Civil Rights Movement - Essay Example

Martin L. King The Civil Rights Movement was an important chapter in American history which led to theestablishment of human rights around the world. Widely believed to have led the movement, Martin Luther King Jr. played a significant role in the development of this movement, but so did many others. The Movement became a ‘stencil’ for human rights worldwide and revolution world wide. This high-profile and historic quest for human rights achieved world notice and also brought to light America’s racist segregation of non-white immigrants. Energized and encouraged by the successes of the civil rights movement, activists worked to reverse the discriminatory laws restricting the influx of darker-skinned peoples into the western cultures. The movement’s struggle for civil rights and liberties was based on lawful civil rights and had its roots in moral motivations. The righteousness of the cause was personified by King whose character and courage was applauded and supported by an increasing number of American citizens of all colors. In 1955, Rosa Parks a black woman, refused to relinquish her seat on a bus to a white man in Montgomery Alabama, a violation of existing Jim Crow laws. This act of civil disobedience became the spark that ignited the masses during the 1950’s and 1960’s in protesting the racial inequalities. Segregation, during the Jim Crow era, was not limited to transportation mediums. In Alabama, hospitals, whether public or private, could not require a white nurse to care for blacks. (Sowell, 2005) In Mississippi, a law stifled freedom of the press by stating, “Any person who shall be guilty of printing, publishing or circulating printed, typewritten or written matter urging or presenting for public acceptance or general information, arguments or suggestions in favor of social equality or of intermarriage between whites and negroes, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to fine not exceeding $500 or imprisonment not exceeding six months or both” (“Jim Crow Laws”, 1998). When Parks was arrested for refusing the driver’s request to give up her seat to the white man, a group of area ministers formed the Montgomery Improvement Association (MIA) which coordinated what would become a 382-day boycott of the bus company by the entire black community. The ministers took this non-violent action to avoid the possible rioting that was widely rumored to soon ensue and to organize their collective congregations into one, larger and stronger common voice. In addition, had they not elected to organize, they likely would have lost many members due to the growing sentiment that all talk and no action would gain nothing. Preachers had spoken tough words from the pulpit and now they were being expected to back it up with tough actions. After discussion amongst the MIA leadership, twenty-six-year-old Martin Luther King Jr., a minister who had moved to town but a year earlier, was unanimously selected to head the MIA. King had no previous experience in the civil rights movement, recently refused the presidency of the city chapter of the NAACP and he had not met Miss Parks (Garrow, 1987, pp. 45-6). King’s inspiring leadership during the Montgomery bus boycott, and the subsequent events in the years to follow, elevated him to becoming the most recognized and beloved leader of the civil rights movement in America. His continued message of non-violent protest was of major significance in the social equality gains for blacks during these years. The U.S. Constitution provided the lawful assurance that non-violent strategies were defensible in court. This allowed for the protests which inevitably led to the awakening to the black plight of many unwary whites who then joined the cause leading to the eradication of racist Jim Crow type laws forever. People, both black and white, were now willing to violate absurd, archaic local segregationist laws because they believed they were abiding and defending a ‘higher law,’ the Constitution (Garrow, 1987, pp. 45-6). The original objective if the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), later headed by King, was to build upon the success of the Montgomery bus demonstration by launching similar boycotts in other cities, but this effort had few successes. At this time in Montgomery, the MIA was fundamentally unproductive in rebelling against other manners of discrimination. The movement seemed stalled until 1960 when a ‘sit-in’ movement initiated a novel and more aggressive yet still non-violent chapter of the civil rights battle. The now famous first sit-in occurred at a Woolworth’s lunch counter in Greensboro, North Carolina when four black students sat down at a ‘whites only’ establishment and requested service. The strategy quickly spread to ‘wade-ins’ at segregated city swimming pools and beaches, ‘pray-ins’ at segregated churches and ‘stand-ins’ at all-white theatres. These activists that braved the threat of being beaten and jailed in order advance their cause of racial justice were inspired by the illustration of courage by those who participated in the Montgomery bus boycott. The SCLC had no part in organizing the sit-in protests but theses actions had an influence King and others. The movement had found that varying forms of public protest could be utilized to overcome segregation in the South. A youth activist group was founded by student leaders after consultation with King and SCLC leaders in April 1960. The Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee added another dimension to the movement and appeared to embrace King’s pacifist methodology for social change at least for a while. The SCLC was not party, or privy to the succession of ‘Freedom Rides’ into the South in 1961. The Congress of Racial Equality sponsored and directed these rides designed to ensure that the Supreme Court’s decision in Boynton v. Virginia, which further defined and extended its earlier ruling that abolished segregation laws regarding interstate transportation was being complied with at the state level. The Freedom Riders clashed with whites in Anniston, Birmingham and Montgomery, Alabama which prompted President John Kennedy to send 600 U.S. marshals to safeguard the protestors. “The Freedom Rides supplied an important strategic lesson for King and the SCLC: in order to arouse public sympathy sufficient to pressure the federal government to enforce civil rights in the states and localities, white racists had to be provoked to use violence against non-violent protestors” (Colaiaco, 1988, p. 39). Answering the contention by the other ministers that it was morally wrong to break the law whether it was through peaceful or violent means, King again begged to differ by calling on the codes of morality: “one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that, an unjust law is no law at all.” Because the segregation laws were unjust and were in direct contradiction to the Supreme Court ruling that granted equal rights to people of color, King did not feel his public demonstration could be truly considered breaking the law. He defined moral law as those laws designed, as all laws were intended to be used, as a means of protecting the people and the community. The segregation laws were used only as a means of subjugation, oppression and degradation and were therefore not moral. Because these laws were not applied equally among the population, for example applying to all people below a specific income range (still immoral but uniformly administered) they were also unjust. To break an unjust and immoral law is thus acting in a moral and just manner for the good of the community, especially if this can be completed in a peaceful, kindly manner. King appeals to the morality of the situation to try to make his fellow ministers see reason in their decision to oppose the nonviolent actions King has been leading. He illustrates how it is only through peaceful but headlining actions that the morality of the white people in the north will finally come to recognize the deplorable conditions that existed in the south. He also convincingly illustrates how people should not be expected to uphold immoral laws and should not be encouraged by their moral leaders to do so. One of his strongest arguments is in the morality of preventing violence by channeling negative energy into positive progress and action. Through these arguments, he is able to shame the church leaders for their lack of understanding their responsibility to bring attention to such immoral actions as segregation laws and to help find solutions that will allow their congregations to live truly equal lives with equal opportunity for the future. (King, 1963) On August 28, 1963 in Washington, D.C. approximately 200,000 people joined the March on Washington which ended at the Lincoln Memorial where those gathered heard King deliver his famous ‘I Have a Dream’ speech. King appeared on the cover of Time magazine in 1964 and was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize that same year. In the accompanying Time article he was recognized as having ‘an indescribable empathy that is the touchstone of leadership.’ When King later criticized U.S. involvement in Vietnam, the publication publicly modified this statement. Actions taken by the SCLC, an ever-growing political power, as well as other demonstrative events throughout the South convinced the Kennedy administration of the need for civil rights legislation. Kennedy’s successor, Lyndon Johnson, used much clout and persuasion in the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This law gave the executive powers to extract federal funding from state and local governments that enforced Jim Crow laws or otherwise practiced discrimination. King illustrated how it is only through peaceful but headlining actions that the morality of the white people in the north will finally come to recognize the deplorable conditions that existed in the south. He also convincingly illustrates how people should not be expected to uphold immoral laws and should not be encouraged by their moral leaders to do so. One of his strongest arguments is in the morality of preventing violence by channeling negative energy into positive progress and action. Through these arguments, he is able to shame the church leaders for their lack of understanding their responsibility to bring attention to such immoral actions as segregation laws and to help find solutions that will allow their congregations to live truly equal lives with equal opportunity for the future. While Martin Luther King undoubtedly contributed much to the civil rights movement, it becomes clear through this analysis that his primary contribution was to provide ideas and be a spokesperson for the movement. He had a great deal of knowledge regarding how to bring about change through peaceful means as well as a plan for beneficial social change, but his lack of follow through on many projects led some of his followers to seek more obvious and faster means of forcing equal rights. Most of the events in which he took a major role were collaborative efforts with several other ministers, the great support of a community more than hungry for change and introduced into a culture already primed for change. The great orator indeed provided a great voice in which the people of an entire race could gain recognition, but he was not the ultimate generator of the movement itself. Works Cited Colaiaco, James A. “Martin Luther King, Jr.: Apostle of Militant Non­violence.” New York: St. Martin’s Press. (1988). Garrow, David J. “The Montgomery Bus Boycott and the Women Who Started It.” Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, pp.45-6. (1987). “Jim Crow Laws.” Martin Luther King, Jr., National Historic Site (January 5, 1998). Retrieved March 24, 2008 from King, Martin Luther. “Letter from Birmingham Jail.” Nobel Prizes. (1963). March 24, 2008 Sowell, Thomas. “Rosa Parks and History.” The Washington Times. (October 29, 2005). Read More