HFDYAT The Aims & Methods of Black civil rights activists were radically different, 1917-55 vs. 1955-68?
Intro:
- Define radically different as ‘extremely dissimilar in nature’ – not radically different despite change
- 2 main changes: tackling de jure to tackling de facto, non-violence to violence, (also growth of
separatist movement) natural progression (evolutionary change) and minority
P1: De Jure vs De Facto
- 1917-55 aimed to tackle ‘de jure’:
o NAACP won some cases 1930s & 1940s, every case fought in 1950s
o 1948 Shelley v Kraemer, 1954 Brown v. Board
- 1955-68 focus shifted to tackling ‘de facto’:
o E.g. 1957 Little Rock, Arkansas
o 1961 CORE & SNCC Freedom rides
- However
o Not complete changes, simply shift in emphasis – once laws enforced, next logical step
was to ensure laws worked in practice
o Shift caused by laws not being enforced: e.g. 10 years after Brown v Board only 1/100
black students in South at integrated school
P2 : Non-violence vs. Violence
- 1917-55, focus on legal action & non-violent direct action
o NAACP law cases, MLK defined rules of non-violent protest (influenced by Ghandi)
o Peaceful direct action : 1917 Silent Protest Parade, CORE sit-ins (e.g. Chicago 1942)
- 1955-68, increased violence
o Took non-violence to places violence was likely following Montgomery Bus Boycott 1955
1961 CORE & SNCC Freedom Rides
o Incited violence themselves
1964 3 major riots in cities sparked by police brutality
- However
o Violence = minority, most violence directed at movt not from (e.g. Birmingham 1963)
o Media amplified violence (King accused them of trying to get militant statements)
o Sit-ins & boycotss used in both periods (Greensboro sit-in 1st February 1960)
P3 : Integration vs. Separatism
- 1917-55, collaboration with whites, CORE, MLK
- 1955-68 growth of separatism under Malcolm X (‘some land that we can call our own’)
o Black power encouraged excluding whites (Stokely Carmichael, Black Panthers 1966)
- However
o Unusual for CORE to collaborate with whites, even 1917-55 activists mostly black
o Separatist movements existed in both periods (Marcus Garvey ‘Back to Africa’ movement)
o Only small proportion wanted separation – only at end of period after movt split 1965
Conclusion:
- Not complete changes rather shifts in emphasis, e.g. de jure de facto
- Similarities across both periods (e.g. nonviolent protest)
- Changes weren’t widespread, often only to end of period/minority
Intro:
- Define radically different as ‘extremely dissimilar in nature’ – not radically different despite change
- 2 main changes: tackling de jure to tackling de facto, non-violence to violence, (also growth of
separatist movement) natural progression (evolutionary change) and minority
P1: De Jure vs De Facto
- 1917-55 aimed to tackle ‘de jure’:
o NAACP won some cases 1930s & 1940s, every case fought in 1950s
o 1948 Shelley v Kraemer, 1954 Brown v. Board
- 1955-68 focus shifted to tackling ‘de facto’:
o E.g. 1957 Little Rock, Arkansas
o 1961 CORE & SNCC Freedom rides
- However
o Not complete changes, simply shift in emphasis – once laws enforced, next logical step
was to ensure laws worked in practice
o Shift caused by laws not being enforced: e.g. 10 years after Brown v Board only 1/100
black students in South at integrated school
P2 : Non-violence vs. Violence
- 1917-55, focus on legal action & non-violent direct action
o NAACP law cases, MLK defined rules of non-violent protest (influenced by Ghandi)
o Peaceful direct action : 1917 Silent Protest Parade, CORE sit-ins (e.g. Chicago 1942)
- 1955-68, increased violence
o Took non-violence to places violence was likely following Montgomery Bus Boycott 1955
1961 CORE & SNCC Freedom Rides
o Incited violence themselves
1964 3 major riots in cities sparked by police brutality
- However
o Violence = minority, most violence directed at movt not from (e.g. Birmingham 1963)
o Media amplified violence (King accused them of trying to get militant statements)
o Sit-ins & boycotss used in both periods (Greensboro sit-in 1st February 1960)
P3 : Integration vs. Separatism
- 1917-55, collaboration with whites, CORE, MLK
- 1955-68 growth of separatism under Malcolm X (‘some land that we can call our own’)
o Black power encouraged excluding whites (Stokely Carmichael, Black Panthers 1966)
- However
o Unusual for CORE to collaborate with whites, even 1917-55 activists mostly black
o Separatist movements existed in both periods (Marcus Garvey ‘Back to Africa’ movement)
o Only small proportion wanted separation – only at end of period after movt split 1965
Conclusion:
- Not complete changes rather shifts in emphasis, e.g. de jure de facto
- Similarities across both periods (e.g. nonviolent protest)
- Changes weren’t widespread, often only to end of period/minority
