When Black Soldiers Dap Defied Authority in Vietnam

The two black soldiers approached each other in the company area. Their hands met, slapped, gripped, slid apart, came together again in complex choreographed sequence that lasted 10 seconds. The elaborate handshake, called the dap, ended with closed fist salute. The white first sergeant watching from 50 ft away saw it as deliberate insubordination.

Those soldiers just gave each other what he understood as a black power salute on a United States military base. He moved to confront them. What happened next occurred thousands of times across Vietnam from 1969 through 1972. Black soldiers defending their right to greet each other in their own cultural style.

 White commanders viewing it as threat to military discipline and confrontations that sometimes erupted into violence. The dap wasn’t just a handshake. It was a declaration of solidarity, recognition of shared experience, and a claim to cultural identity that the military couldn’t control. Understanding the dap requires understanding what it communicated and why that communication was seen as dangerous.

The origins of the dap in Vietnam traced back to 1968-1969 when black soldiers began elaborating on traditional handshakes to create more complex greetings. The word dap itself came from either dignity and pride or from the sound of hands slapping together. Accounts vary on etymology. The basic dap started as an extended handshake with added components.

 Two soldiers would approach, slap palms, grip hands, bump fists, and conclude with some variation of raised fist or other gesture. The entire sequence might take 5 to 10 seconds. But the dap evolved rapidly. By 1970, some versions had become elaborate rituals lasting 30 seconds or longer with multiple stages.

 Hand slaps, finger snaps, chest bumps, shoulder bumps, intricate hand movements, and concluding gestures. Learning the dap required practice and shared cultural understanding. Different units developed their own variations. The dap performed by soldiers in the first cavalry division differed from the version in the 25th infantry.

 Black Marines had their own dap distinct from Army versions. The variations created in-group identification. You could tell what unit or which part of the country a black soldier came from by how he gave dap. The complexity was intentional. The elaborate choreography served multiple purposes beyond simple greeting. It demonstrated cultural knowledge that white soldiers and officers didn’t possess.

 It created moments of black solidarity that excluded whites. And it took time, time when black soldiers were focused on each other rather than on military duties or white authority. The military significance of the dap went beyond the physical gesture. Every time black soldiers gave dap, they were claiming cultural space within military structure that demanded conformity and suppression of individual identity.

The elaborate ritual required stopping whatever else was happening and focusing entirely on the greeting. When black soldiers passed each other in company areas, on base, or even in combat zones, they would stop and give dap. This interruption of military routine was itself a form of resistance. The time involved was provocative.

 A simple salute or nod takes 1 second. The elaborate dap took 10, 20, 30 seconds. When white NCOs or officers watched two black soldiers spend half a minute on an elaborate greeting ritual while work was waiting, they saw deliberate defiance of efficiency and discipline. The exclusivity was threatening.

 White soldiers who tried to participate in the dap were rejected or mocked. The dap was explicitly black cultural expression that whites couldn’t join. In a military that claimed to be integrated and colorblind, this assertion of separate black identity was viewed as divisive. The physical components carried meanings that white command structure understood and feared.

 The raised fist conclusion was a black power salute associated with radical movements. The elaborate hand movements evoked African and culture. The entire ritual rejected European-American cultural norms in favor of African-American expression. Recognition that they shared experience and identity more fundamental than their shared military service.

The dap said, “You are my brother because we’re both black, not because we’re both soldiers.” This challenged the military’s claim that service transcended race. The spread of the dap through military units occurred rapidly during 1969-1970 and tracked with broader black consciousness movement gaining strength among African-Americans.

Black soldiers arriving in Vietnam from stateside bases brought versions of the dap they’d learned there. Others created new variations in Vietnam itself. The ritual spread as black soldiers from different units encountered each other and shared their versions. By mid-1970, the dap was nearly universal among black soldiers in Vietnam.

 Congressional investigations into racial tensions documented that the dap was performed openly on virtually every American base. The attempts to suppress it had failed before most white commanders even understood what they were seeing. The dap even appeared in disciplinary settings. Black prisoners in Long Binh Jail gave dap to each other despite regulations prohibiting it.

 When punished for giving dap, they gave it again. The gesture became a test of will between black prisoners and white guards. The command response to the dap evolved from confusion to prohibition to frustrated acceptance when prohibition proved unenforceable. Initially, many white officers didn’t understand what they were seeing.

 The elaborate handshake seemed odd but not necessarily threatening. Some commanders ignored them as harmless cultural expression. But as the dap became more widespread and elaborate, and as its connection to black power movement became clear, the command attitude shifted. The raised fist conclusions were unmistakable black power salutes.

Commands began issuing prohibitions. Orders came down banning the dap or limiting it to simple handshakes without elaborate rituals. Black soldiers were told that giving dap violated regulations about military courtesy. That it disrupted good order and discipline. That it couldn’t be permitted.

 The enforcement of these prohibitions created confrontations. Black soldiers refused to stop giving dap. When threatened with Article 15 punishment, some accepted the punishment rather than stop giving dap. The confrontations sometimes escalated to violence. White NCOs attempting to break up dap rituals got into physical altercations with black soldiers who refused to stop.

 The dap became a flash point for broader racial tensions. It was visible daily occurrence that crystallized conflicts about respect, cultural identity, and authority. One documented incident from 1970 at a base in the Central Highlands illustrates the dynamics. A white first sergeant ordered two black soldiers to stop giving dap and return to work.

 The soldiers finished their dap ritual before responding. The first sergeant physically grabbed one soldier’s arm. Other black soldiers in the area immediately surrounded the first sergeant. The situation nearly erupted into mass brawl before officers intervened. The investigation of that incident concluded that the first sergeant had overreacted and that the soldiers hadn’t violated any specific regulation.

 But it also noted that the dap was divisive and potentially threatening to good order. The military couldn’t quite make up its mind whether to prohibit the dap or tolerate it. The unenforceable nature of dap prohibitions became clear by 1971. Black soldiers simply refused to stop. The military couldn’t court-martial hundreds or thousands of soldiers for shaking hands.

 The prohibitions existed on paper but weren’t enforced in practice. Some commands tried compromise approaches, allowing simple handshakes but prohibiting the raised fist conclusions or the most elaborate rituals. These half measures satisfied nobody. Black soldiers viewed them as attempts to control their cultural expression.

 White commanders saw them as weakness. The psychological significance of the dap for black soldiers went far beyond the physical gesture. It was affirmation of identity and humanity in environment that often denied both. Black soldiers in Vietnam faced racism from white soldiers, discrimination in assignments and discipline, and Confederate flags displayed openly in areas where they worked and slept.

 The dap was daily reminder that they weren’t alone. That other black soldiers understood their experience. And that their black identity was valid and valuable. The ritual nature of the dap created sacred space for the 10 or 20 or 30 seconds of giving dap, black soldiers existed in a relationship defined by mutual respect and recognition rather than by military hierarchy or white authority.

 The dap was an island of black self-determination in an ocean of white control. The educational function of the dap taught cultural pride and identity. Young black soldiers arriving in Vietnam learned the dap from veterans. The teaching process transmitted not just the physical movements, but also the cultural meanings and the importance of maintaining black solidarity.

 One black veteran interviewed for Wallace Terry’s Bloods described the dap as the only thing that was ours. Everything else in military life was controlled by white authority. Where you slept, what you wore, what you ate, where you went, what you did. But the dap belonged to black soldiers and nobody could take it away.

The defiance aspect was crucial. Every time black soldiers gave dap in the presence of white authority that disapproved, they were asserting that their cultural identity mattered more than white comfort. This assertion was radical in a military context that demanded conformity above all else. The specific confrontations over dap that escalated to formal discipline reveal how seriously the military took the threat it perceived.

 Court-martial records from 1970 to 1971 include multiple cases where black soldiers faced charges that included giving dap as an element of broader insubordination or disrespect charges. The dap itself wasn’t usually the sole charge, but it appeared in the specifications documenting the soldier’s defiant behavior. One case from 1970 involved a black corporal charged with disrespect to a superior NCO.

 The specifications included that he engaged in an elaborate Negro power handshake ritual after being ordered to stop and return to duty. The language in the charge sheet, Negro power handshake ritual, revealed how the military officially characterized the dap. The corporal’s defense argued that shaking hands couldn’t constitute criminal behavior and that to stop was unlawful because it discriminated against black cultural expression.

 The court-martial board convicted him anyway, finding that he disobeyed a direct order regardless of whether the order was appropriate. Another documented case involved three black Marines who gave dap in front of a formation during a change of command ceremony. The company commander viewed this as deliberate disruption of official function and as showing disrespect.

 All three received non-judicial punishment, reduction in rank, and forfeiture of pay. The Marines appealed the punishment, arguing that they’d simply greeted each other and that white Marines who talked during the same ceremony received no punishment. The appeal was denied with explanation that the elaborate and prolonged nature of the ritual made it different from casual conversation.

These cases established that the dap could be punished as insubordination or disrespect even though it wasn’t explicitly prohibited by regulation. The military’s position was that commanders had authority to maintain good order and discipline and if a commander determined that the dap disrupted that order, he could prohibit it.

One black soldier testified, “The dap is how we recognize each other. It’s how we show respect. When they tell us we can’t give dap, they’re telling us we can’t be black and we’re not going to accept that.” The congressional investigations struggled to understand the issue. Some members viewed it as trivial.

 Why were commanders making such an issue about handshakes? Others saw it as serious symbol of racial polarization that needed addressing. The final congressional report noted that the dap was symbolic of broader issues of racial identity and cultural recognition within the military. The report recommended that commands allow cultural expression, including the dap, as long as it didn’t directly interfere with military duties.

 This recommendation was largely ignored. The connection between the dap and the broader black power movement was real and was precisely what made white commanders uncomfortable. The Black Panther Party and other black power organizations had developed their own greeting rituals in civilian context.

 The raised fist was a universal symbol of black power. When black soldiers incorporated these elements into the dap, they were explicitly aligning themselves with radical black politics. Some black soldiers in Vietnam openly identified with black power ideology. They wore black power symbols, read Black Panther literature when they could obtain it, and discussed Malcolm X and other black radical leaders.

 The dap was visible manifestation of this political consciousness. The military’s concern was that black power ideology encouraged resistance to white authority and solidarity based on race rather than on military unit. Officers feared that black soldiers who identified primarily as black rather than as soldiers would refuse orders, protect each other instead of following chain of command, and potentially turn violent against white personnel.

But the causal relationship was backwards. The dap didn’t create racial solidarity that led to violence. The racial discrimination and harassment created need for solidarity that the dap expressed. The violence occurred when that solidarity was attacked or when racist treatment became unbearable. The white soldiers’ reactions to the dap varied, but tended toward resentment and fear.

Some white soldiers were indifferent. They didn’t understand the dap’s significance and didn’t care as long as it didn’t affect them. These soldiers generally ignored the dap and avoided involvement in racial conflicts. Others resented the dap as exclusive ritual that made them feel like outsiders.

 The elaborate greetings between black soldiers highlighted that white soldiers didn’t have equivalent cultural expression. This created a sense that black soldiers had something whites were excluded from, which contradicted whites’ expectation of being included in everything. Some white soldiers attempted to give dap or to participate in black cultural expressions as a way of bridging the racial divide.

 These attempts were generally rejected by black soldiers who viewed them as appropriation or mockery. The dap was black cultural property and white participation wasn’t welcome. The lasting impact of the dap extended beyond Vietnam and influenced how the military dealt with cultural expression in the following decades. The post-Vietnam military reforms included efforts to recognize and respect cultural diversity, including African-American cultural practices.

 The absolute prohibitions on cultural expression were relaxed in favor of more nuanced approaches. The modern military allows cultural greetings and expressions as long as they don’t interfere with duties or violate specific regulations. The dap itself has largely disappeared as specific practice, but the principle that cultural identity can be expressed within military context has been established.

 The broader lesson was that attempting to suppress cultural identity creates resistance and conflict. Black soldiers in Vietnam taught the military that cultural expression couldn’t be prohibited by fiat and that respecting cultural diversity was necessary for maintaining morale and cohesion. Cultural expressions that emphasize ethnic or racial identity over military identity will always create some tension with military values.

The veterans who participated in the dap carried different memories of its significance. Some remember it primarily as social ritual, the way black soldiers greeted each other and maintained friendships. Others remember it as political act, conscious resistance to white authority, and assertion of black power.

If you’re a black veteran who gave dap in Vietnam, your account of what it meant to you and how commands responded matters to understanding this aspect of the war. The comments are open. For everyone else, understanding the dap reveals how cultural expression becomes political when it occurs in context that seeks to suppress it.

 The elaborate handshake was revolutionary act because it asserted black identity in a space that demanded conformity. Share this video to preserve this documentation of how black soldiers used the dap to claim cultural autonomy in Vietnam. The sources are in the description with links to congressional testimony and investigation records.

Subscribe for more content examining the cultural and political dimensions of Vietnam that standard histories ignore. Thank you for watching. The dap was more than a handshake. It was a declaration that black soldiers would maintain their cultural identity and solidarity regardless of what white authority demanded.