April 30, 2006
Civil Rights South
It is a point of continual astonishment to me that, after over two centuries of prejudice, racial tension, and unequal treatment of blacks in one of the most consistently conservative and stubborn societies in modern history, after a few years the civil rights movement essentially succeeded in turning the South around 180 degrees. Even reading the details in the readings from this week, I find it difficult to believe that the event actually happened. The response was so violent, so vehement, so deeply entrenched in the very identity of the South, that it hardly seems possible that it should have transpired.
Our readings for the week were exceptionally short, drawn from three sources: “The Preconditions for Racial Change” by Harvard Sitkoff, “The Struggle for Civil Rights” by Doug McAdam, and the chapter on Martin Luther King, Jr. from Liberalism and Its Challengers by Alonzo L. Hamby.
Sitkoff’s essay discusses some of the factors that made it possible: economically, African Americans were far better off after World War II, making them far more difficult to marginalize. In addition, the advent of mass communication, particularly the television, piped the racial struggle directly into the living rooms of black people, and they reacted en masse. Additionally, now that the United States was one of two bona fide world powers, a stricter national adherence to the principles of equality inherent in a democracy became absolutely crucial in allowing the US to maintain credibility. In short, it was an issue of national security. A number of other new factors leapt into the mix after World War II, as well. Many people suddenly became very anxious to avoid comparisons with the horrific example of the Nazis. And many scientific theories about differences between the races, which had previously been used to justify segregation, simply lost their credibility.
The McAdam’s piece chronicles the pro-civil rights trials and efforts of members of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee during the summer of 1964, “Freedom Summer.” Hundreds of volunteers, made up largely of Northern college students, ventured to Mississippi to conduct a voter registration drive. The students taught classes, stayed with black families, and frequently confronted the local whites. Their eyewitness accounts of what they saw and experienced during their time there is riveting.
They encountered squalid conditions beyond imagining, and a great deal of opposition and hardship. A few of them lost their lives, and (of course) many more were gravely threatened, even harassed and falsely imprisoned by police. While the last piece showed how many factors contributed to the positive change which took place, this piece shows how difficult it still was to effect change. The will shown by the students involved in Freedom Summer is inspiring, and well worth revisiting. However, it also shows (in case the previous article seemed to show otherwise) that this was perhaps one of the most difficult changes that the region ever faced, and it still has not, in many ways, been achieved.
The final selection, regarding Martin Luther King, Jr., was interesting for one reason in particular. I have encountered a number of historical figures that conservatives don’t seem to be able to deal with, but I’ve never really considered one that liberals don’t quite know how to handle. This particular author seemed to have great difficulty reconciling King’s political activity with his deep faith. In particular, he almost deals with it as a psychosis induced by a troubled upbringing (troubled because of religion). He stresses over and over again a supposed guilt complex which he perceives in King’s life, as well as what he sees as a messiah complex. From everything I have read by and about the man, Hamby completely misses the point. It’s sad that things so often went precisely the other way in the South, but it is entirely appropriate that a Christian did, in fact, lead the charge for civil rights.
People looking in from the outside simply don’t get that, and I can’t imagine how . . . unless it’s from watching the example provided by Christians themselves. This, I firmly believe, is precisely what it is. It’s rather a disturbing thought, actually, but perhaps my own surprise at the ability of the South to actually allow a successful civil rights movement to transpire is similar to Hamby’s apparent surprise that a Christian was one of its leaders. It’s always a shock when certain types of people who ought to know better but generally don’t actually begin to behave out of character.
Posted by Jared at April 30, 2006 09:30 AM | TrackBack