When we examine the various approaches for the Civil Rights Movement that are discussed in Blood Done Sign My Name we find that there is no one clear answer as to which is more affective, because it was the combination of all three: radical, liberal, and conservative that finally pushed some of what the Civil Rights Movement strived for. No approach on its own was able to do anything, whether it was the nonviolent marches and demonstrations which were not able to grab the attention of the white power structure, or the racially driven violence which simply terrified whites, and which most likely would have done nothing were it not paired with the nonviolent demonstrations as well. Blood Done Sign My Name focuses around the killing of Henry Marrow, giving the image of the town of Oxford before the incident and after. One could say that the first approach taken, long before the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960’s took place, was that of a radical approach, with slave uprisings happening well before the emancipation of slaves. The atmosphere leading up to and around the murder of Henry Marrow is a very harsh one, with tensions running extremely high because of a clear denial of rights for African Americans. When the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was passed, there were most likely many people who thought that the problem was now solved. However, it became clear to the black people of Oxford that despite there being federal laws regarding their rights as citizens, there was really no way for the Federal Government to enforce those rules upon the smaller, local governments. Tyson talks about how the federal laws, while they did have something to do with the Civil Rights Movement, were certainly not all of it. As pointed out by Tyson... ... middle of paper ... ...only way for blacks in America to get the attention of whites and to finally get enforcement of laws that were in place for a while. Violence, while it might have also done some harm to the movement, for the most part was what got the whites to wake up and see that the blacks were not to be pushed around, and that something had to be done to change the racial system in the United States. Works Cited Kennedy, John F. Civil Rights Address. King, Martin Luther Jr. Letter From Birmingham Jail. Powell, Adam Clayton. Speech On Civil Rights. < http://www.infoplease.com/t/hist/powell-civil- rights/> Tyson, Timothy B. Blood Done Sign My Name. New York: Three Rivers, 2004. X, Malcolm. The Black Revolution.
The book, “My Soul Is Rested” by Howell Raines is a remarkable history of the civil rights movement. It details the story of sacrifice and audacity that led to the changes needed. The book described many immeasurable moments of the leaders that drove the civil rights movement. This book is a wonderful compilation of first-hand accounts of the struggles to desegregate the American South from 1955 through 1968. In the civil rights movement, there are the leaders and followers who became astonishing in the face of chaos and violence. The people who struggled for the movement are as follows: Hosea Williams, Rosa Parks, Ralph Abernathy, and others; both black and white people, who contributed in demonstrations for freedom rides, voter drives, and
The hypocrisy and double standard that allowed whites to bring harm to blacks without fear of any repercussions had existed for years before the murder Tyson wrote about occurred in May of 1970 (Tyson 2004, 1). Lynching of black men was common place in the south as Billie Holiday sang her song “Strange Fruit” and the eyes of justice looked the other way. On the other side of the coin, justice was brought swiftly to those blacks who stepped out of line and brought harm to the white race. Take for instance Nate Turner, the slave who led a rebellion against whites. Even the Teel’s brought their own form of justice to Henry Marrow because he “said something” to one of their white wives (1).
... was also the clearest way of drawing the Federal Government to the support for the civil rights campaign and the large force that black Americans represented. However, I do not believe that this alone achieved racial equality in America. It is easy to overlook the work of organisations such as the SNCC and SCLC. These played a crucial part in helping to invoke protest that developed in the form of widespread civil disobedience campaigns. Moreover the impact of two World Wars acted as a catalyst as they changed the World and America’s position in it. It created a domestic issue for the United States that needed to be dealt with. America as an emerging Superpower could no longer continue like this. However what is clear is that King’s beautifully articulated speech combined with the mass participation in the March created a day that captured the World’s imagination.
... cowardice. For many blacks nonviolence was the only option because violence would have cost them their jobs, their homes, and even their lives. It was a creative way that an African-American could fight for freedom and at the same time avoid genocide, the logical consequence of racism.
The main goal of the Civil Rights Movement was to instate equality under the law. King was a figurehead for the Civil Rights Movement. King’s ability to organize factions into a force that was unaffected by violence greatly contributed to the success of the Civil Rights Movement. In a letter he wrote from a Birmingham jail, King describes the four steps to non-violent protest. The first step is “collection of the facts to determine whether an injustice exists.”i This relates to Thoreau’s critique of an unjust government. Thoreau believed that every machine had friction, yet “when the friction comes to have its machine…let us not have such a machine any longer.”ii In the case of civil rights, the government has the friction of racial inequalities. That friction had several machines which enables whites to prevail over African Americans. King’s second step was negation. Thoreau lived during a time when negotiation was non-existent. He met the government “once a year--no more--in the person of its tax-gatherer; this is the only mode in which a man situated as I am necessarily meets it.”iii In the case of Thoreau and King, their struggle could not be resolved by simple negotiation. The third step, as King calls it, was self purification.
Between 1865 and 1970 leadership; motivating, persuading, encouraging and inspiring the masses to engage with a vision was vital to the progression of the African-American civil rights movement. It is a common notion that individual leaders held dominant roles within the movement and used the power from this to lead the grassroots and make decisions on behalf of organisations. Additionally, it is believed that leaders were the strategists who shaped the methods of the movement; allowing them to win the nation’s allegiance and convince them to make sacrifices for racial justice. However, this traditionalist perspective ignores much of the conditional causes that in fact triggered outstanding leadership accomplishments. More recent historians
...this informative book by Juan Williams and also taking this class that focuses on civil rights has slightly reshaped the way I view the civil rights movement. Growing up in a black community, I have always heard stories and learned things in school about the fight for equal rights and the leaders of the movement. Previous to reading this book and taking this course, I only grasped one thing about the civil rights movement: all of the leaders involved, pastors, journalists, writers, organizers, teachers, lawyers, students, protesters, rioters, etc., had one goal in mind, freedom. Freedom from being unequally treated as a result of their ethnicity. Now that I am older and able to think significantly more critically about issues, I see that although the one goal of the movement was freedom, there were different principles and beliefs about how to achieve that freedom.
In the 1960s, the nation was faced tumultuous times. There was racial tension between the white citizens and black citizens of America. Whites could not understand why the African Americans were so upset; they had their freedom from slavery and job opportunities. However, the African American was dissatisfied with the small crumbs of God given rights that all American citizens were entitled to. Two men propelled to the forefront of the Civil Rights Movement as leaders; Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and Malcolm X. Their agenda was to seek equal rights for all Americans. But both men differ on the approaches needed to reach these goals; one believed using nonviolence was the answer while the other advocated violence Many people argue that the
The use of violence during the Civil Rights Movement proved to be ineffective because it furthered social tensions between Whites and Blacks. The people who generated violence were mainly the Black Panthers advocating Black Power. Black Power called for nationality, unity, self-pride, self-defense and the separation from the White race (Blumberg 9). The idea of separation of the White race competed with integration since Black Power wanted “African Americans to establish their own ...
The legacy of the Civil Rights movement is long and brutal one, with roots that stem back to the boats that brought black slave to the New World. Activists, looking for change, were beaten and murdered on trains and buses, it was unsafe for them to walk the streets or go to church, and schools and homes were bombed and burned to the ground. They filled the jails, and forced to endure acts of violence, intimidation, and harassment (Litwack).
It started off as a plan—a captivating initiative to end segregation; to end discrimination and to cease the hatred. Unsuitable to a period where locals were accustomed to enmity and hostility towards fellow humans. Post era of where our sun-kissed ancestors were imbruted for the sake of America's trade system. Imagine the humiliation inherent with being black. Negro, Nigger, Coon, Jiggaboo were all names you sadly were accustomed to. To be treated as animals and not as the kings and queens the creator destined you to be. The sacrifice of the ebony messiah gone in vain; living in fear of the self-proclaimed superior race. Poverty or brutality: pick your poison. And it was all justifiable by law. The year 1966 forever changed the face of America. A new foundation arose for blacks to place their hope in. It embarked a revolt against the oppressors and its supporters. It was the fervid force that distressed the source. But who held responsibility for this? Who procured the prowess to bring an uprise against an unjust regime?Huey P. Newton—the nonconformist who birthed a mutiny. The man behind the mafia.The founder of The Black Panther Party.
The latter part of the Civil Rights Movement was characterized by action and change as it was no longer centralized in the South or only fought for by black individuals. Rather, northerners were active in achieving black equality and the white community was campaigning for integration. Although many lost their lives in this struggle, their valiancy did not go unrewarded and soon enough African Americans were able to vote, work, study, and simply eat lunch beside white individuals.
The movements discussed in this paper represent the power of what can happen when a nation is united. The Reconstruction Era paved the way for the Civil Rights Movement. If one element of the Reconstruction Era was missing from the history of America the Civil Rights Movement may have not been possible. To evaluate each event on an individual basis, the Reconstruction Era is a representation of a developing country deciding how to move forward with the situations that were present at the time. Reconstruction was necessary in order to save the country and to integrate black Americans into an evolving nation. The Civil Rights Movement on the other hand symbolized a vision that was created during the Reconstruction Era, but was not fulfilled until this point. As a nation that was a trailblazer in the form of democracy, we had failed the black community in equality. The only problem with both of these movements is the fact that they should have not needed to occur in the first place, in a theoretical world were racism does not exist. Along side with how long it took for change to occur in the country are the only real negative representations behind each of these movements. Thousands of black Americans died simply to have the same rights as white Americans. The future of this nation cannot advance without knowing the legacy of each of these
After the death of Malcolm X the movement started to get funky. It seemed as though after the assinaition of Malcom X, the revolution’s focal point began to change. The movement began to head towards a more intense, and nitty gritty level. It seemed as though all the non-violent organizations such as the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, the Congress of Racial Equality, as well as the Christian Leadership Conference had little hold on what was about to happen to the movement. The death of Malcolm X brought a new direction in the movement. In a society of a violent system it was hard for young blacks to take charge in an non-violent organization, it seemed to be a hypocrisy. And the idea of tolerance was wearing thin for the whole generation.
Ultimately, through the Civil Rights movement occurred when it did due a gap between what America was supposed to be and where it actually was. America was forced to finally uphold her ideals. Simply, during the fervor of the Cold War, the United States was not truly living up to her vaunted ideals of liberty and justice for all. The Cold War, while squashing dissidents in the country, also highlighted American hypocrisy. How could the United States claim to be the world’s harbinger of democracy and freedom when millions of its people were still held in bondage by Jim Crow segregation? Capitalist success in the era provoked those who were dissatisfied with the status quo. Americans excluded from the “American Dream” included women, blacks, and homosexuals. Even as the economy soared, they saw few advancements in civil rights. Minorities took to the streets to demand full equality. In the past, similar movements had failed, but now, they succeeded. Why, in a period of such conformity,