Why, if at all, was the Civil Rights Movement so successful?

 [This blog post is an edited essay of mine from my final year at University of Birmingham©]

The ‘Civil Rights Movement’ was a revolutionary political and social reform of the way America treated its black citizens. It is rightly considered one of the biggest leftist accomplishments in American political history. I will argue that the Movement was overall extremely successful, especially for its time, in that it gained so much support that it aided African-Americans in their aims to end discrimination, segregation and to achieve voting and civil rights. Power in numbers as well as strong leadership carried out by influential strategists and organized groups were just some of the methods that made the Movement revolutionary. However, to argue that it did not have its downfalls and that Blacks and Whites are fully equal today in America would be a fallacy. As with any historical oppression, remnants of these social divisions and discrimination still survive today but in different forms.

The first action that was highly influential in aiding the Movement was the legal action taken to establish rights for Blacks through the judicial system. The ‘National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People’ (NAACP) argued that The Jim Crow laws, embodied by the ‘Plessy vs. Ferguson’ case, was unconstitutional because of its contradictory ruling that Blacks were ‘separate but equal’ within education. This long-standing segregation was challenged in ‘Brown vs. Board of Education’ in 1954. This was the first important and successful legislation for the Civil Rights Movement gaining and amassing support for their cause and significantly legitimised their political activism. It sparked a new wave of rights-based legalism and signified the first legal victory for black civil rights. “This change from a ‘substantive due process’ vision of the Fourteenth Amendment to an individual rights-based model generated a formidable body of jurisprudential theorising and a long period of Constitutional and statutory interpretation that fundamentally changed the language of law in the United States.” (White, 2002, p304). Conversely, many liberal legal scholars now criticize it for being relatively ‘weak standing’ in the law as ‘Brown II’ was created in order to deliberately delay any desegregation of Blacks and Whites in southern schools, “One of the central battles of the Civil Rights movement—desegregated schools—was basically lost. Michael Brown’s school in Ferguson, for example, was deeply segregated, and it wasn’t an aberration in Missouri or the country as a whole.” (Berlatsky, 2015, paragraph 5). Nevertheless, this law enshrined legal rights for desegregation, gave the people behind the Movement confidence and hope, as well as rousing the attention and interest of the media and generated more sympathetic supporters, all because “the highest federal court…had raised a powerful voice on behalf of racial equality” (Lawson, 1998, p11). This was the first essential legal victory for the Movement, yet more still needed to be accomplished for their legal rights.

It can also be said that the “‘Civil Rights Act’ is the most important and potentially powerful anti-discrimination law ever enacted by the U.S. Congress.” (Rosenberg, 2004, p1147). Equality enshrined by the Fourteenth Amendment was finally meaningfully enforced in the ‘Civil Rights Act’ (passed in 1964) by it stating that racial discrimination in any public place, by any employers and by state governments was now illegal. Yet, “Washington had shown its capacity to act under the right political circumstances, but its efforts still left 70 percent of Black southerners unable to exercise the franchise” (Lawson, 1998, p16). Although it now existed, the Act still did not ensure fair voting rights for Blacks and discrimination was still rife in housing for example. White supremacy was still widespread and extremist organizations such as the ‘Ku Klux Klan’ (KKK) used intimidation as well as violent tactics against anyone who tried to exhibit any freedom that the Act was meant to ensure. Nonetheless, this Act guaranteed the rights of black people were not being ignored by government as the widespread political mobilization that it created meant that their cause was not going unnoticed. This act safeguarded the protection of basic rights for Blacks. However, it was not until they finally won the right to vote that they were considered, valued and represented within government and politics.

 In terms of legislature, the ‘Voting Rights Act’ (passed in 1965) was the last key success of the Movement. “The Selma to Montgomery March…hastened passage of the law, (and) brought to a climax the succession of massive demonstrations aimed at pressuring the national government to legislate an end to racial segregation and disfranchisement in the South.” (Lawson, 1998, p33). Despite this, some argue that the historical events surrounding this landmark Act was so violent that it is difficult to call it a full success. The brutality displayed by law officers on ‘Bloody Sunday’ that occurred in 1965, revealed police officers who “shot teargas and waded into the crowd, beating the nonviolent protesters with billy clubs and ultimately hospitalizing over fifty people.” (Kindig, date unknown, paragraph 3). The violence however, was witnessed by the nation as it was all televised which brought tremendous media attention as to how Blacks were being so unjustly treated. The feelings generated by the public from both Blacks and the Whites who were sympathetic to their cause, catapulted the events into a nationwide debate. For many Americans, it was an awakening and a realisation that in order for change, they had to lend their voices in support. In effect, the backlash from these open displays of brutality experienced by Blacks by law enforcers created such a furore that it forced the government to push through the Act. This Act is still considered one of the most important victories for the black community as they finally had legitimate and direct access to politics through this legal doctrine. The goal to ensure Blacks were recognized and treated fairly by government was finally attained through legal action. This made the Civil Rights Movement so successful. This assured that justice and equal rights for Blacks were enshrined through legislation and that they were recognized by the law of their country. However, further grounds were needed to be covered for black people’s value of life within society to be improved.

The Movement should overall be praised for its non-violent protests as a form of civil disobedience, which helped to gain more support and change stigma around African-Americans. Martin Luther King championed this approach in order to create more allies than enemies, “To address racial injustice, ‘you don’t do it by magnifying the problems’,” (Sebastian quoting Huckabee, 2015, paragraph 1). This is possibly one of the most controversial and widely disputed methods as many considered it to be extremely violent, especially towards the end. The NAACP took up arms as racial tensions grew because protesters were being continually intimidated for speaking out. ‘Bloody Sunday’, the ‘Watts Riots’ and the mass demonstration held in Birmingham were just some of the examples used to demonstrate how brutal clashes became. Conversely, to criticize this generally nonviolent Movement because of sporadic episodes of violence is unfair, considering how much aggression and opposition they received. Even the most peacefully organised protests such as the ‘Freedom Rides’ saw many unarmed protesters being frequently attacked. “‘The violence was being perpetrated by the oppressors, not the oppressed and that was an incredibly powerful message and an incredibly important tool during the movement’, said…an attorney with the Southern Poverty Law Centre” (Simkins quoting Cohen, 2014, paragraph 9). It was evident to many observers that violence was mainly initiated by law officers or by the opposition. Media (especially television) showcased to the American public how mistreated and abused Blacks were. Violence inflicted upon protesters was frequent throughout the Movement’s peaceful demonstrations, especially during the sit-ins across the South.

The ‘Sit-In Campaign’ is an example of a successful civil disobedience mass protest against segregation. It first started in 1960 on a small scale in Greensboro, but quickly gained momentum spreading throughout the South, eventually galvanising 700,000 protesters. It attracted more student and youth groups to the cause, providing the Movement with growing numbers and new strategies that emphasised direct action and participatory democracy, “activists also revealed new relationship dynamics between students and adults and merged nonviolent direct action with voter registration, a combination considered incompatible.” (Lee, 2010, part 1). However, “early sit-ins had very little impact beyond the local level and was no real threat to segregation as a whole…There was no follow up plan and no way to export the initiative to other places due to a lack of strategic grassroots organizing that will be seen in the early 1960s.” (Lee, 2010, p65). It did not succeed in ending segregation in the South and some argue it did not contribute much to the national campaign. Nevertheless, it gained extensive publicity broadcasting the demonstrators’ commitment to the cause and winning relative respect across America. The Sit-ins exposed many injustices experienced by Blacks that usually went unnoticed by the white masses. It highlighted how racist attitudes were as many Blacks were attacked, “planned attacks from white thugs, assaults that the police intended to ignore, hoping to discourage and intimidate the activists” (Lee, 2010, p177) frequently occurred during these peaceful protests. By the end, it had achieved desegregation in many restaurants throughout the South, thus “These successful protests established a pattern of Black protest in the city that were repeated during the Civil Rights Movement: successful student-adult collaboration against white racism.” (Lee, 2010, p13). Although this made a small change to segregation practices, it had little impact on desegregation. The bus boycott however, was more effective as it directly impacted on the economy in order to further its aims.

The ‘Montgomery Bus Boycott’ (from 1955-1956) was possibly the most influential protest because it demonstrated how peaceful protest could still make an impact. Rosa Parks’ undeserved arrest for not giving up her seat for a white person generated a year-long widespread boycott, “its effectiveness was the result of leaders’ decisions about tactics and strategies and their capacity to mobilize thousands of ordinary people in a complex, year-long grassroots challenge to the city’s political and economic establishment.” (Dreier, 2006, p88). The black community displayed incredible resilience and restraint against aggressors, which in turn changed negative attitudes around them. After Parks’ arrest, “What followed is one of the most amazing examples of effective organizing in American history. That night, several black community leaders met to develop an action plan.” (Dreier, 2006, p90). Similarly, “In August 1963 thousands of African Americans and whites gathered for the March on Washington. It was peaceful with no arrests.” (Simkins, 2014, paragraph 10). Critics of the Movement claim that King incited violence in his speeches and protests. Nevertheless, it is entirely unrealistic to expect a revolution and a reversal of people’s attitudes and convictions to have no violence whatsoever. It is implausible to think that King would have wanted his people to be assaulted or killed, but as with any huge uprising, there are risks. “King…faced editorials admonishing him for provoking riots and isolating those sympathetic to his cause with his ‘excessive’ demonstrations. Progressive white Americans, who distinguished themselves from the ‘bigots and hatemongers’ in the South, turned against King when he came into their de facto segregated neighbourhoods to protest racist housing practices.” (Sebastian, 2015, paragraph 12). Protesting the rights of a long oppressed people was considered provocative and inconvenient to some, but this claim was unjustified and superficial. It is true that the Movement had some violence surrounding it, however this was never their intention or goal and most of their methods were passive. Overall, peaceable civil disobedience coupled with effective organization led the Civil Rights Movement to victory.

The most important method that the Movement used which undoubtedly propelled its success was its charismatic leaders and speakers, which aided the revolution in gaining the numbers it needed to push their agenda. King used the religious connections he had as a Minister to make sure the church was behind him when he led the Movement to success. His Baptist religion helped gain some backing for his cause as America was, and still is, considered mostly Christian and sought to “convert the hearts and minds of white racists through appeals to their Christian consciences”(Lawson, 1998, p18). With the dominant religion on his side, he led with the belief of non-violence; essentially encouraging harmony and peaceful protests. His historically famous ‘dream’ speech is one of the most thought provoking and studied speeches of the 20^th Century. This alongside being supported by over 200,000 protesters marching to Washington in 1963 gained widespread attention from the public and media and thus brought their cause to the forefront, forcing a response from President L. Johnson. His leadership and organization of the ‘Southern Christian Leadership Conference’ (SCLC) brought to light the role black churches had in the beginning of the Movement. This role was important in gaining success because the churches already had existing authoritative figureheads and networks of black civilians that could be easily organised by them. Some critiqued the SCLC for its heavy reliance on King’s charismatic personality and leadership skills in order to be successful, however it can be argued that a key feature to any organisation is a strong and effective leader. The March on Washington was potent and effective nevertheless, the demonstration was divided between the restrained and cautious older generation of the SCLC and the more defiant youth who preferred more direct forms of activism in the ‘Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee’ (SNCC). The Movement was fractured into many subsections, as with any Movement on this scale, it cannot wholly be contained, but this allowed it to gain success through varying strategies of protest. Just as King’s method was to gain success through peaceful methods, Malcolm X sought independence for Blacks through more aggressive means. Both were inspiring and influential in their own rights but the differences in their leadership meant there was a leader for all kinds of African-Americans to follow and support within the Movement. There were also lesser known speakers who played a significant role in directly affecting the Civil Rights Movement and its overall success.

Fannie Lou Hamer used similar methods to King in her leadership, centring “on acts of public prayer in a prophetic style—through public speaking and discourse—and a pastoral style—through the use of sung prayer.” (Barber, 2015, part ii). Her involvement in the ‘Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party’ (MFDP) was mainly to set up a delegation because of the thousands of blacks failing to register to the Democratic Party during ‘Freedom Summer’ in 1964. Hamer effectively “verbally pushed back against a racist white social structure throughout her speeches while also using Biblical references to strengthen the message she believed God had sent her to deliver equality for all American citizens.” (Barber, 2015, p1). By offering comfort to her people through the use of music and emotive spoken word, she in turn changed the mind-sets of Whites by placing emphasis on their religious duty and consciences. Although she was not as educated as other black leaders, her fortitude and leadership were more easily relatable to many Blacks at that time. These powerful speeches put significant additional pressure on the government and enabled the Civil Rights Movement to gain support (even convincing both the tentative and the disapproving at times) and finally gave a voice against institutional racism.

The Civil Rights Movement was extremely successful in its aims, albeit they were not achieved quickly. All the struggles and pitfalls were diluted by the overall influence and lasting impact the Movement had. Methods such as legal action as well as civil disobedience and nonviolent means of protest meant the Movement could permeate institutional racism to its governmental core and change stigma surrounding African-Americans at that time. The most important method the Movement utilised was its powerful emphasis on emotive and religious spoken language by important figureheads and leaders. This propelled its success to become historic in its own right. The Voting Rights Act, The Montgomery Bus Boycott and Martin Luther King were all the most integral and successful aspects of the Movement. Although racial discrimination still remains on a reduced scale at a political, social and economic level, it does not mean that the Movement was not successful (especially for its time). It is not often that an ‘ethical revolution’ will defeat all moral injustices and so the continuation of the Movement’s aims are necessary for the evolution and development of society. The Civil Rights Movement has allowed black people to have entrenched rights as people and not property. It also enabled them to be integrated and valued in society, becoming a significant part of American political history. Therefore, the methods mentioned were the most important reasons for the overall triumph of the Movement.

xx

Bibliography

Barber, B. K (2015) Tell It On the Mountain: Fannie Lou Hamer’s Pastoral and Prophetic Styles of Leadership as Acts of Public Prayer, published by University of Montana ScholarWorks Undergraduate Theses and Professional Papers, part ii, page 1.

Berlatsky, N. (2015) The Civil Rights Movement Didn’t Succeed, posted onto splicetoday (31^st August), available at http://www.splicetoday.com/politics-and-media/the-civil-rights-movement-didn-t-succeed, paragraph 5.  

Dreier, P. (2006) Rosa Parks: Angry, Not Tired- Urban and Environmental Policy (Dissent), published by Occidental College OxyScholar, pages 88, 90.

Kindig, J. (date unknown) Selma, Alabama, (Bloody Sunday, March 7, 1965) - Racial Conflict, posted onto BlackPast (2007-2015), available at http://www.blackpast.org/aah/bloody-sunday-selma-alabama-march-7-1965, paragraph 3.   

Lawson, S.F. and Payne, C.M. (1998) Debating the Civil Rights Movement: 1945-1968- The View from the Nation, published by Rowman and Littlefield Publishers Inc., pages 11, 16, 33, 18.

Lee, B. E. (2010) The Nashville Civil Rights Movement: A Study of the Phenomenon of Intentional Leadership Development and its Consequences for Local Movements and the National Civil Rights, published by Georgia State University ScholarWorks at Georgia State University, part 1, pages 65, 177, 13.

Rosenberg, G. (2004) The 1964 Civil Rights Act: The Crucial Role of Social Movements in the Enactment and Implementation of Anti-Discrimination Law in Saint Louis University Law Journal, published by University of Chicago Law School-Chicago Unbound, page 1147.

Sebastian, S. (2015) Don’t criticize Black Lives Matter for provoking violence. The civil rights movement did, too, posted onto the Washingtonpost (1^st October), available at https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/10/01/dont-criticize-black-lives-matter-for-provoking-violence-the-civil-rights-movement-did-too/?utm_term=.38ecb64de312, paragraphs 1, 12.

Simkins, C. (2014) Non-violence Was Key to Civil Rights Movement, posted onto voanews (20^th January), available at http://www.voanews.com/a/nonviolencekey-to-civil-rights-movement/1737280.html, paragraphs 9, 10. 

White, J. V. (2002) Brown v. Board of Education and the Origins of the Activist Insecurity in Civil Rights Law-Scholarly Works in Ohio Northern University Law review, published by Scholarly Commons UNLV Law, page 304.