Sociology

The social movements of the twentieth century have come to be regarded as some of the most important social movements in American history.  However, none was as important as the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s.  The leaders of this movement, activists such as Martin Luther King Jr. and Stokely Carmichael, paved the way for the African American communitys integration into American society.  This particular time in history is defined by its successes, but also marred by violence.  Protests and demonstrations of all kinds, including marches, exhibited civil disobedience, however, violence always interrupted the demonstrations.  Because of the violence and the success of the Selma to Montgomery March of 1965 and the March Against Fear in 1966, Stokely Carmichael and Martin Luther King Jr. both turned from straightforward desegregation agendas to more political agendas.

In 1965, thousands of demonstrators fighting for African American civil rights marched from Selma, Alabama, to the state capitol, Montgomery.  Known as the Selma to Montgomery Marches, this demonstration was thwarted twice.  In the marchs initial attempt, 200 Alabama state troopers from the Dallas county Sheriffs Office attacked demonstrators with whips, tear gas, and nightsticks.  The rationale for attacking the demonstrators was that the governor had banned marches in Alabama.  In another incident, known as Bloody Sunday, as the demonstrators were crossing the Edmund Pettus Bridge over the Alabama River, state troopers on horseback clubbed demonstrators and attacked the crowd with tear gas.  The march finally got underway without further incident, and it was a complete success (Wilkinson, 1997).

Likewise, in 1966, the March Against Fear was marred by violence from the moment it began.  The march was started by James Meredith, who was shot by a sniper, rendering him unable to continue with the march.  However, civil rights activists, including Stokely Carmichael and Martin Luther King Jr., decided to take over the march in Merediths name.  The March Against Fear, a walk from Memphis, Tennessee to Jackson, Mississippi, was to encourage African Americans to register to vote.  All freedom-loving people were invited to join in the walk, no matter the race of the individual.  No demonstrators were attacked on the main route however, some were assaulted on side trips, either to their campground for the night or on their way to or from eating a meal (Scanlon, 1999).

Stokely Carmichael joined the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee and participated in Freedom Rides before the Selma to Montgomery Marches and the March Against Fear.  The Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee and the Freedom Rides held civil disobedience to be the most important tactic of the Civil Rights Movement.  This organization and demonstration believed in nonviolent protesting and accepting all activists, black and white alike (Simkin, 1997).

However, shortly after the marches, Stokely Carmichael and the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee drastically shifted from traditional leadership to a separatist and militant leadership.  Northern white activists were ousted from the group, and Carmichael took over leadership duties from John Lewis.  For this particular group, and for Carmichael, the emphasis of the Civil Rights Movement was now on political power, third parties, and black power (Wilkinson, 1997).  Stokely Carmichael became involved with Black Power, an idea whose principles, as Carmichael put it, are to call for black people in this country to unite, recognize their heritage, and to build a sense of community (Qtd. in Simkin, 1997).

Perhaps Stokely Carmichael became disillusioned with civil disobedience because of the violence on the marches in which he participated.  It was obvious that the demonstrators who walked in those marches were nonviolent individuals trying to get a point across in a peaceful way.  However, police and government, among others, perpetrated the violence that existed in those marches.  Perhaps Carmichael figured that if police, government, and others were not going to resolve the issue of African American civil rights peacefully, then why should the African American community take the abuse  Why not fight back
Carmichaels plan for the future of African Americans in American society was not only to have them integrate into Anglo society, but for them to achieve a sense of pride in being an African American.  He believed that before African Americans could integrate into American society, they needed to unite and become reliant on themselves alone.  They, in essence, needed to find themselves and be proud of who they are.

Martin Luther King Jr., like Carmichael at first, believed whole-heartedly in civil disobedience.  King read books on Mahatma Gandhis ideas of civil disobedience and how it worked for Gandhi against British rule in India.  King believed that the same principles could work for African Americans in America.

Unlike Stokely Carmichaels ideological position, which spoke only to the African American community, Kings ideological position of equality for all spoke to all races.  The Selma to Montgomery Marches and the March Against Fear encouraged King and like-minded individuals that civil disobedience was a successful tactic.  These marches were successful, and therefore civil disobedience was successful.  Thus, King did not stray from these principles (Simkin, 1997).

Although King never strayed from civil disobedience, he and other activists did expand their agendas to include politics in essence, peace for all.  King became involved in criticizing the United States involvement in the Vietnam War.  It seemed as though he was straying from the issue that he truly believed in, the issue that was close to his heart African American civil rights (Wilkinson, 1997).

However, King believed that the Vietnam War and civil rights were directly connected.  Peace, both in America and abroad, were important to King (King, 1967).  Perhaps he realized the violence that he encountered throughout his position as activist during the Civil Rights Movement, including the Selma to Montgomery Marches and the March Against Fear, and decided that the best thing he could do would be to rally for peace.  Perhaps if peace were achieved on other levels, peace would be achieved with regards to the Civil Rights Movement.

Martin Luther King Jr.s plan for the future of African Americans in American society was that African Americans be fully and peacefully integrated into American society.  King was very much interested in African Americans being able to live in peace alongside the Anglo community, with all the rights and privileges that Anglo Americans were afforded.  Martin Luther King Jr. believed that peace was the answer, not aggressiveness.

Stokely Carmichael turned away from civil disobedience in favor of the Black Power agenda and militancy.  Martin Luther King Jr. did not stray from civil disobedience, but he widened his agenda to include peace, not just desegregation.  Both wanted the best for their nation, however, Carmichael was concerned mostly with the African American community, while Martin Luther King Jr. was concerned with all races, both black and white.  Carmichael wanted African Americans to take pride in their heritage and their community and reject Anglo values, while King wanted both communities to come together and live in peace with each other, respecting each others values and heritages.

Although both ideological positions have their good points and are interested in what is best for the African American community, Martin Luther King Jr.s position makes the most sense.  Kings position and plan was practical.  Although Carmichaels position on having pride in ones heritage and becoming self-reliant is a good thing, and essentially, a must, King perhaps realized that the nation was not going to change willingly to accept African Americans.  Carmichaels position seems to want to force Anglo society to accept African Americans, but Kings position seems to say that it does not matter whether or not African Americans are accepted by Anglo society, just give them basic civil rights and allow them to live alongside the Anglo community peacefully.  In essence, they do not have to like each other, but they should be equal to one another.