the evocation of LBJ.
Posted by Dr. Sandy Kramer on May 5,2012 | 07:58 AM
Reality differs, Ryan H... let me suggest that many Americans ARE IN poverty because of those two programs, not despite them. Thinking of the larger timeline, starting with a visit to the US Census Dept's website which points out that poverty has only increased despite (or because of?) those programs. I do believe in caring for the least of my brothers and prove it weekly/monthly by taking care of the poor both at home and abroad, but nanny states are the worst possible thing for human beings. We are meant to be living in harmony with the earth, not in some pre-packaged environment addicted to the filth offered by a broken state with corrupt politicians. That's no good. I applaud the author's multi-decade efforts but to label LBJ in a good light is harrowing.
Posted by Kure on May 4,2012 | 11:45 AM
There might be enough material on LBJ's long political history, including his tenure as President, to make an equivalently long biography as one on Lincoln. In that respect perhaps the biographers should be compared. But LBJ should not be esteemed alongside Lincoln for reasons other commentors have left here. Perhaps we do idolize Lincoln overly much, but having lived during LBJ's years I realize what this biographer is attempting to do is raise Johnson above the public's impression of him now that decades have passed. An objectionable effort.
Posted by R Burns on May 3,2012 | 07:13 PM
LBJ was a bully and a coward, two descriptions I've never heard applied to Lincoln. Many of LBJ's anti-poverty programs were thoughtlessly planned wastes of money that destroyed families, and his failure to stand up to the generals over Vietnam cost an untold number of lives. I commend Caro on his historical research. Such books are needed. But let's not compare LBJ to Lincoln.
Posted by Gregory Urbach on May 3,2012 | 06:39 PM
I think LBJ is unfairly villainized. While his foreign policy was terrible and should be criticized, he did wonders for many Americans with his domestic policies and for that he deserves recognition.
Posted by Alana Nora on April 25,2012 | 02:38 PM
Excuse me, but rating Lincoln and Johnson IS correct. Both were political opportunists. Both had opportunities to improve the nation. Lincoln kept blacks in the Union slaves, while freeing only those in the rebellious states. Lincoln played 'general' while ignoring the best military advice. And Johnson? There is not space to list 'landslide' Lyndon's accomplishments which were a direct result of political opportunity. He cared not one bit for the black man, only for that which would benefit him. Yes, rate them the same. But Lincoln deserves no high place in history.
Posted by Stephen Downey on April 23,2012 | 11:23 PM
It's remarkable how many of the people commenting on the piece appear not to have read the piece all the way through. Plus, try and leave your present-day political biases at the door. Last i checked, Bill Clinton left the presidency running surpluses, so I'm not sure how the Great Society is bankrupting us all on its own.
Posted by Joey B on April 23,2012 | 02:48 PM
@Ryan H: Well said. And to the person who said Lincoln killed more Americans than Hitler: Goebbels would have admired the way you argue there, buddy.
Posted by AfterBenH on April 23,2012 | 02:04 PM
+ View All Comments