In many Southern States the force and presence of the Klan was enough to dissuade African Americans from joining the campaign - Mississippi, as state with the highest amount of Klan activity also had the lowest amount of registered African American voters, and the lowest amount of NAACP activists. The Klan’s ability to intimidate African Americans could be viewed as a reason in explaining why it took so long for the Bill to be passed. The open racism of the klan was another big issue for the Civil Rights Campaign. The conspicuous nature of their hate made racism more commonplace, and accepted thing that happened. This de facto bigotry made it more difficult for civil rights activist to change the hearts and minds of the activists, and made politicians reticent about their support of the campaign, for fear of losing public support.
However, in some instances I think he went too far, such as forcefully making Native Americans leave and some of the comments he made about the issue. For example, Jackson says “Toward the aborigines of the country no one can indulge a more friendly feeling than myself, or would go further in attempting to reclaim them from their wandering habits and make them a happy, prosperous people” (Hollitz, 209). But Jackson’s comments don’t seem to coincide with his actions regarding the Cherokee Indians in Georgia. The Cherokee had attempted with great success to become more Americanized, but were ordered by Georgia to leave as per the Indian Removal Act created by Jackson. The Cherokee incorporated laws, a constitution, interracial marriages, and even tried living like whites do.
In 1640 Massachusetts law required settlers to help their fellow Indian neighbors, but this friendly gesture was coupled with stern provisos. Any Indian who refused to fence his fields after such help was offered forfeited his right to sue for damages and if a beast trampled their cornfield they had to identify it. Plymouth magistrates allowed Indians to impound offending beasts, but this meant either that they drive the animals to the nearest English pound or construct one on
Their methods also alienated whites, this occurred through the violence that Malcom X emphasised along with self-defence. Leaders such as Malcom X orated about arming themselves to stay safe; this caused the whites to increase their fear of the black Americans. Black Power were reluctant to use legal means and they preferred direct confrontation, for example ‘Police the pigs’ campaign after 1966. This slowed the progress of the civil rights movement because without the help of the white American’s they were unable to achieve change which in turn weakened the movement. By alienating the whites, defacto change could not occur which meant that dejure change couldn’t be pushed through, with the reluctance of the African Americans to work with the whites this caused the biggest impact to weakening the civil rights movement of the 1960’s.
In the eyes of white supremacy it would be a negative, but in the eyes of the black race it meant a man who refused to obey the orders to beat other slaves and go against the racist norms. Which is exactly what he did when he took a strong stand on racism was in 1957, when he condemned President Eisenhower and Alabama Governor Faubus for the way blacks were being treated in the South. Saying that “the way that they are treating my people in the south, the government can go to hell,” and when they threatened him that he would be sent over to the Soviet Union, Armstrong laughed and simply said “the people over there ask me what’s wrong with m country, what am I suppose to say?” His statements may have prompted Eisenhower to take action in a desegregation case, because soon after Armstrong made them, he ordered blacks to be admitted to Little Rock’s Central High School, which prompted a congratulatory telegram to the President from Armstrong. This was one of the few times that a black man spoke out for what he believed in to the white man and got away with it. Especially calling out such people in
Validity of Criticism against Andrew Jackson The criticism of Andrew Jackson and his supporters for upholding the principles of majority rule and the supremacy of the federal government inconsistently and unfairly is valid and can be demonstrated by three points. These points are as follows: first, his negotiations to the Chickasaw treaty; second, his verdict to “forcibly remove” the Native Americans to the West; and third, his decision to support the railroad which in turn took away the Indian’s food source of the buffalo. It is because of these three points that Andrew Jackson was often viewed as a hypocritical man who was uncaring for minority groups unless it could selfishly benefit him. In 1814, Andrew Jackson individually “negotiated the Chickasaw treaty”, resulting in the Indians’ land being opened up to white settlement despite what the Chickasaw Indians desired. The Chickasaw tribe reluctantly agreed to this treaty under pressure from the United States, which left them little to no choice because of its mass power.
For instance, the writer claims that the book Uncle Tom’s Cabin and its common predecessor who attacks the topic of slavery in order for the abolitionists to unite together and fight for the same beliefs, isn’t fair or moral since they were disrupting the peaceful state that the U.S was in and shifting the people apart even more. On the other hand, the other passage written by the Southern literary messenger of Richmond also opposed Mrs. Stowe;s tale but he/she had a very biased opinion towards the South so he/she just argued using his/her untrustworthy opinion and very little knowledge. For example, the messenger didn’t think that the author of the story should have put emphasis on the abolition actions since they didn’t deserve the attention and it was unfair for the South since they their opinions didn’t get noticed. 1) C-1 2) The Pro-Southern Court Speaks (1857) 3) Author: Roger Taney 4) Author’s Position: Against Dred Scott and his wish to become a free African American 5) Bias: The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court has the authority to speak for what he favors and in this case, his bias leaned toward the South so he supported them by going against Dred Scott. The Court also must cancel the Missouri Compromise since it goes against the constitution so they couldn’t
As James Weldon Johnson accounts in his chronicle, “Dairy of an Ex Colored Man” Johnson describes acts of hate and violence toward African Americans. Many thought Blacks inferior and urged they could not and will never become civilized; “you freed nigger and you gave him a ballot, but you couldn’t make a citizen out of him.”(75) Johnson lived first hand in a society Griffith wished to enforce and even proliferate. His testimony shows that what Griffith believed was the solution to a “black problem” was already in practice. But more than that, Johnson knew that this was not an issue of Black vs. White in the protection of a righteous civilization. He argued that “modern civilization hit ignorance of the masses through the means of popular education.
It discusses other ideas associated with racial prejudice such as the effects of a social hierarchy. Mississippi Burning, likewise to Wild Cat Falling, explores how the ‘coloured’ people were being racially discriminated and prejudiced against since the white Americans too, had an ethnocentric perspective on their coloured neighbours. A quote that supports the concept of ethnocentrism is, “he wasn’t doing anything except be a negro”. The diction of negro creates a tone of anger in the quote which helps illustrates the same concept of, if you’re black then you will be excluded, denied public facilities and racially prejudiced by the white society. Furthermore the tone creates an authentic voice which helps illustrate to the audience the African Americans anger and frustration towards the concept and from being racially prejudiced against in general.
The south had them erupting because of the segregation that was still an accepted practice in that area. Other parts of the nation had them because of the Viet Nam conflict and all that it represented by way of government lies and the loss of innocent lives. Innocence was destroyed during this era, as the younger generation pulled back the curtain of the Wizard and saw that it was only a man dressed as the American government. Once the untruths became evident, the grass root movement to change the nation took hold and social protest became a way of life for the American people." (J. Baldwin) "The 1950s and the 1960s had very distinct and indelible influences on present day America.