"Freedom Riders" - A PBS Film (2011)

This post is in remembrance of former Assistant Attorney General John Doar, who passed away in New York City this past week. He was 92 years old. Many will be familiar with him from the Civil Rights demonstrations of the 1960’s, where he was on the front lines facing the violence of segregation on its deathbed. He was dispatched to Montgomery, Alabama in 1961 along with John Seigenthaler, to protect the Freedom Riders.

The Freedom Riders were a group of young, idealistic students who wanted to dramatically demonstrate to the world that it was not possible to travel from one state to another without the risk of violence if you were African-American. This demonstration came at the same time as the Lunch Counter sit-ins which took place in many of the segregated cities were occurring.

John Doar’s role in the movement came about in a kind of left handed way. The Kennedy Administration was about to have its first summit with the Soviets and the specter of violent protests calling attention to the lack of freedom for African-Americans was the last thing they needed to be packing along with their bags when they went abroad.

This was the beginning of Mr. Doar’s 7 years of service as Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights, where he was frequently on the front lines of the Movement, where he became highly regarded as both a committed and somewhat fearless man. He was present at the admission of James Meredith at the University of Mississippi, confronting Ross Barnett and providing Meredith with protection. He was also the lead investigator in the 1964 case of the 3 missing Civil Rights workers; Andrew Goodman, James Chaney and Michael Schwerner; as later depicted in the film “Mississippi Burning.”

He prosecuted Collie Leroy Wilkins for federal civil rights violations in the murder of Viola Liuzzo. This was extraordinary as the jury was all white and the trial took place in 1963 in the segregated state of Alabama. Later that same year he confronted and calmed an angry mob after the assassination of civil rights leader Medgar Evers, murdered outside his home. The following account of the rioting which took place in the wake of that murder demonstrated Mr. Doar's faith in non-violence as a weapon.

The full story is at  http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/trialheroes/doaressay.html

"Into the no-man’s land between the police and the rioters walked John Doar.  The crowd stopped for a moment, stunned as though they were watching a ghost. Then bottles, bricks, and other missiles began crashing around him. Doar called to the crowd.  “You’re not going to win anything with bottles and bricks,” he said.  He could hardly be heard above the roar of the crowd, which began to encircle him. A man with a tire iron lifted it and took aim at Doar’s head. 

An angry black woman yelled in his face, “We get our rumps shot up!”  She asked with sarcastic disgust, “Are we gonna wait for the Justice Department?” Doar pleaded, “Aw, give us a break.” Then he shouted again, “Hold it! Is there someone here who can speak for you people?”  One black youth emerged from the demonstrators and joined Doar in the street.  “This man is right,” the youth said, pointing at Doar.  

“My name is John Doar—D-O-A-R,” the official called again and again.  “I’m from the Justice Department, and anybody around here knows I stand for what is right.”  He walked toward the mob, shouting—begging—for the crowd to disperse. “Medgar Evers wouldn’t want it this way,” he called.

In an alley, a CORE worker grabbed a teenager with a rifle who was taking aim at Doar. “Hold hands with me and help us move these people along,” Doar said to some nearby protesters.  A few people linked hands and they slowly began to push the mob back from the police line. A massacre was averted.  Barricades were removed and a motorized streetsweeper began whisking up the broken glass and other hurled debris."

During the March on Montgomery in early 1965 he was in the front of the 3^rd; and successful; attempt to reach the state capitol, walking “point” one block ahead of the marchers. He was Assistant Attorney General to Robert Kennedy at the time.

This film captures all of the drama and fear that were part of the Freedom Riders campaign. Utilizing one Greyhound Bus and one from Trailways, these brave activists; recruited by the Congress for Racial Equality, or CORE; set out to highlight the segregation that was commonplace in the cities throughout the Southern states.

On May 4, 1961, the first group; consisting  of 13 African-American and white civil rights activists left Washington, D.C., in an attempt to integrate the rest rooms and waiting rooms at bus stations along the way on the journey South. African-American Freedom Riders tried to use “whites-only” restrooms and lunch counters, and white participants attempted to use the “Colored Only” facilities.

What many people do not realize is that the Freedom Rides were meant as a replication of the 1947 Journey of Reconciliation, designed to test the 1946 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Morgan v. Virginia. That decision held that segregated bus seating in Interstate Commerce was unconstitutional. This did not apply to the individual states and it would be another 9 years until Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat on a local bus in Alabama.

The violence began as soon as the first bus hit Rock Hill, S.C. on May 12. The next day they were again attacked in Atlanta, Georgia where some of the riders boarded a Trailways Bus. By the time the Freedom Riders hit the state of Alabama the violence was so out of control that the bus could not even stop at the terminal. With an angry mob slashing tires and breaking windows the bus left with a contingent of angry whites chasing it.

When the tires finally gave out the bus pulled over and the white driver fled. The mob then threw in gasoline bombs in an attempt to smoke the passengers out. When they emerged they were beaten under the watchful eyes of the Alabama State Police. The images of the burnt bus made the front page of newspapers worldwide.

Throughout the summer the Freedom Rides continued until the Interstate Commerce Commission issued new regulations barring discrimination in accommodations at bus stops acroos the country. Thjis had the same effect as the 1946 Supreme Court Ruling, and it would be another 4 years before the Civil Rights Act would be finally passed and enshrined as law.

This film captures all of the drama and violence which invaded our living rooms via the nightly news, and eventually changed the way we looked at ourselves in terms of being a truly free country. And while all of this was happening here, the struggle in South Africa was portrayed as something different and more evil, while in reality there was no real difference at all.

This is an important film for these times, when some people are calling for a repeal of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and other legal protections which were won by the hard work of many people at grave risk to themselves. The fact that there are people trying to roll back those protections is ample proof in itself that these laws are still very necessary. Watching this film is one of the things you can do to honor the memory of the late John Doar.

Alabama Voter's Literacy Test - 1965

Lately there have been a lot of people; both Liberal and Conservative; who have called for the return of “literacy tests” to become eligible to Vote. This is in addition to the Conservative movement to roll back the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The photograph above was taken just after LBJ signed that bill into law in August 1965.  Among the people in the photograph are MLK and Rosa Parks.

Most people that call for the return of literacy tests are speaking in jest; more like exasperation at the views of the people who hold different political views than they themselves have. But, just for fun, I’d like everyone to take this 1965 Alabama test and see how they would score. Keep in mind that your level of education is far greater than that of the average African-American who would have been required to take this test in the 1960’s. And remember, in Alabama at the time education was a privilege and not a right for the people required to take this test.

The next time you hear someone talk about how “there ought to be a test for voting” whip this out and see how they would fare. You have about 15 minutes to complete the test and one wrong answer is a failing grade. You will be surprised at how little you think you know.

1. Which of the following is a right guaranteed by the Bill of Rights?

 _____Public Education

 _____Employment

 _____Trial by Jury

 _____Voting

 2. The federal census of population is taken every five years.

 _____True _____False

 3. If a person is indicted for a crime, name two rights which he has. ______________________ ________________________

 4. A U.S. senator elected at the general election in November takes office the following year on what date? _________________________________________________

 5. A President elected at the general election in November takes office the following year on what date? ______________________________________________________________________

 6. Which definition applies to the word "amendment?"

 _____Proposed change, as in a Constitution

 _____Make of peace between nationals at war

 _____A part of the government

 7. A person appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court is appointed for a term of __________.

 8. When the Constitution was approved by the original colonies, how many states had to ratify it in order for it to be in effect? _________________________________________

 9. Does enumeration affect the income tax levied on citizens in various states? __________

 10. A person opposed to swearing in an oath may say, instead: I (solemnly) ______________________________________________________________

 11. To serve as President of the United States, a person must have attained:

 _____25 years of age

 _____35 years of age

 _____40 years of age

 _____45 years of age

 12. What words are required by law to be on all coins and paper currency of the U.S.? ________________________________________________________________________

 13. The Supreme Court is the chief lawmaking body of the state.

 _____True _____False

 14. If a law passed by a state is contrary to provisions of the U.S. Constitution, which law prevails? ________________________________________________________________________

 15. If a vacancy occurs in the U.S. Senate, the state must hold an election, but meanwhile the place may be filled by a temporary appointment made by ________________________________________________________________________.

 16. A U.S. senator is elected for a term of _____ years.

 17. Appropriation of money for the armed services can be only for a period limited to _____ years.

 18. The chief executive and the administrative offices make up the ___________________ branch of government.

 19. Who passes laws dealing with piracy? ________________________________________________________________________

 20. The number of representatives which a state is entitled to have in the House of Representatives is based on _________________________________________________

 21. The Constitution protects an individual against punishments which are _______________ and _______________________.

 22. When a jury has heard and rendered a verdict in a case, and the judgment on the verdict has become final, the defendant cannot again be brought to trial for the same cause.

 _____True _____False

 23. Name two levels of government which can levy taxes: ________________________________________________________________________

 24. Communism is the type of government in: _____U.S.

 _____Russia

 _____England

 25. Cases tried before a court of law are two types, civil and _________________________.

 26. By a majority vote of the members of Congress, the Congress can change provisions of the Constitution of the U.S.

 _____True _____False

 27. For security, each state has a right to form a _________________________________.

 28. The electoral vote for President is counted in the presence of two bodies. Name them: _____________________________________________________________________

 29. If no candidate for President receives a majority of the electoral vote, who decides who will become President? ___________________________________________________

 30. Of the original 13 states, the one with the largest representation in the first Congress was ______________________________________________________________________.

 31. Of which branch of government is the Speaker of the House a part? _____Executive

 _____Legislative

 _____Judicial

 32. Capital punishment is the giving of a death sentence.

 _____True _____False

 33. In case the President is unable to perform the duties of his office, who assumes them? ___________________________________________________________________

 34. "Involuntary servitude" is permitted in the U.S. upon conviction of a crime.

 _____True _____False

 35. If a state is a party to a case, the Constitution provides that original jurisdiction shall be in ______________________________________________________________________.

 36. Congress passes laws regulating cases which are included in those over which the U.S. Supreme Court has ____________________________________________ jurisdiction.

 37. Which of the following is a right guaranteed by the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution.

 _____Public Housing

 _____Education

 _____Voting

 _____Trial by Jury

 38. The Legislatures of the states decide how presidential electors may be chosen.

 _____True _____False

 39. If it were proposed to join Alabama and Mississippi to form one state, what groups would have to vote approval in order for this to be done? ________________________________________________________________________

 40. The Vice President presides over ____________________________________________.

 41. The Constitution limits the size of the District of Columbia to ______________________________________________________________________.

 42. The only laws which can be passed to apply to an area in a federal arsenal are those passed by ___________________________________________ provided consent for the purchase of the land is given by the _________________________________________.

 43. In which document or writing is the "Bill of Rights" found? ______________________.

 44. Of which branch of government is a Supreme Court justice a part?

 _____Executive

 _____Legislative

 _____Judicial

 45. If no person receives a majority of the electoral votes, the Vice President is chosen by the

 Senate. _____True _____False

 46. Name two things which the states are forbidden to do by the U.S. Constitution. ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________

 47. If election of the President becomes the duty of the U.S. House of Representatives and it fails to act, who becomes President and when? _______________________________________________________________________

 48. How many votes must a person receive in order to become President if the election is decided by the U.S. House of Representatives? _______________________________

 49. How many states were required to approve the original Constitution in order for it to be in effect? ______________________________________________________________

 50. Check the offenses which, if you are convicted of them, disqualify you for voting:

 _____Murder

 _____Issuing worthless checks

 _____Petty larceny

 _____Manufacturing whiskey

 51. The Congress decides in what manner states elect presidential electors.

 _____True _____False

 52. Name two of the purposes of the U.S. Constitution. _________________________________________________________________________

 53. Congress is composed of __________________________________________________.

 54. All legislative powers granted in the U.S. Constitution may legally be used only by ______________________________________________________________________.

 55. The population census is required to be made very _____ years.

 56. Impeachments of U.S. officials are tried by ___________________________________.

 57. If an effort to impeach the President of the U.S. is made, who presides at the trial? _____________________________________________________________________

 58. On the impeachment of the chief justice of the Supreme Court of the U.S., who tries the case? ________________________________________________________________

 59. Money is coined by order of:

 _____U.S. Congress

 _____The President's Cabinet

 _____State Legislatures

 60. Persons elected to cast a state's vote for U.S. President and Vice President are called presidential _________________________________________________________.

 61. Name one power which is exclusively legislative and is mentioned in one of the parts of the U.S. Constitution above______________________________________________.

 62. If a person flees from justice into another state, who has authority to ask for his return? _____________________________________________________________________

 63. Whose duty is it to keep Congress informed of the state of the union? _____________________________________________________________________

 64. If the two houses of Congress cannot agree on adjournment, who sets the time? _____________________________________________________________________

 65. When presidential electors meet to cast ballots for President, must all electors in a state vote for the same person for President or can they vote for different persons if they so choose? _____________________________________________________________________

 66. After the presidential electors have voted, to whom do they send the count of their votes? _____________________________________________________________________

 67. The power to declare war is vested in ________________________________________.

 68. Any power and rights not given to the U.S. or prohibited to the states by the U.S. Constitution are specified as belonging to whom? ______________________________

Here are the answers;

1. Trial by Jury only

 2. False (every 10 years)

 3. Habeas Corpus (immediate presentation of charges); lawyer; speedy trial.

 4. January 3

 5. January 20

 6. Proposed change, as in a Constitution

 7. Life (with good behavior)

 8. Nine

 9. Yes

 10. Affirm

 11. 35

 12. In God We Trust

 13. False

 14. U.S. Constitution

 15. The governor

 16. Six

 17. Two

 18. Executive

 19. Congress

 20. Population (as determined by census) less untaxed Indians

 21. Cruel and unusual

 22. True

 23. State and local

 24. Russia

 25. Criminal

 26. False

 27. Militia

 28. House of Representatives, Senate

 29. House of Representatives

 30. Virginia

 31. Legislative

 32. True

 33. The Vice President

 34. True

 35. The Supreme Court

 36. Co-appellate

 37. Trial by Jury

 38. True

 39. Congress and the legislatures of both states

 40. The Senate

 41. 10 miles square

 42. Congress; state legislatures

 43. Constitution

 44. Judicial

 45. True

 46. Coin money; make treaties

 47. The Vice President, until the House acts

 48. 26

 49. 9

 50. Murder

 51. False

 52. (Preamble statements) "to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity."

 53. House of Representatives and Senate

 54. Congress

 55. 10

 56. The Senate

 57. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court

 58. The Senate

 59. The U.S. Congress

 60. Electors

 61. Pass laws, coin money, declare war

 62. The Governor

 63. The President

 64. The President

 65. They can vote for different people

 66. Vice President (President of the Senate)

 67. Congress 

 68. The states; the people

Little John and the Chickens

Johnny was a strange little boy. Even his parents were a bit puzzled by him. He grew up in a small backwoods area where white people were almost never seen. This was the era of Apartheid and bullwhips in South Africa. He got “religion” at a young age and would preach to the hens in the henhouse as he tended to his chores. He stuttered while he spoke. He even disapproved of his father’s farm work because it was interfering with God’s plan.

As a young teen he was given an opportunity to learn with a church volunteer who was visiting the area. Although he stuttered and stammered; and most people, including his parents; thought that he was wasting his time; this woman saw something in the boy. She encouraged him to go further.

A few more years passed by and that woman became involved in legal difficulties. The laws of that time and place did not allow his people to learn to read and write. In many churches the local authorities allowed only 1 copy of the Bible. And, they actually came around to check.

With only 1 book it would be almost impossible to teach people to read. This restriction was one of the many factors which gave way to “lining”; a practice common to his people; whereby the Pastor would read, or sing a line; and then the congregation would repeat it.

When the authorities couldn’t stop the woman from teaching they closed the church and sent her to jail for “moonshining” after they found 1 bottle of beer. Then they confiscated the building, tore it down and sold the church property. Little Johnny, a teenager by this time, was affected greatly by this whole turn of events. And all the while the racial tension in South Africa grew ever worse.

You might say that these events informed the person who Johnny would ultimately become. You see, that little boy; Johnny; was John Lewis, future activist and Congressman. He can be seen in the above photo. He is the one being attacked by the dog on March 7^th, 1965 during the Selma-Montgomery march for the right to vote.

You see, all that befell Johnny took place; not in South Africa under Apartheid; but here at home in the United States of America. And the sacrifices made by Mr. Lewis and thousands of other brave men and ensured that later generations would have the right to be heard in the voting booth.

As for the woman; the one who was arrested and jailed for “moonshining”; that was Septima Clark, of the Highland Folk School. Now, fifty years later, the rights which these 2 fought for; in the form of the Voting Rights Act; are under attack by people who would have you believe that the need for these protections has passed. Don’t believe that for a second. The new battle for Civil Rights will not be about color. The new battle will be about economics.

"An Idea Whose Time Has Come" by Todd S. Purdum (2014)

With the Civil Rights Act of 1964 currently under fire by Conservatives, this book comes at a crucial time in our country. With a skillful hand author Todd S. Purdum takes a good look back at just how hard it was to get the legislation passed in the first place; and thereby exposing the risks to be run should we let it be overturned.

Think of a life; in which your legal rights as we know them today; were suddenly altered. What if local laws trumped federal laws whenever you left the Interstates? The W.C. Fields line from “My Little Chickadee” comes to mind. As he is being led off to his own hanging, our wayward hero is heard to cry “I’m new in town, where can I purchase a Book of the Rules?” This may seem absurd on its face, but it’s not too far from the reality which would set in should the Civil Rights Act ever be repealed.

At the time that the Act was made into law, there were sections of our country; not just in the South; where people of color, read that as non-white or “different”, could not obtain a hotel room for the night, or even sit in a restaurant to eat. The hotel maids that touched the sheets of the white patrons were black. The cooks in the restaurants were black. It was an absurd embarrassment. At the time we were engaged in a Cold War with the Soviets, and having a hard time claiming the moral high ground against a backdrop of racial discrimination.

The author draws upon the best writings, and writers, of the Civil Rights chroniclers and then adds to their perspectives of life “in the forefront” by taking a hard look at the people who were actually involved behind the scenes in the legislative process. (The bibliography of this book could serve as a syllabus for a complete course on the history of the Civil Rights Movement.)

After the Freedom Riders; after Selma; there was still no legal basis for an end to Jim Crow in the South until it was codified into law. This book is the story of that end of the Civil Rights struggle. With a colorful cast of characters; every bit as varied, and sometimes flawed; as their counterparts in the front lines were, this book will have you recalling all of the political figures you remember from the news growing up in the 1960’s.

There are President’s Kennedy and Johnson; both struggling against the winds of change to secure the rights of all Americans to vote. There are the Senators; ranging from Humphrey to Dirksen and Thurmond; with one of the longest filibusters in our history as the Senate belatedly comes together to pass a bi-partisan Civil Rights bill. There are enough characters in here to fill a novel; with the difference being that these people actually lived and changed lives in the bargain.

The real difference between this book and the many others concerning the Civil Rights Era is that this book concentrates on what was happening in Washington, D.C. at the time of the protests. While the protests may have been the catalyst for change; without new laws to back up those changes, there is no telling what the fate of the movement would have been. And the story of the wrangling, and the deal making that went into getting the bill passed is every bit as exciting; and at times infuriating; as the actual struggle on the ground was.

Mr. Purdum has taken all of the available information of the Civil Rights Struggle and  written a newer, more concise history of the Civil Rights Act; one which will be appreciated by readers who were not alive at the time these events occurred.

There are very important lessons to be learned from this book; the most important of which is just how hard it was to get this law passed in the first place. And that lesson calls to mind a very important question; why would anyone want to do away with the Civil Rights Act? Bear in mind that the next time this battle is waged it will be more about economics than color.

"Down to the Crossroads" by Aram Goudsouzian (2014)

Author Aram Goudsouzian explores the march which changed the direction of the Civil Rights Movement in America. Up until the “March Against Fear” in Mississippi in 1966, African-Americans were patiently protesting, in a non-violent fashion, the injustices of the past 100 years since the end of the Civil War and slavery.

But when a lone white man shot and wounded James Meredith; the first African-American to enter the University of Mississippi in 1962, he set off a chain reaction which brought everyone under the umbrella of the Civil Rights Movement to descend on Mississippi in a show of unity. At the time some whites even accused the “movement” of having orchestrated the shooting to drum up national support. I’m not kidding. They actually said that; even as far away as New York.

James Meredith had begun what was essentially a one man march from Memphis, Tennessee to Jackson, Mississippi when he was shot on the 2^nd day, just after entering Mississippi. The assailant merely stood in the road waiting for him and announced that he was looking for James Meredith and didn't want any trouble with anyone else. When Meredith stepped forward and identified himself, he was shot.

The whole spectacle was bizarre. They say that a picture is worth a thousand words, but the iconic photograph of Mr. Meredith being shot does not do justice to what had just happened. Meredith, being trailed by the media and the State Police, was walking along in broad daylight when he was shot by a man who did not even try to get away after the shooting. His only concern was to ask if Meredith was dead. He was visibly disappointed when he was informed that Meredith was still alive. I have never seen such hatred, either before this incident, or since.

In the town of Greenwood the police station boasted a plague dedicated to “Tiger” the police dog who had taken a bite out of several demonstrators in 1963. The animal was a local celebrity.

The main point of this book is to chronicle the change that the attempted assassin’s bullet had upon the Civil Rights Movement as a whole. Within hours of the shooting, members from every sect of the Movement came forward to lend a hand in completing the March which Mr. Meredith had begun. This was also the march which brought the Vietnam War to the forefront of the Civil Rights Movement. With African-Americans dying in disproportionate numbers in that conflict, they had a big stake. As remarked by Vincent Young, a bus driver from Brooklyn, “No Viet Cong ever called me a nigger.”

Joined by Martin Luther King and his troupe, the march also attracted Stokely Carmichael and his group, SNCC. This was the birth of the Black Power movement; within just a few days that slogan would become a household word. And, who you were and where you lived would come to inform the meaning of those words.

To the marchers in Mississippi it meant getting the vote and respect; to the people living in the ghettos it meant exactly what it said; Black Power. They would begin to exert economic power in their neighborhoods, buying from African-American merchants only. This kind of puzzled white people because to them it represented nothing short of the discrimination which African-Americans were fighting against themselves.

Martin Luther King and Stokely Carmichael were not the bitter rivals that history would have us believe. The older man saw in Carmichael something of himself 10 years earlier during the Montgomery Bus Boycott. His only real concern was that the rhetoric of Black Power would do harm to everything which had been accomplished up until that point. For Carmichael’s part, he didn’t want to distance himself too far from King, since doing so would mean losing the support of the press, which was solidly behind the older man.

Local Mississippians lamented the march as the work of outsiders coming to foment trouble. This ignores the fact that people had to come from all over the country precisely because the locals were afraid to march. They stood to lose their jobs, their homes, and even their lives. The African-American was so cowed by fear that in the town of Grenada the local blacks turned in anyone who even spoke of civil rights, ensuring their own continued inequality. Can you even imagine being that “beat down” in spirit? I can’t. Can you imagine doing that to someone else? (Fill in your own response here.)

During the march a local man named Ben Chester White was shot and killed by 3 local men whom he knew well. They called themselves the Cottonmouth Gang, and simply went by his house and asked him to help them look for their dog. He came willingly, as he had always obeyed white men without question. They drove him to a nearby bridge and shot him with 2 shotguns multiple times, disposing of his tattered corpse in the river.

Mr. Goudsouzian has left no stone unturned in this riveting portrait of the march itself, as well as the movement as a whole. He carefully chronicles the changes which were taking place in the movement at the time, as African-Americans began to act on their unwillingness to wait patiently any longer for something that was theirs to begin with.

The March against Fear was a pivotal moment in a time filled with moments which would all add up to a big change in America as regards Civil Rights. Although almost 50 years have gone by since the passage of the Voting Rights Act in 1965, the job is not done. Even as I write this; in a country with an African-American President; there are still people who want to roll back that historic law, along with all of the gains made by the Civil Rights Movement in all of its diverse forms.

From the NAACP to SNCC and even the Black Panthers Party, all of these groups have contributed to change. Without any one of them in the mix it is doubtful that the Movement would have remained cohesive after 1968, when Martin Luther King was murdered. It’s important to remember that. Diversity within the Movement is precisely what saved it in the long run.

One of the most ironic moments in the book occurs when Mississippi Highway Patrolman Fred Ogg remarks; at the end of a long day; “I’m just about overcome.” 

Rolling Back Voting Rights - Why?

Have you been wondering about the recent push in several states to roll back the Voting Rights Act of 1965? If not, you should be. Why on earth would anyone support taking away a right under the guise of its not being needed anymore? You have to wonder. Of course, there is an answer, and it’s not Voter Fraud. Let’s examine the history of why the Voting Rights Act was necessary in the first place.

On the surface it would seem to be all about the Right to Vote; and there is some merit in that thought. But the purpose; the need; for the Voting Rights Act went much deeper and exposed the more sinister forces against which African-Americans of the 1960’s were up against.

Racial Injustice was endemic in the South of 50 years ago. The worst place was in Mississippi, with the other Southern “Jim Crow” states coming in at a close second. The courts were manned by white judges and the jury pools were all lily white. No blacks need apply. As a matter of fact, since they could not vote, they weren’t even on the list for selection to serve on a jury. This meant that an African-American of the time would never face a jury of his peers, and therefore never receive equal justice under the law.

And that, in a nutshell, is what the current hullabaloo is really all about. Not the vote, but the administration of equal Justice in America. If allowed, the Conservative forces would have the Voting Rights Act repealed under the fiction that it is no longer necessary. But, don’t buy into it.

The truth is easy to see, and just as easy to manipulate. But, ask yourself these questions. If, as the Conservatives wish, the Act is repealed, what will be the effect upon the composition of jury pools in America in a few short years, as people find themselves falling off of the Voter Registration Rolls? What type of jury will you be standing before? Will they all look and think as you do? Or, will they be composed of people who are all different than you? And finally, would you be happy with that situation for yourself?

A lot of people gave a lot of time, pain and suffering to secure the right to vote for everyone. The photo above is evidence of that struggle. Those are Alabama State Troopers in action on Bloody Sunday; March 7, 1965 during the march from Selma to Montgomery. All of the people arrested that day stood before white judges and juries. How do you think that worked out for them?

So, don’t let the knee jerk slogans of Conservative politicos and the hidden agendas of bigots fool you with this one. It’s not just about the Vote; it’s about the fair Administration of Justice in the Courts. The new restrictions will affect the elderly and the working poor in a disproportionate manner. If you are an hourly worker you will be less likely to vote on Voting Day, and they will have cut back on early voting, making it even harder to do so.

The struggle to achieve these rights is not about race anymore; it's about the war between the rich and poor in America today. And that war parallels the fight of the Civil Rights Era. In the end, remember, the next ethnic group in that photo above could be yours.

Martin Luther King and Malcolm X

Today is Martin Luther King Jr.'s birthday. It will be celebrated tomorrow with school closings and a bank holiday. I have always wondered how Martin Luther King would have felt about that. Originally I had planned on running the iconic "I Have A Dream" speech to commemorate the day.

But then I started listening to some of his other speeches, some of which I remember from when they were given. I finally chose the one above to illustrate the point that, in spite of Martin Luther King's rhetoric, he was not that far from the beliefs of Malcolm X, who is often perceived to be the antithesis to Mr. King concerning the methods necessary to bring about a change in Civil Rights. They were closer than you might think, or have been taught.

Martin Luther King has gone down in history as the non-violent leader of the Civil Rights Era, while Malcolm X has secured his place in history, based only upon his early beliefs in the violent overthrow of "whitey". This is a simplistic and uninformed view of both men.

While Mr. King is known for his non-violence, he is often short changed when it comes to acknowledging the demands he made from his own people, just as Malcolm X did. Both men wanted equal treatment of the races. Both wanted to be respected as human beings. The difference was in their individual styles, and approaches, to the issue.

Martin Luther King wanted to be given equal rights, as if it was within the Provence of the State to do so. Malcolm X took these rights as God given, and was not about to beg for them.

But things change, and as Martin Luther King grew more frustrated with the slow pace of the movement, Malcolm X was growing spiritually. Returning from a pilgrimage to Mecca, Malcolm saw that he, along with thousands of other so-called Black Muslims, had been sold a false bill of goods by their leader Elijah Mohammed, the titular head of the Black Muslim movement. When Malcolm came back from Mecca he broke with that movement and began a church of his own, based upon his experiences in Mecca, which had given him intellectual growth. He began to understand that black separatism was not the answer.

Meanwhile, in a subtle reversal of roles, Martin Luther King had become angrier, and more politically active concerning the War in Vietnam, which he felt was being fought with a disproportionate number of young black men being drafted. In other words, he was becoming more polarized.

Malcolm, on the other hand, had been to Mecca, and for the first time he had seen Muslims of all colors. This experience softened his stance on the separation of the races, making him believe, for the first time, that only an unfettered dialogue on race could bridge the divide.

So, in essence, over a period of about 10 years, both sides began to see, and understand, the other side of the argument concerning racial disparity in America.

I hope that you will take the time today to listen to both of these video clips from You Tube. Listen carefully, beyond the catch phrases, and you will see that both of these extraordinary men basically stood for the same things; Dignity, Justice and Equality for all people.

Thoughts on the MLK Memorial.

I don't know which of the errors concerning the Martin Luther King monument, which was unveiled last weekend in Washington, D.C. troubles me more. Maybe it's the fact that it was outsourced to China, while I would have preferred a monument done by an American, not necessarily of African-American descent. Dr. King is often quoted on being judged by the content of character, rather than the color of one's skin. But the monument should have been done by an American, as the whole Civil Rights Era was so uniquely American in it's context.

Maybe it's the way the Chinese artists cast him in a formidable, and almost unnapproachable stance,which was so unlike the man himself. Or perhaps I was troubled by the way in which they mangled the quote used on the monument. In it's short, clipped version the words sound arrogant and full of self praise. They were anything but that.

On February 4th, 1968, while speaking at Ebenezer Baptist Chiurch, a mere 8 weeks before his murder, Dr. King spoke of what his eulogy would be like if he were to pass away before his work was complete. He did not wish to be remembered as a supreme leader, he wanted to be remembered as a man who stood up for what is right, and beat the drum in that cause. He spoke with resignation, as a man who was fully reconciled with his own mortality, his eyes were moist, and his voice filled with emotion when he spoke these words;

"Yes, if you want to say that I was a drum major, say that I was a drum major for justice. Say that I was a drum major for peace. I was a drum major for righteousness. And all of the other shallow things will not matter."

This is the quote as it appears on the side of the monument;

"I was a drum major for justice, peace and righteousness."

Maya Angelou said it best when she opined that the statue, along with it's truncated quotation, "minimizes the man."

"Hellhound On His Trail" by Hampton Sides

This is a gripping book, thoroughly researched and adamant in it's conclusion. Just one flaw. It doesn't wash clean. When all the assembled evidence is gathered and analyzed, the reader is still left with several glaring questions; where did an escaped convict get the money to buy a car, travel about using only cash for a year, seemingly stalking Dr. King, meticulously planning his murder using maps to mark his intended locations, only to leave those maps behind in an Atlanta rooming house, along with a $20 bill that would wind up being sequentially matched to the bills that James Earl Ray possessed?

Now, on with the review. If you have ever seen Alfred Hitchcock's masterpiece "North by Northwest", then you will understand the way that the various Intelligence organizations operated in the 1950's and 60's. The setting up of identities for ficticious persons, while having non-descript real people carrying out seemingly unrelated "tasks" was the preferred way to accomplish anything of note, without fear of the entire "chain" of seemingly unrelated events being discovered. Moreover, if it were discovered, it would seem to make no sense. This was the rationale behind the Kennedy Assassination, and most probably, given the painstaking research of this book, the same thing that drove the plot to kill Martin Luther King.

What makes this book so remarkable is that even as it sets out to prove that one lone man killed Martin Luther King, it fails. Along the way there are so many glaring holes in the tale that one has to agree with the New York Times editorial of July 1968, which basically said that if you believe this you're nuts.

This is a very well written, and gripping read, even if you don't buy the conclusion. Mr. Sides has written an accounting of James Earl Ray's 21,000 plus mile journey that rivals any work of fiction. The FBI, headed by J. Edgar Hoover, a man known well for his distatse of the slain Dr. King, is tasked with heading the Investigation, against his will. The Royal Canadian Mounted Police, along with New Scotland Yard, are prominently on display in their role to capture the assassin.

Some of the best portions of this book concern the American government and it's reaction to the assassination. Coming, as it did, within 5 years of President Kennedy's murder in Dallas, the country's leadership, under LBJ, was hard pressed to bring this case to a quick close. With many of the nation's cities already in flames, including Washington DC, and the Poor Peoples March set to begin in about 4 weeks, time was of the essence. It was also a Presidential election year.

Absent from this account is any mention of the deal that James Earl Ray made in accepting a 99 year prison sentence in lieu of a trial. This had to do with his father's escape from a mid-western prison some years earlier. James Earl Ray was offered a trial- but his father would be returned to prison. This is a rather important piece of the puzzle, that is left out of the book by the author.

Ask anyone about the trial of James Earl Ray - they'll tell you he was found guilty. In reality he accepted the sentence without trial. He then immediatley recanted his statement. So, there never was a trial, not until shortly before Mr. Ray's death in 1998, at which time he was attempting to prove his innocence. Even the King family asserts that James Earl Ray was not the killer. Here is a link to the letter that James Earl Ray wrote from prison concerning these facts;

http://www.catyoga.com/pages.htm

Whatever your view concerning the King assassination, this book is non-stop action and suspense. And that is a hard thing for an author to accomplish when the ending is already so well known.