Category: Civil rights

There have been so many great civil rights leaders in America but the two that have stood out to me were Malcolm X and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Their remarkable amount of effort put forth in the fight for change is really noteworthy. Although both had two different leading styles they both accomplished many milestones and helped to make a change in the U.S. regarding equality in society. The concept that really made the two individuals different in a political standing was that Malcom X was in support of getting change by any means necessary even if it meant violence, and on the contrary Dr. King focused on non-violence movements. In regards to today’s society they really paved the way for a change for the better, however I feel Dr King’s method is still a lot more powerful in regards to really accomplishing the goal of making a difference.

Dr. Martin Luther King was a leader that didn’t allow this turmoil during his time of fighting for change to discourage him from his plans so it is appropriate to say that he was determined. Dr. King faced many adversities that could have caused him to lash out violently but his discipline to make this change through non-violence stayed clear at all times. “Between 1958 and 1967, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was arrested 30 times for demonstrating and participating in non-violent protests against segregation.”[1] This was a very gruesome time period for African Americans in the U.S. because caucasion people were seen as superior and they were against all ideas of equality. During this time as well most of the police forces were dominated by white people so this caused more friction in the society when African Americans expressed their interest for change. Through his determined actions he made a lasting impact on his supporters and provoked the caucasion class society to understand that his people will be heard.

In addition, Martin Luther King Jr. had patience that allowed him to thrive through difficult obstacles. One of his early accomplishments was his “I Have A Dream” speech which brought together over 250,000 supporters where he discussed his passion of being able to see the U.S. united between whites and blacks. Also, Dr. King lead one of the largest marches in history which was the “Selma to Montgomery March.” This took place in Alabama on a 54 mile route straight to the capital and upon his arrival with his 2,000 supporters tailing him he was met by another 50,000 supporters both black and white.[2] Once they arrived Dr. King and many other speakers addressed this large audience and from this speech he helped to get the 15th Amendment passed which was his initial start to change

Although, Martin Luther King Jr. was a passive aggressive leader which caused him to take a more reasonable approach, Malcolm X was still making an impact on his supporters who felt that violence was the only means to make a change. Martin Luther King, who was a pastor incorporated his beliefs in to his teaching. Malcom X, was a member in the Nation of Islam, he also did the same but through his experiences he have faced tribulations which affected his reputation and made him take a more aggressive approach. Therefore, his approach involved rioting against the police at times and trying to prove a point. This was quoted from Malcolm X where he stated, “The people who are involved in a revolution don’t become a part of the system –they destroy the system, they change the system.” From this concept you can clearly understand his thought process and see how it could work. However, this idea was very complicated because it presents an issue with trying to overthrow a whole race. This is what made Martin Luther King’s ideology more supportive of both races and why he was directly able to have an effect on society leading to the 15th Amendment being passed.

In regards to these two civil rights leaders they have both made remarkable impacts on today’s society and we wouldn’t be where we are without both of their efforts. Nonetheless, Dr. Martin Luther King’s ideology of non violence movements really had the greater influence on society. This is clearly shown with the simple fact that with the help of others and of course Dr. King himself they really got the 15th amendment passed. I could relate to this non-violence act in today’s society because we currently are revolved around the media. Therefore, the way that makes most sense would be to build up your support through this platform without having to fight anybody and then taking it to a political standpoint. Through this process we are most powerful at this point because trying to revolt through violence is just not the answer.

“I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.” By Martin Luther King JR, 1963

These famous words were uttered to hundreds of thousands of people at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington DC by Martin Luther King Jr, a social activist who became the face of the American Civil Rights movement. For centuries upon centuries, groups of people have used their power within a society to oppress and act in an inhumane manner towards another group of people. Martin Luther King Jr became a prominent political leader of the civil rights movement during the 1960’s after he gave his iconic and revolutionary speech in Washington DC in which he called for civil and economic rights and an end to racism. In the 20th century alone, the abuse of power within different societies has been responsible for over 200 million deaths through war and oppression. However, when power is given to the right person, it can ultimately be used for the greater good. King used the idea of power to successfully manipulate the audience into feeling compassion for African Americans and their centuries of injustice and oppression.

It was Kings’ use of his own power during the civil rights movement as a political leader that helped African Americans’ and other oppressed minorities to fight against injustice and give rights to all in society. The definition of power, commonly used by political scientists, is that power has the capacity to get others to do or stop doing something now, or in the future. Comparatively, oppression is the systemic and institutional abuse of power by one group at the expense of others and the use of force to maintain this dynamic. While power has historically been used and abused by many political leaders, such as Adolf Hitler during World War Two and Joseph Stalin during the Soviet Union, that has not always been the case. Although, historically, a certain person or people in society that have held power have abused it, or used it in a negative and inhumane way, power can also be used for the greater good, such as King used his own political power and influence during the civil rights movement to fight oppression and bring rights for all people within society.

Throughout the speech, King relies heavily on repetition to impact the audience and broaden their minds to the cruel injustice and oppression that African Americans’ have faced for years under the white man’s power, and the changes that he would like to see within their racist society. As his speech carries on, he talks about how it is time for society to recognise and change the injustice and cruelty towards African Americans and to unity as “all of Gods children”. The idea of unity and standing together against injustice makes any audience feel strong and empowered, so to hear an influential and educated African American man preach unity and equality had a strong emotional impact on everyone who has heard his famous words.

The most memorable part of Kings speech is where he describes his dream of a nation where all people would have equal rights and freedom. Although it was not originally a part of his speech, King improvised and announced his deepest desires for what he wants his country to become and mentions his own children within the speech. This caused the audience to feel compassion for African Americans and the centuries of injustice and oppression that they have unfairly faced at the hands of the white man’s power.

This speech does not just impact and have an impression on African Americans’ and oppressed minorities. Many privileged and educated people, from races and religions that have not ever been oppressed, were and still are deeply moved by King’s speech. Moreover, this speech can resonate with everyone. While this speech is about oppression and inequality, his speech is also about unity and how, despite peoples race, religion, and ethnic background, we are all people. This speech can resonate with everyone, regardless of their background or race, because King created this speech to unite and bring everyone together.

Despite what Martin Luther King has achieved with his speech and the ever-lasting impression that it has had on society, African Americans still face discrimination in the modern world. An example of this is the controversial yet unjust police brutality against African Americans. According to recent available FBI data, US police kill black people at disproportionate rates. Racial minorities made up about 37% of the general population in the US, but they made up 63% of unarmed people killed by police in American. Due to this along with many other contributing factors, the Black Lives Matter movement began to organise. This movement formed as a call to action in response to state-sanctioned violence and anti-Black racism. This movement has many similar beliefs and fundamental values to the Black Panther movement during the Civil Rights movement, as it was there original purpose to patrol African American neighbourhoods and protect residents from police brutality.

However, in 2008, Barack Obama was elected as the first ever African American of the United States of America. This alone shows how much of an impact Kings word had on the world decades later, especially towards African Americans. An African American man becoming the president of the US is something that Martin Luther King Jr could only dream of. So when Obama was elected in 2008, and then re-elected in 2012, it truly showed how far American society has come since Martin Luther King Jr gave his influential and inspiring speech during the 1960s.

This speech has gone down in history as the most iconic part of this progressive era, and for good reason. It was completely necessary for this time period and place, and without it, African Americans’ may still be deeply oppressed and segregated within society. This speech was important in several ways; It brought even greater attention to the Civil Rights Movement, which had been going on for many years. It also gave white people an insight into how African Americans felt about their nation and what they wished for their country to become. His nonviolent tone and approach to the oppression that African American’s have endured under the white man’s power was precisely what was needed for the United States government to act.

Kings speech was revolutionary, and his peaceful political power played a major role in fighting against years of injustice and oppression and caused the white man to feel compassion for African American’s. It is truly an eye-opener to see how much King’s words resonate within the realms of today’s society, with the newly-developed movements to continue to fight discrimination in society, and the historical impact that his word has had on society decades later. This speech has and will continue to have an inspiring message within it and will continue to impact people for decades to come. We realise that his words have greatly helped change our modern society and circumstances, and although we have progressed a great deal in more than 50 years, we can still progress so much further together as a nation and as a society.

Global law, which really has begun creating with the main states, has been a subject of critical changes, particularly amid the period between the Westphalian harmony arrangement (1648) and World War I. Conventional global law is a law of intensity, that is war is viewed as an imperative trait of state sway. One of the basic subjective contrasts between customary universal law and contemporary worldwide law is the preclusion of forceful wars and the possibility of global assurance of human rights. As it were, contemporary worldwide law takes the privileges of man under its support. The universal security of human rights is a progressive thought and conventional controls of worldwide law have nothing to do with it by any stretch of the imagination. It has been an acknowledged tenet that worldwide law is to control the relations between country states, yet not people. In this manner, Oppenheim, the main specialist on global law in the United Kingdom composed, that ‘the purported privileges of man not exclusively don’t, however, can’t appreciate any security under universal law, since that law is concerned exclusively with the relations among states and can’t give rights on people.’ [1]

Soon after the barbarities of World War II, the initial step was taken to set up and perceive the all-inclusiveness of human rights in worldwide law. It was broadcasted in the Purposes of UN Charter that human rights and crucial opportunities are ‘for all without refinement as to race, sex, dialect, or religion.’ [2] The selection and announcement of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was another real advancement in the method of universalizing human rights. The UDHR Preamble was unmistakably characterizing that ‘The General Assembly announces This Universal Declaration Of Human Rights as a typical standard of accomplishment for all people groups and all countries… ‘ [3] Later the standards of UN Charter and UDHR were created and certified in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights both received by General Assembly goals 2200 (XXI) of 16 December 1966, and in the number of other worldwide arrangements and assertions. Subsequently, an all-inclusive arrangement of guidelines was built up for the assurance of human rights.

The problem of worldwide insurance of human rights is the ideological clash of Universalism and Cultural Relativism. Basically, the idea of Universalism holds that every person has certain unavoidable rights just in light of the fact that the individual is a human, in any case the national foundation, religious or political perspectives, gander or age. The advocates of this idea guarantee that ‘the global human rights like rights to measure up to insurance, physical security, free discourse, the opportunity of religion and free affiliation are and should be the equivalent all over.’ [4] The idea of Universalism bases on three key jurisprudential hypotheses the characteristic law hypothesis, the hypothesis of realism, and the hypothesis of positivism. The underlying foundations of regular law hypothesis return to antiquated occasions. The primary concern of this hypothesis is that common law is remaining above synthetic positive law and characterizes the eliminable human rights, which are important for all the country states. Realism, a firmly related idea, ‘is a hypothesis of widespread laws dependent on a confidence in the general human ability to reason and think judiciously.’ [5] Rationalism overrides divine inception of common law with the hypothesis that every individual is invested with specific rights because of the all-inclusive limit of all people to think sanely. Both the common law hypothesis and hypothesis of logic consider general human rights not to rely upon cultural assorted varieties and strengths. The hypothesis of positivism exhibits the presence of general human rights noticing the acknowledgment and approval of human rights instruments by lion’s share of states in any case their cultural foundation. It gives the idea that the idea of Universalism with its supporting speculations of characteristic law, logic and positivism finds the wellspring of human rights in global law, as opposed to in individual societies. Human Rights are extra cultural.

Cultural relativism is the declaration that human qualities, a long way from being all-inclusive, fluctuate a lot as indicated by various cultural points of view. [6] From my perspective, one of the real downsides of the hypothesis of Cultural relativism is the view of ‘culture’ as something constant and stable. Truth be told, a wide range of Cultural relativism, be it Strong or Weak [7] Cultural relativism, depends on the stable origination of culture, which neglects to perceive the adaptability of culture for social changes and ideological developments. Though, I emphatically bolster the possibility that culture is a progressing procedure of authentic improvement, adjustment and development. Adversaries of this hypothesis contend that Cultural relativism can be perilous for the adequacy of universal insurance of human rights since the idea of the hypothesis in a general sense legitimizes human rights manhandles connecting to the traditions and conventions of the general public. Indian custom of sati [8] is a brilliant case of human rights infringement with cultural bases. An eighteen-year-old Rajput young lady submitted sati in 1987 amid her significant other’s burial service fire. She was a college understudy and her marriage was demanded by her folks. There is no proof whether she submitted sati deliberately or under strain, anyway this case found a vast reaction among Rajput society. As an indication of the challenge numerous human rights activists, the two people, sorted out walks against the convention of sati, in the interim numerous others turned out for the custom, asserting that sati is a noteworthy piece of their ethnic culture. They are not just made the young lady as an image of the committed spouse, yet additionally raised a holy place to pay tribute to her. The human rights protectors and activists were marked as Western settlers who were overriding old Indian conventions with Western ones. Clearly, the hypothesis of Cultural relativism prompts the thought, that the principle social unit is a network, not a person. An inquiry rises, does the network have rights to force its will on an individual, or does it have rights to restrict any eliminable right of a person?

As one of the antiquated countries, Armenians have their own one-of-a-kind cultural customs and extent of morals, however, our conventions are increasingly adaptable to address the difficulties of the time. I don’t delay to underline that Armenian conventions are very humanistic since they are to a great extent enlivened with the belief system of the Armenian Apostolic Church. One of the best supernatural occurrences of the Armenian Apostolic Church is that there isn’t separate church and separate individuals, our congregation and individuals together is one entire solidarity, similar to a tremendous ‘basilica’. Furthermore, this ‘house of prayer carries inside it all the human qualities, similar to heart, graciousness, and so forth.

Examining the ideas of Universalism and Cultural Relativism, I reached the resolution that in numerous social orders or it is smarter to state in numerous networks social relations are controlled through local conventional standards. Without a doubt, the dismissal of global human rights may prompt orderly maltreatment of human rights inside the social orders or networks, still, in some cases, worldwide insurance of human rights can be utilized for political purposes. Human rights infringement now and again are the purpose behind the mediation of one nation’s military into another nation’s domain. Starting here, cultural relativism isn’t supported. I legitimize the presence of Cultural Relativism. As I would like to think Cultural Relativism is an aftereffect of normal chronicled improvement, it is an issue that couldn’t be evaded.

Bibliography

1. BBC News, War on terror ‘curbing human rights’, 22nd March 2010, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1763641.stm
2. Brown, Chris, (1999), “Universal Human Rights: A Critique”, in Dunne, Tim and J. Wheeler, Nicholas, Human Rights in Global Politics, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge
3. Huntington, Samuel P. (1996) The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. New York: Simon and Schuster International Crises Group, The ICC Indictment of Bashir: A turning point for Sudan?, 22nd March 2010, http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=5959&l=1
4. Mutua, Makau (2002), Human Rights, A Political & Cultural Critique, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press Reuters, U.S. “war on terror” eroded rights worldwide: experts, 22nd March 2010, http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE51F36120090216
5. Risse-Kappen, Thomas, (2002), The power of human rights: International Norms and Domestic Change, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Introduction:

To a great extent, Malcolm X had an effect on the African American Civil Rights Movement from 1925, up until he was assassinated in 1965. He gave a voice to people of all different demographics, religions, and classes, and this perhaps led to what would later be his enormous body of followers, which continued to believe in him even after he died. Coming from an extremely poor family, Malcolm was the son of a Baptist preacher, who received constant criticism and resentment from the white community due to his passion for equality. This is what later lead to the assassination of his father in 1931, by the KKK, one of many white supremacist organisations whose primary target was African Americans. This occurred during the ‘Segregation Era,’ an era that lasted between 1900 and 1939, when black people had virtually no rights. They were seen by white Americans as ‘subhuman’. That was, until 1954, when black Americans such as Malcolm X decided to take a stand against this injustice, and abolish the ignorance surrounding differences in race, especially in the United States.

Body 1:

A large audience that Malcolm X was able to reach was the poor of America, as he himself came from a very down-and-out family. Born in Omaha Nebraska, his father was murdered by the Ku Klux Klan, followed by the institutionalisation of his mother. Prior to this, at age 9 Malcolm began robbing grocery stores in an attempt to provide for his suffering family. Malcolm’s mother suffered a nervous breakdown a few years after this, and was shipped off to a mental institution interstate, prompting social workers to split Malcolm and his nine now-parentless siblings apart. For the first few months, Malcolm stayed with neighbours, but he was soon sent to juvenile detention in Mason, Michigan, where he attended an all-white junior high school. Although he was extremely academically successful and aimed for study law at university as he got older, a white English teacher informed him that being a lawyer was, “no realistic goal for a nigga.” Constantly frustrated with the negative attitude of this small town, he moved in with his half-sister when he was 15 years old, no longer attending high school. He attained a rail-road job, and by the time he turned 17 he was a permanent resident of Harlem, in New York City. Then, at 19 years old, he was finally arrested for the first time for his involvement in the theft of his half-sister’s fur coat. Not long after this, he was arrested a second time for an armed robbery, and then a third time for robbing a number of homes. Sentenced to prison at age 21, his cellmates, “called him Satan for his habit of pacing around and muttering curses at God and the Bible.” However, the time in prison proved positive for Malcolm. “In every free moment I had, if I was not reading in the library, I was reading on my bunk,” Malcolm wrote in his autobiography, “You couldn’t have gotten me out of the books with a wedge.” Therefore, although Malcolm X was often associated with crime in the media, he was an inspiration to many due to his low socio-economic background. He was, essentially, a voice for the poor.

Body 2:

It can be said that Malcolm X was able to reach such a wide audience because he not only inspired his African American followers, but his Islam followers also. Although being born to a Baptist family, Malcolm always felt like the Christian religion was forced on him, as it was forced on his ancestors during the slave era (1776 – 1865). He even went as far as the call Christianity the ‘white man’s religion.’ Furthermore, following the death of his father and the institutionalisation of his mother, Malcolm and his siblings were put into foster care interstate. Malcolm was sent to Harlem, where his life took a steep decline. Once he turned 18 and was no longer in the care of his foster parents, he turned to crime, being involved in a multitude of armed robberies. Because of this, he went to prison, where he discovered Islam. Malcolm X’s fellow inmates has converted to Islam, and this inspired him. They told him about its roots to African American culture and identity, and its correlations with black pride and black nationalism. After further research into the difference in Islam and Christianity he perceived how, “the collective white man had been actually nothing but a piratical opportunist who used Faustian machinations to make his own Christianity his initial wedge in criminal conquests. First, always ‘religiously,’ he branded ‘heathen’ and ‘pagan’ labels upon ancient non-white cultures and civilizations. The stage thus set, he then turned upon his non- white victims his weapons of war,” (Malcolm X Autobiography, 1965). Malcolm believed that Christianity as a whole was, “designed against the black man,” (Malcolm X autobiography, 1965).

Body 3:

The assassination of Malcolm X followed a long and difficult power struggle with the leader of The Nation of Islam, Elijah Muhammad. Although Malcolm had once had a strong respect for Elijah, his opinion of him changed when he found out that Elijah Muhammad had impregnated and fathered a number of illegitimate children, an action that was in direct violation of the guidelines of the Nation of Islam. Following this disagreement, Malcolm was suspended from the organisation in 1963, which led to his decision to leave in 1964, converting to traditional Sunni Islam, and changing his name to El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz. He followed this by publicly criticising Elijah Muhammad, accusing him of “religious fakery,” which provoked members of the Nation of Islam to take action against him. They threw bricks and drinks at his home, which forced him and his family to sleep in a tent in their backyard. On February 21, 1965, members of the organisation shot Malcolm dead at a theatre. Members of the public were devasted, with this event causing everyone to question the true motives and intentions, and even authenticity, of the Nation of Islam. People no longer believed that the organisation had good intentions.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, Malcolm X had an effect on the African American Civil Rights Movement from 1925, up until he was assassinated in 1965. Such a great number of people supported him due to his strong association with religious independence, as well as his low socio-economic background. His death can be seen as a catalyst for the disintegration of the Nation of Islam many years later. Malcolm was an inspiration to a wide variety of African American groups, which is something that set his apart from other influential black people at the time. Overall, Malcolm X’s part in the African American civil rights movement was crucial in the obliteration of the unjust treatment of African Americans in the United States.

Today I will be talking about a poem about civil rights. The poem’s name is the caged bird and the author is Maya Angelou. She was in the civil rights time and she was famous for making a poem it talks about her life in the civil rights. She also made poems to educate people to not be racist so that in the future people can live happily without civil rights. I will be talking about this poem and how it is structured so people always want to read it.

The poem’s message is to educate the people not to discriminate against people for their racism in this case it is the African American people. The caged bird is the African American they get abused and have to obey the civil rights rule and the free bird is the people that is being racist to the African American people. This means that African American people were in pain during the civil rights and Maya Angelou was making poems to feel better and telling her life stories in the poem so that one-day people can get educated not to discriminate against other people because of their race.

The reason why this poem was so popular was because she used lots of poetic devices. She used consonance metaphor repetition and personification. These poetic devices are important in a poem because these poetic devices make the poem interesting and people would want to read it. For example, in stanza 4 she used personification sighting tree which reflects the bird’s content. Another example is stanza 1 which she used consonance bird back wind dips wing dares. She was a professional at doing these poetic devices which is why her poem was so famous.

The civil rights time was very racist to people but now people have improved and evolved so nowadays people are not so racist anymore. But there are people that are still racist. The reason may be that they just dislike their kind or they have not been educated. That is right Maya Angelou wrote this poem to educate people so in the future people are not racist to other kinds. One day I think that Maya Angelou’s poem will stop people from being racist.

Overall Maya Angelou wrote this poem when other people were being racist to her so she wrote these poems to educate people in the future not to be racist and treat everyone fair so everyone is not left out.

Remember that time in history when blacks and whites were not equal, segregated, and where inequality was the norm during this time period. Well, that was known as the Civil Rights Movement. The Civil Rights Movement was a time period between 1956 and 1965 that involved many major and historical events. Through 1956 and 1965 Little Rock Nine, Bloody Sunday, World War 2 and Civil Rights, Rosa Parks, Civil Rights Act of 1957, Woolworth Lunch Counter, Freedom Writers, March On Washington, Civil Rights Act of 1964, and Voting Rights Act of 1965 happened throughout this time frame

Many of these events were blacks uniting together and fighting for what is right. In 1957 Little Rock Nine was one of the main and big events that occurred in Arkansas. This was where nine african american high school students that were starting their first day of school at an all-white school. The government had appointed some troops to restrain any sort of integration to be allowed at the high school. As usual, this clashed and did not sit well with the whites. Many whites went to central high school and began to verbally abuse those nine students for attempting to get an education and make something of themselves. The only thing was that the students were allowed to be there by the president. The supreme court granted the ability for African Americans to go to school with whites according to Brown vs Board of Education. In this case, they reached a verdict which was schools were no longer able to be segregated. A few years later blacks continued to fight for equality. In February of 1960, Woolworth’s lunch counter happened. A group of college kids came in wanting to be attended and the workers refused to give their service. Police had to take action because there was still inequality happening during this time frame. The students denied leaving until it was closing time. The day after they arrived back but this time with various students to protest. Then again on March 7 of 1965 there was 600 people that came together and protested in Alabama. These people were enticed by john lewis who was a civil american leader. They had reached a little bridge when all of a sudden their protest go put to an end by the Alabama officers. The people were not going to stop fighting for something they strongly believed in so they kept going. This led to many lives being injured and placed in the hospital. Martin Luther King tried to recreate this protest on March 9 of the same year but sadly did not get any further than Lewis did he was stopped at the same bridge. He did in fact successfully recreate it on March 20 and was safe with the feds continuously watching them. So he did end up pulling it off and sticking with his thoughts that were right.

In addition, there were various powerful speakers and leaders that made big changes that lasted a lifetime. One civil rights leader that is very well known and very powerful was Dr.Martin Luther King Jr. He lead many historical events and stood up for what he believed in and did not back down whatsoever. In 1955 Rosa Parks stood her ground and did not give her seat up for white people. Police officers took action due to the laws that were created back in that time frame. This inspired Martin Luther King to lead and put together the Montgomery Bus Boycott. This lasted for 15 entire days from December 5 of 1955 through December 20 of 1955. This was a small time frame where blacks chose not to ride any of the buses in Montgomery, Alabama. This was their way of protesting with no type of violence happening and no being injured. Another big event he took a leadership role was the March on Washington. This was the largest rally ever held in history. This march took place on August 28 of 1963 in the national mall of Washington. He and other civil rights leaders managed to gather a total of 250,000 people which covered most of the land. This was expected to switch into a violent act of protest, but it was actually the calmest form of protest. This was the place and protest where Dr.Martin Luther King Jr. delivered him “I Have a Dream Speech”. By giving this speech he embraced his thoughts to everyone and how he thought things should be done about the struggles that African Americans were going through. Malcolm X was another leader that stood by him and had similar beliefs and thought processes as him. He made

Santoro’s unique method of measuring the extent of success of the Civil Rights Movement is refreshing, yet in some ways, limiting. For example, the nature of the survey questions posed was dichotomous, breaking the immensely complex question into two categories: success or failure. Although Santoro claims that the question forced the participants to come to an instinctive, uncomplicated conclusion, however the lack of consideration of the multiple factors that construe the arguments of the historians discussed thus far is seriously alarming. The identity of the participants also comes under scrutiny. Although the opinions of ordinary African Americans symbolically appear to be the best, and perhaps only, reliable tool to assess the success of the Civil Rights Movement, it is impossible to ignore the fact that these participants may have differing opinions on the ambiguously defined aims of the civil rights movement, which might affect the consistency of their collective opinion. It also raises the question of whether some participants’ opinions are worth more than others, and if so, provides another limitation. This argument bases its evidence on the opinions of the Black constituent, and the reliability of the source could be negatively affected by the multiple factors that influenced their opinions during this time. For example, during the 1980s when the racially hostile, ultra-conservative Reagan administration dominated the White House, data showed that there was a direct relationship between African American support of Reagan and the belief that the Civil Rights Movement was successful.[24] This could potentially contaminate the research and discredit Santoro’s argument. On the other hand, Santoro breaks down each category of the participant to better understand their motivations at the time of the survey, which prevents the group from being unjustly homogenized.

As a scholar, a considerable portion of Santoro’s work focuses on Black people and the Civil Rights Movement, although he does not seem to have gained a significant reputation in this field. One could say that there is a certain bias towards a more negative approach to the Civil Rights movement since much of his work in this area is not about the legal successes of the movement, but about the struggle for fair employment[25], the rise of violent protest[26] and black dominated neighborhoods [27]. Overall, Santoro is not completely convincing. Although his unorthodox approach is admirable and his focus on the de facto side of segregation, his lack of concentration on other factors that can be used to measure the success of the Civil Rights movement, such as the efficacy of Civil Rights laws, is worrying.

The period of 1955-68 marked the beginning of a much longer struggle, abruptly severed by the assassination of its figurehead, which was the point from which the aims of many different activists began to diverge and evolve as the movement splintered, making it difficult to assess the success of the movement. As Santoro points out “all measures of success rely on subjective judgments”[28]. It is therefore unjust to judge the Civil Rights Movement against the harsh dichotomy of failure and success or to grow frustrated with the lack of immediate revolutionary change in America.

It is more prudent to, like Minchin, acknowledge that this period of the Civil Rights movement, through its pursuit of de jure desegregation, contributed to the security of Black opportunity in the mainstream world, whilst the second phase of what Black Power Historian Peniel E. Joseph termed a wider “Black freedom struggle” is tasked with finishing the pursuit of equality of Black result, or the desired outcome. In general, the period of 1955-1968 saw the ambitious attempt of many African Americans to uproot centuries of white supremacy, and their struggle should not be seen as entirely fruitless. As Vincent Harding once declared at a gathering of the Student Non-violent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) in 1978, ‘if anyone present doubted what the movement had accomplished he or she ‘had forgotten what life was like in a Jim Crow America where lynchings went unpunished and terror was everywhere”’.

The civil rights movement was a movement that did more than just accomplish equal rights for African Americans, but also improved economic growth in American society. This went on to foster inspiration for the 2020 Black Lives Matter movement. The people who played the most predominant parts during the civil rights movement are names that are known worldwide. They are known globally due to the many methods they used to protest and demand their own civil rights. The ideas these people had and the movements they started are still in use today helping their names stay relevant and taught from generation to generation. Many recognize the names of Martin Luther King Jr., Malcolm X, Rosa Parks, John Lewis, Bayard Rustin, James Farmer, Hosea Williams, Whitney Young Jr., and Roy Wilkins. These are the names of the nine activists who led the civil rights movement. Their names are known, but not many fully understand their impact on American society.

The civil rights movement was started by African Americans, as an effort to bring racial discrimination and segregation to an end, by campaigning for equal rights. One of the biggest events that furthered the civil rights movement was when Rosa Parks refused to get off her seat on the bus. On December 1, 1955, Parks was asked to get up from her seat in front of the bus in favor of a white person since the “white section” of the bus was full. Against the then-law, Parks would not relocate her seat to the back of the bus. At the time, buses, like most other places, were heavily segregated. In opposing segregation publicly, Parks commenced the Montgomery Bus Boycott.

The civil rights movement started in the late 1940s and ended in the early 1960s. However, it is arguable that the civil rights movement is still in motion today. The murder of Breonna Taylor was a huge part of the spike of the Black Lives Matter movement. Taylor was shot by police officers in her home for alleged drug dealings, though her apartment was never searched (Lovan). Breonna Taylor’s tragic and avoidable death is a potent reminder to many of a similarly needless murder, that of Emmet Till in 1955, who was murdered for simply being black in the South. Physician Kimberly D. Manning from the Department of Medicine at Emory University said it best: “Like the bloated, disfigured face of lynched teenager Emmett Till lying lifeless in an open casket for the entire world to see in 1955,6 footage of these recent deaths typify a level of inhumanity that makes it too hard to turn away or carry on in indifference.” (566) This is one of the many connections people have made between the Black Lives Matter movement and the civil rights movement.

The Civil rights movement was a struggle for social justice that took place during the 1950s and 1960s for black Americans. They wanted to have equal rights as the blacks did. During Reconstruction, black people took on leadership roles like never before. Many white Americans, especially those in the South were not happy that people they’d once enslaved are now equal to them. Down in the south, it was a huge movement. Martin Luther King jr was an amazing part of the movement. He faults civil rights and political rights to get rid of segregation in the United States. When Dr. King died; it did not stop the process of the civil rights mission. Actually, his death had a big impact on the civil rights movement. It gave people the confidence to do what needed to be done for them to be equal with everyone else. After his death, multiple people started to stand up for themselves and lead groups to protest and fight for their rights. There was also a letter sent by Martin Luther King jr called the “Letter from Birmingham Jail”. King’s letter would expose them for not acting on the atrocities quickly enough. The point was to get everyone together and make them believe in equality. The speech “I Have a Dream” made people get together and remind them that everyone in the world is created the same.

On August 24, 1955, Emmit Louis a fourteen-year-old black male from Chicago visiting relatives in Leflore County Mississippi when entered the meat market in the town of Money. When he left he supposedly whistled at the owner which back then in that area was not an ok thing to do. The owner told her husband and at least one other person went to the boy’s house. They found him tied to a cotton gin around his neck with barbed wire. All of that was because he supposedly whistled at the owner. it’s just wrong to do that to anyone when there is no reason why he did it. One of the biggest legal assaults on the Jim Crow laws came on May 17, 1954, when the supreme court announced its decision regarding the Brown v. Board of Education case. Which was a combination of a few cases that involved students being denied access to all-white schools.

Civil rights can be explained by the different actions that the government takes to put a stop to bias but also to generate or supply equivalent conditions to its people. This is mainly related to and is about unequal treatment based on minority groups and features and qualities traits such as race, male or female status, disability, and much more. The white citizens council was formed and led opposition to school desegregation all over the South. The citizen’s council called for economic coercion of blacks who favored interrogated schools. the students attempting to integrate the school dramatized the seriousness of the school desegregation issue to many Americans. Although not all school desegregation was as dramatic as in Little Rock, the desegregation process did proceed gradually. To overcome this problem some school districts in the 1970s tried busing students to schools outside of their neighborhoods. Imagine walking into a Woolworth’s store on a sunny afternoon only to be greeted by twenty pairs of white people’s eyes all directed towards the door. Imagine sitting down with two other blacks and demanding service. Blacks are becoming the subjects of violence, their self-esteem is lowered, making them feel inferior and most importantly they are denied their freedom of choice.

First, one part of the problem is that blacks are becoming the subjects of violence. More specifically physical violence, which is when someone uses physical force to harm another person. Some ways harm is inflicted on its victims are by beatings, many times in public, people being burned to death as a result of their house being set on fire, and lynching, in which a person is hung. If they don’t get treated badly there, invisible to everyone, no one will pay them any attention. All they want is to be treated the same as everyone else. They have been mistreated for decades now and they are tired of it. They are going to make a change no matter what it takes. It’s not only african americans it’s everyone that doesn’t get treated the same because of their color. The black were getting sick and tired of the discrimination so it was time for them to do something. So they got laws passed that ended segregation and let everyone have legal rights.

Work Cited

1. https:www.history.comtopicsblack-history civil-rights-movement
2. https:www.history.comtopicscivil-rights-movement
3. https:www.britannica.comeventAmerican-civil-rights-movement

When baseball was desegregated in 1945, after Rickey Branch reached out to Jackie Robinson, many things changed and the Civil Rights movement gained momentum. Jackie Robinson was the first African American to step onto a major league baseball field. This monumental event not only furthered the Civil Rights Movement but provided other African Americans with the opportunity to play not only baseball but fight for rights in other aspects of their lives. His inspiring ordeal gave awareness of the importance of the Civil Rights Movement to a demographic of people that otherwise would not have had any reason to concern themselves with it. The Civil Rights movement was launched by his career, and without Jackie Robinson, may not have been as successful and meaningful as it was. Jackie Robinson was born on January 31, 1919, in Georgia. He was the youngest of five children. His family was sharecroppers living in Cairo Georgia, however, after his father left them they moved to Pasadena California. It was there that his love for sports began. His brother was a track star, going to Berlin in the 1936 Olympics and winning a silver medal. This prompted him to start his career in sports. He first started running track and playing basketball, baseball, and football. He continued his love for sports at Pasadena Junior College, however soon after he transferred to UCLA in 1939. It was there that he met his later wife, Rachel Isum. He did not graduate from UCLA however, and instead spent his next two years playing football in Hawaii and California. In the spring of 1942, he was drafted into the United States Army. Although he never saw combat, he was an officer in charge of his own unit. (History, 1)The United States was fighting for the treatment of other people in the war, ironic since the treatment of people back home was still shameful. The Civil Rights Movement had been underway for many years, however, it had yet to pick up speed. Nevertheless, this would all change only a few years after Jackie Robinson desegregated baseball in 1947 with the Brooklyn Dodgers.

Baseball was then and still is today, America’s Sport. All throughout history Baseball has been a relief for Americans. After World War II Americans enjoyed watching baseball as a way to distract themselves from reality. This is what made baseball such an essential part of the Civil Rights Movement. Baseball reached people from all across the country, this is why Branch Rickey was looking to desegregate baseball. He was looking for someone who was a good ball player but could also hold himself with composure and grace even while he was being taunted or yelled at. For this reason, Jackie Robinson caught his eye. He signed with the Brooklyn Dodgers in 1944 and was met with the most press out of any other baseball player.