beginning with his open housing campaign in 1967, did
McNamara, who had always championed the stand of Adam Yarmolinsky and
the rest, become a strong participant.

McNamara promptly endorsed the Gesell Committee's report, which called
for a vigorous program to provide equal opportunity for black
servicemen, ordering the services to launch such a program in
communities near military bases and making the local commander
primarily responsible for its success. He soft-pedaled the committee's
controversial provision for the use of economic sanctions against
recalcitrant businessmen, stressing instead the duty of commanders to
press for changes through voluntary compliance. These efforts,
according to Defense Department reports, achieved gratifying results
in the next few years. In conjunction with other federal officials
operating under provisions of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, local
commanders helped open thousands of theaters, bowling alleys,
restaurants, and bathing beaches to black servicemen. Only in the face
of continued opposition to open housing by landlords who dealt with
servicemen, and then not until 1967, did McNamara decide to use the
powerful and controversial weapon of off-limits sanctions. In short
order his programs helped destroy the patterns of segregation in
multiple housing in areas surrounding most military bases.

The federal government's commitment to civil rights, manifest in
Supreme Court decisions, executive orders, and congressional actions,
was an important support for the Defense Department's racial program
during this second part of the integration era. It is doubtful whether
many of the command initiatives recommended by the Gesell Committee
would have succeeded or even been tried without the court's 1954
school ruling and the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Yet in several
important instances, such as the McNamara 1963 equal opportunity
directive and the open housing campaign in 1967, the department's
actions antedated federal action. Originally a follower of civilian
society in racial matters, the armed forces moved ahead in the 1950's
and by the mid-1960's had become a powerful stimulus for change in
civilian practices in some areas of the country.[24-7]

[Footnote 24-7: For a discussion of this point, see
Yarmolinsky's _The Military Establishment_, pp.
346-51.]

Achievements of the services should not detract from the primacy of
civil