Talk:Civil rights movement (1896–1954)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Old convo

I've just added an African Blood Brotherhood entry. Please check it out and contribute if possible. DJ Silverfish 21:35, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Merge of Key Events data

There is already an article Timeline of the American Civil Rights Movement and the additions should be merged into there. Simesa 01:08, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

First, though, we have to ask - is this information from a copyrighted source? Simesa 01:32, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Possible Copyvio "Key Event" Data

User Mitchumch entered the extensive "key event" data, and later agreed to provide sources. User Mitchumch is no longer on Wikipedia, and at least one of his entries has proven to be completely bogus. I have advised an administrator. Simesa 02:23, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Timeline

This article had a long and very informative timeline. It's not generally Wikipedia's policy to put long itmelines in an article, especially if there already is a timeline page. I put the info there (there is a subpage exclusively for that list now: HERE). If you can help integrate the list to the main list, that would be great!Avraham 16:14, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

That info appears to have come from a copyrighted website (see the Discussion page for Timeline of the American Civil Rights Movement). I haven't worked through the info yet to see what can be salvaged. Simesa 11:29, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Merger with 19th-century African-American civil rights activists

I don't think we can merge something that smells so strongly like a Copyright Violation. In any event, I think a better resolution would be to have seperate articles for these individuals and place entries for them in Timeline of the American Civil Rights Movement. Simesa 11:29, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Agreeing with this. Of course, the article has it stands has many problems (The 20th century civil rights movement involved a lot more than the admirable Mrs. Parks, for example). JChap2007 18:26, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Civil rights in the military

We have the church, the labor movement, economic segregation... so should there be a brief section on civil rights in the U.S. military, with a reference to "Main article: Military history of African Americans" ? Actually civil rights isn't just African-Americans but encompasses other minorities such as women and gays, which seems like even more reasons to include such a section... --Bookgrrl 18:22, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Name of this article?

Just out of curiosity, why did the name of this article (and the matching one for 1955 and later) get changed from African-American Civil Rights to American Civil Rights? The entire article, without exception, is about racial issues. There's not a single thing about other minorities' civil rights struggles. So why not just call this "African-American Civil Rights Movement" as it used to be? --Bookgrrl 01:56, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

For a variety of reasons, this is the correct title.

• The term "American Civil Rights Movement" is used about six times as often as "African-American Civil Rights Movement".
• The term African-American was not invented until the 1980s. (Really.)
• Leaders including Martin Luther King, Jr. would have been abhorred by the notion that they were seeking what Wallace, Reagan and others would denigrate as "special rights" -- they were defending the rights of all by restoring the rights of the disenfranchised.
• The rights of other minorities were similarly marginalized, including Jews, Hispanics and Asians. Leaders such as King made a point of crossing lines of color to build a broader movement, and recruiting labor unions, anti-poverty groups and white churches with gusto, yet avoiding paternalism within the tent.
• Really, again, it was just called "the civil rights movement".--Dhartung | Talk 08:37, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

I have deleted "blacks went to canada to buy beer for the troops because southern and nothern merchants would not sell them" from the first paragraph as it did not make sense. Perhaps a miss-insert? (Iswyn 17:13, 25 March 2007 (UTC))

I can't find a way to correct the icon-covered text in the first paragraph (tried several times). soverman 1:54 30 June 07 (UTC)

40%??

Referring to schools for blacks started by Jews, the article states "At one time some forty percent of southern blacks were learning at these schools." I assume this means 40% of southern blacks who were enrolled in colleges? I find it very unlikely that 40% of southern blacks attended college at this time... -Elmer Clark 03:19, 1 December 2007 (UT </WHAT WERE THE GOALS?/>/WHAT DID IT DO IN THE 1920'S AND 1930'S?/WHO SUPPORTED/OPPOSED?/

Segregation: Toms and Janes?

Excuse my complete ignorence (But I am of a young generation born and living in Europe), but I have no idea if people being refered to as "Tom" and "Jane" is a kind of racial slur impying a working class status (Like an "ordinary Joe"), or if the article simply means refered to by thier first names? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tintreas (talk • contribs) 23:19, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Starting date?

The two articles on the civil rights movement, 1896-1954 and 1955-1968, seem to assume that nothing significant happened before 1896. In reality I would argue that the period from 1865-1896 was a golden age of the civil rights movement (read Norris Wright Cuney, for example, which I just created). He and leaders like him made tremendous strides in creating in organizing black voters, creating employment opportunities, and substantially reducing segregation. The change during this period was tremendous and it was due to a lot of hard work. The period in the late 1890s was a turning point. Right around the turn of the century, segregation took hold, in the South as well as many other parts of the country, and black civil rights were rolled back drastically, almost overnight. The 1896-1954 period should not be viewed as the beginning of the movement but rather a sort of dark age in the middle (not to say that the pioneers in the 1896-1954 were not important but just to say that this was a period when racist forces managed to gain the upper hand in a lot of the nation).

I would suggest either this article should be extended to 1865 or else, perhaps better, another article should be created to discuss this earlier period.

--Mcorazao (talk) 19:51, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

I didn't start this article, but I think 1896 was chosen because of Plessy v. Ferguson. In the aftermath of Plessy, many states that had not already done so adopted "separate but equal" laws, so the date is not entirely arbitrary. But you're right: 1865 (13th Amendment) or 1876 (end of Reconstruction) could be equally valid starting dates. By all means expand the scope of this article to the earlier period. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 20:30, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

The article Nadir of American race relations appears to cover the time period between the Civil War and 1896. This article may be the area to discuss the material you are referring to. Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 20:34, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback!

The Nadir of American race relations does cover a good part of that era although it covers only one side of the era. Regardless if it is to be claimed that this article is covering the earlier era then why is it not named like these two articles and included in the portal template?

But regardless the Nadir article focuses heavily on the problems. The reality, of course, is that the reason for the lynchings was that blacks were actually making major strides in improving their situation. Mind you, from our perspective today it looks like things were terrible but if you look at many parts of the country and compare the situation of blacks in the 1850s to their situation in 1880s things were drastically improved. There was a substantial contingent of middle class blacks in the South and even a fair number of wealthy blacks. The chairman of the Texas Republican party was black and blacks substantially influenced the national party platform. The "Nadir" was actually a reflection of the fact that conservative whites were desperately trying to reassert dominance because the white community was genuinely sliding in its dominance (it never lost dominance, of course, but things were changing a lot). This all is not really addressed very well in Nadir and, given the title, it is probably not appropriate to address it in more detail.

--Mcorazao (talk) 21:37, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Folks, I gave this some more thought and decided that the 1865-1896 period is important enough in its own right to merit its own article. In the spirit of WP:BOLD I created a stub African-American Civil Rights Movement (1865–1895). I figure this will motivate discussion either for or against. If you want to discuss please go to that talk page.

--Mcorazao (talk) 03:27, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Looks like a good start! — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 18:56, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Diverse Founders of NAACP

I've edited the section that says the NAACP was founded only by blacks and jewish whites. Any standard history of the NAACP shows that it was actually a very diverse group with blacks, jews, and other whites of diverse religious/ethnic backgrounds. The main four who got the NAACP started were Villard, Ovington, Walling, Moscowitz. The first three were non-jewish whites. Villard and Ovington were the descendants of noted abolitionists. Other early members included Joel and Arthur Spingarn, Josephine Ruffin, Mary Talbert, Inez Milholland, Jane Addams, Florence Kelley, Sophonisba Breckinridge, John Haynes Holmes, Mary McLeod Bethune, George Henry White, Charles Edward Russell, John Dewey, William Dean Howells, Lillian Wald, Charles Darrow, Lincoln Steffens, Ray Stannard Baker, and Fanny Garrison Villard. This was an exceptionally diverse group of people, and included many ethnicities, not just one or two.

http://www.naacp.org/about/history/index.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.197.186.213 (talk) 16:15, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Proposed Move

There is a proposal to move this article to "American Civil Rights Movement (1896–1954)." You can discuss it at Talk:African-American Civil Rights Movement (1955–1968) Thanks, Racepacket (talk) 18:03, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:African-American Civil Rights Movement (1955–1968) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RM bot 18:15, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:African-American Civil Rights Movement (1955–1968) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. Racepacket (talk) 22:59, 7 November 2010 (UTC)