The Civil Rights Movement in Popular History

The Civil Rights Movement in Popular History

The popular history of the Civil Rights Movement as it is perceived in this country is an idealised one with the nonviolent methods of Martin Luther King holding the centrepiece. In reality, of course the history of Civil Rights in the USA is a much more complicated story that involves plenty of violence on all sides. Has this violent side of the Civil Rights Movement been ‘whitewashed’ and marginalised in popular history? To what extent would the Civil Rights been more or less successful without controversial groups like the Black Panthers, and the broader Black Power movement?

In current popular history, there is a divide in how Civil Rights progress was achieved. Either one was on the ‘good’ side of MLK and his nonviolent methods, or you were on the violent side of Malcolm X. In actuality, there was not such a significant divide between non-violent methods and violent ones; the relationship between the two was more fluid.[1] Instead, this alleged divide between MLK and Malcolm X could be better understood as political vs. cultural. The impact that Malcolm X left on the Civil Rights movement was cultural rather than political, his views that he preached put many black people in America back in touch with their heritage and raised the collective ‘self-esteem’ of the African-American community.[2] On the other hand, MLK’s legacy on the Civil Rights is perhaps better remembered because he had a more tangible effect in the form of legislation and lawsuits.

The Black Panthers were a manifestation of the views put forward by Malcolm X. It was a way for black people to help themselves in their own communities and to deter Police discrimination in black neighbourhoods. For example, the Black Panthers started numerous community programs like health clinics and free breakfast for children.[3] There was far more to the Black Panthers than violence, however it is undeniable that the Black Panthers did use violent methods. As the Black Panthers grew in membership, their violent methods became a help and hindrance to Civil Rights. They were a hindrance in that their polarizing methods turned off many potential white supporters from the Civil Rights movement. On the other hand, these methods facilitated the success of MLK’s nonviolent methods. After all, the violence of the Black Panthers was the alternative to nonviolence; this in turn made MLK’s demands seem much more agreeable since the alternative was much worse.[4]

The idealised popular history of Civil Rights ignores the crucial role of Malcolm X and the Black Power movement in rousing the African-American community. Malcolm X articulated ideas that attracted many black people to become actively involved in the Civil Rights movement. In addition, it is unlikely MLK would have been so successful without the militant Black Panthers acting as a worse substitute to MLK’s nonviolent movement. However, it is clear why the popular history of Civil Rights marginalises Malcolm X, since it is easier to make it seem as though nonviolence was solely responsible for Civil Rights rather than a combination of both nonviolence and the radical leftist Black Panthers.

Chris Kinslow

---

[1] A. Moody, Coming of Age in Mississippi (New York, Bantam Dell, 1968) Ch. 3

[2] J.H. Cone, Martin & Malcolm & America: A Dream or a Nightmare. (New York, Orbis Books, 1991) pp. 291-292

[3] J. Bloom, W.E. Martin Jr, Black against Empire: The History and Politics of the Black Panther Party. (Berkeley, University of California Press, 2012) pp. 179-180

[4] Ibid. pp. 122-123