Non-Violent Tactics In The Civil Rights Movement

The Civil Rights Movement represents a pivotal event in world history. It resulted in positive changes for African-Americans, among other minorities across the United States and much of the world. While the overall goal of all activists during the civil rights movement was to obtain social justice, and terminate racist and discriminatory customs and laws for African Americans, leaders differed in their tactics. Many Leaders hoped to explore issues of race, human rights and dismantle the institutional racism through nonviolent means. However, others felt forced to use violent tactics in order to ensure change. While historians often put an emphasis on the importance of the non-violent tactics of the Civil Rights movement, radical organization’s

use of civil disobedience and direct-action protest proved to be the the most productive means of civil rights activity because it attracted considerable public attention, brought an increase in funding and placed higher pressure for governmental and societal progress.

From the beginnings of US history, African Americans have been marginalized and mistreated. Beginning with the Atlantic Slave trade to what many would argue the present day, Blacks have been considered unequals in society. By the 1950s African Americans had endured centuries of white supremacy, embedded in policy, social code and both intimate and public forms of racial biases and restrictions. Specifically in the years leading up to the movement the social and political order of Jim Crow pushed many over the brink. The famous, “separate but equal” saying was used as a cover up for inherently racist policies. In the late 1800s up into the 1960s, a majority of US states administered discriminatory policies and segregation through "Jim Crow" laws. Examples of these laws existed in Florida, Mississippi, Missouri, New Mexico, and Texas with the prohibition of mixed race schools: “The schools for white children and the schools for negro children shall be conducted separately.” Other Jim Crow laws prohibited intermarriage between blacks and whites, “ The marriage of a person of Caucasian blood with a

Negro...shall be null and void.” Countless other Jim Crow laws meant rest rooms, transportation, and even gravesites were segregated. Racism was not just restricted to public policy but it was also engraved in societal ideals. African Americans were essentially kept out of society. Acts of terror against African Americans that began post-civil war reached a newfound intensity in the 1890s and 1900s. These violent acts consisted of lynching, burning and whipping of African Americans. “The Pill” , a PBS American Experience Documentary, explains, “Sterilization abuse of African American women by the white medical establishment reached its height in the 1950s and 1960s. Women who went into the hospital to deliver children often came out unable to have more.” This was a deliberate imposing of measures intended to prevent births within the African American Race. The immense racism that was prevalent during the first half of the 19th century pushed many African-Americans over the edge forcing them to finally speak up.
The shift to radical measures was a slow and gradual process rather than an abrupt shift in beliefs. Originally many activists sought to instigate reform through legal channels, but after hundreds of ignored petitions and letters, these means proved to be highly ineffective. Seeing their efforts slow at prompting change, many activists turned to more radical measures and the idea of Civil Disobedience became increasingly popular. Henry David Thoreau once said “Unjust laws exist: shall we be content to obey them, ...or shall we transgress them at once? … if [a law] is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then I say, break the law.” Listening to Thoreau’s philosophy, many activists lost trust in the government, especially due to the lack of federal intervention against the ruthless acts of violence directed at african americans. Black activist Robert William wrote in 1959: "WE MUST be willing to kill if necessary. We cannot take these people who do us injustice to the court … it becomes necessary to punish them ourselves...we cannot rely on the law.” William continued to explain how African Americans are unable to receive justice under the current judicial system and thus the only way for their voices to be heard was through violent, “radical” means. Unlike many moderate civil rights organizations, radical groups brought attention to major issues. Elites by definition have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo, and are likely to try and avoid dealing with the demands of any change-oriented organization if they can afford to do so. Radicals forced elites into a situation where they had no choice but to deal with their set of demands. Williams along with many other African American activists believed that radical measures provided the only effective recourse against imperfect legislation
While there were many radical organizations emerging during the late 1950s-60s the four most commonly known groups are the Black Panther Party, the Youth International Party, Students for a Democratic Society and The Weather Underground organization. The Black Panther Party were the first in U.S. history to violently fight for ethnic minority and working class emancipation. Their overall goal was to establish socialism through mass protest and the practice of militant self defense in minority communities. The Black Panthers claimed that in order to ensure equality they needed the the right to control welfare programs, medical centers, schools, and police system in poor black areas. Similarly the SDS often allied with the Blank Panther Party and embraced radical, means of protest to achieve at first marxist goals. A breakaway party known as the Weatherman hoped to achieve their goals of equality through violent acts of terrorism. This group was involved in bombings at both federal institutions and colleges. Finally the Youth International Party, was created by 60s activists, Jerry Rubin and Abbie Hoffman. Hoffman was quoted to have said, "we will burn Chicago to the ground!" ((Democracy is in the Streets, James Miller; Simon and Schuster, New Yourk 1987: p. 286) They found the most success at the 1968 Democratic Convention in Chicago where they promoted a pig named pigasus as Yippie candidate for president to mock the social status quo. After the emergence of riots that rocked Chicago for days following the convention, Hoffman, Rubin, Black Panther Bobby Seale and four others were arrested for crossing state lines with the intent to riot and conspiring to incite violence. Despite the differences in these groups choice of action they are all interrelated in that they recognized the need to take protest a step further than just peaceful demonstrations.
Despite the repercussions brought on by acts of violence and radicalism, radical organizations were able to solve perhaps the greatest challenge faced by most activists, funding. Many aggrieved populations lacked the resources necessary to wage large-scale collective challenges. Resources obtained from outside supporters were essential. The movement could not operate for long on shared discontent and moral commitment alone. Thus, Radical black organizations played a key role in the Civil Rights movement because they stimulated increased financial support by white groups to more moderate black organizations especially during the late 1960s. In their use of direct action protest radicals created a crisis that the white community could not afford to ignore. The eruption of violence and destruction that followed radical civil disobedience created a newfound appreciation for the non-violent peaceful tactics of many other civil rights leaders such as Martin Luther King jr. According to statistics gathered from 1952 to 1970 on, “Total Outside Income of Major Movement Organizations” organizations such as the National Urban League (NUL) -- a group against violence-- income rose from nearly nothing in 1952 to an astounding $14,542,000 by 1970. The biggest turnaround in funding was between 1961-1963, when the amount of money nearly quintupled ($257,000 to $1,221,000). Similarly the Southern Christian Leadership Conference’s (SCLC)--another non-violent moderate organization-- income rose exponentially between 1960 and 1965: starting from only $54,756 in 1960 to an incredible $1,643,000 in 1965. Many historians argue that this turnaround funding towards moderate organizations came from the emergence of prominent radical groups in the early 1960s-70s. According to data the generally more moderate organizations like the National Urban League, the NAACP, and the Legal Defense and Educational Fund received more outside income than other groups which were younger and more militant. CONCLUSION SENTENCE.
At least as important as funding, and probably much more so, was the degree of access to key decision-makers that movement organizations and their leaders were able to maintain. Often times Moderates received greater acceptance to decision makers as a result of radical pressure, thus there was a positive radical flank effect at that level. Study of radical flank effectively demonstrates changes in a social movement would take place during periods in which socially-defined radicalism was increasing or periods in which new or more militant organizations were emerging. As radicalism increased, trends leaned toward favorable civil rights policies. In 1960 student sit ins made up the first wave of mass direct action protests. Following that, in 1963 and 1964 there was an increase in government actions related to the radical flank, since this period was the high tide of urban riots. With 1965 came the Selma Spectacle and, in Watts, the first truly devastating urban riot; 1966 was the point at which black power began to be articulated publicly. In the public mind, urban riots, armed nationalists, and black power rhetoric became a growing crisis that the government had to address. The fate of rights-expanding policies and laws had not been determined solely by the degree of goodwill or “enlightenment” among the power holders, rather it emerged within a structure of political interests surrounding the governmental apparatus.
In conclusion, while many historians and the media as a whole have been quick to mischaracterize radicals during civil rights movement as counterproductive and barbaric, in reality they played a pivotal role in granting African Americans the civil rights they were due.

The civil rights movement deeply affected American society and on a larger scale the world. Among its most important achievements were two major civil rights laws passed by Congress. These laws ensured constitutional rights for African Americans and other minorities. But racism was and still is by no means solved. Today’s society is still plagued with a fundamental discriminatory outlook on minorities, but the Civil Rights Movement created a step in the right direction for african americans among other minorities and inspired countless other

movements.