Back More
Salem Press

Table of Contents

Ethics: Questions & Morality of Human Actions, 3rd Edition

Civil Rights movement

by Charles C. Jackson

The Event: Historical movement dedicated to bringing substantive civil rights to all American citizens by dismantling legally sanctioned systems of racial prejudice in the United States.

Date: 1950s-1960s

Type of Ethics: Civil rights

Significance: The Civil Rights movement changed the status of race relations in the United States, especially between African Americans and whites, and formed a model for other struggles for equality during the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries.

The Civil Rights movement in the United States represents a broad and protracted struggle in the effort to establish constitutional liberties for African Americans and members of other historically disadvantaged groups. A liberal interpretation of the movement’s history suggests that it could be dated as far back as the Emancipation Proclamation of 1863.

Some scholars maintain that the Montgomery bus boycott of 1955 represents the genesis of the Civil Rights movement. Yet this assessment tends to ignore the contributions of many individual activists, such as W. E. B. Du Bois and A. Philip Randolph, and organizations such as the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and the National Urban League (NUL) that took place prior to 1955. These and other initiatives gave rise to countless efforts over the next twenty years or so by African Americans and their supporters.

History

The U.S. Supreme Court’s Brown v. Board of Education decision in 1954 augured a dramatic shift in the status of race relations in America. “Separate but equal” had been declared unconstitutional in education. The system of segregated education in the South was ordered to be dismantled.

The Brown decision did not go unchallenged. In 1956, the White Citizens Council of America was formed. Its expressed purpose was to provide “massive resistance” against the desegregation effort in the South. The organization was successful in pressuring school boards, business leaders, and politicians to maintain a hard line against the desegregation effort. In 1957, massive resistance emboldened Arkansas governor Orval Faubus to use the National Guard to prevent African American students from integrating Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas.

1963 march on Washington. By National Archives at College Park.

Ethics_p0530_1.tif

As the civil rights effort broadened in scope, so did the violence caused by some whites. Freedom riders were sometimes brutally beaten; peaceful demonstrators were frequently attacked by local police with dogs and blasted with high-pressure water hoses; some demonstrators were jailed for marching and sit-ins; and some civil rights leaders were physically abused, while others had their homes bombed.

The 1955 Montgomery bus boycott, however, appeared to have begun a spirit of social activism that could not be easily deterred. The refusal of Rosa Parks, an African American seamstress, to give up her seat to a white passenger sparked a protest that lasted more than a year, paralyzing the city buses. The significance of the bus boycott was that it kept the Supreme Court involved in the desegregation debate, gave national prominence to Martin Luther King, Jr., and demonstrated that direct action could bring about desired change.

The movement appeared to have gained momentum following the Montgomery bus boycott. Soon after, challenges to Jim Crow began to spring up in various places throughout the South. In Greensboro, North Carolina, in 1960, four African American college students sat at a lunch counter, challenging Woolworth’s policy of serving only white customers.

The sit-in became a powerful weapon of nonviolent direct action that was employed by the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE), the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC, pronounced “snick”), the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), and other nonviolent activist groups and organizations fighting discriminatory practices.

Also during this time, CORE began the “freedom rides,” while the SCLC began organizing a major voter rights drive (Voter Education Project), both in the South. All such efforts were met with resistance from whites who were determined to hold on to the advantages that racial discrimination afforded and to the traditions of segregation.

Some significant legislation supporting the civil rights effort was passed by Congress. The 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1965 Voting Rights Act are often viewed as the most important legislation of the period. Together, they enhanced the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the Constitution, guaranteeing equal protection of the law and the right to vote. Legislation did not, however, readily translate into a more open society. Frustration over the lack of opportunity for jobs, better housing, and greater educational opportunity resulted in a series of riots from 1965 to 1967. In 1968, the Kerner Commission (National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders) concluded that white racism was responsible for the conditions leading up to the riots.

Retrenchment

Some observers suggest that the Civil Rights movement began to wane during the late 1960s and early 1970s. There are indications that as the movement became more militant, whites were hard pressed to find common ground with some organizations. There are also indications that the Vietnam “antiwar” movement became the focus of attention, detracting from the civil rights effort. Still others suggest that the death of Martin Luther King, Jr., in 1968 deprived the movement of its most influential leader, causing disarray and abandonment by liberal whites. Others maintain that the Civil Rights movement never ended, but that it has experienced only moderate support from liberals and outright hostility from conservatives.

Despite the ups and downs of the struggle, the civil rights of all citizens have been enhanced by the efforts of African Americans and their supporters. Women have gained tremendously, as have other minority groups, such as Hispanics, Native Americans, Asian Americans, and gays and lesbians. The tactics and strategies employed by African Americans during the 1950s and 1960s became standard operating procedure for many activist groups.

Significant Organizations

The NAACP, founded in 1909 by African Americans and white liberals, assumed leadership in the civil rights struggle during the first half of the twentieth century. From its inception, the NAACP began the struggle to achieve legal redress in judicial systems around the country on behalf of African Americans. Throughout most of the twentieth century, the NAACP has fought for anti-lynching legislation, the fair administration of justice, voting rights for African Americans in the South, equal educational opportunity, and the ending of discriminatory practices in the workplace.

The NUL was founded in 1911. Although it is considered a proactive civil rights organization, it stood on the periphery of the civil rights struggle until about 1960. Prior to the 1960s, the Urban League concentrated almost exclusively on improving employment opportunities for African Americans migrating from the South.

CORE, founded in 1942, did not become actively involved in the Civil Rights movement until about 1961. It was one of the first civil rights organizations to employ the strategy of nonviolent direct action. It began utilizing the sit-in as a protest strategy following the initiation of the Journey of Reconciliation (freedom rides).

The SCLC was founded in 1957, under the leadership of the Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr., and often worked hand in hand with the NAACP. It grew out of an effort to consolidate and coordinate the activities of ministers and other civil rights activists in southern cities.

SNCC was organized by the SCLC and African American student leaders in 1960 to help guide anti-segregation activities in the South. It broke away from Martin Luther King, Jr., and the SCLC within a year, arguing that its tactics for achieving integration were too conservative. Over the years, as the leadership of SNCC became more militant, it began to exclude whites from the decision-making process. This militant posture culminated in the call for “Black Power” by SNCC in 1966.

Further Reading

1 

Blumberg, Rhoda L. Civil Rights: The 1960s Freedom Struggle. Rev. ed. Boston: Twayne, 1991.

2 

Bosmajian, Haig A., and Hamida Bosmajian. The Rhetoric of the Civil-Rights Movement. New York: Random House, 1969.

3 

D’Angelo, Raymond, comp. The American Civil Rights Movement: Readings and Interpretations. Guilford, Conn.: McGraw-Hill/ Dushkin, 2001.

4 

D’Emilio, John. The Civil Rights Struggle: Leaders in Profile. New York: Facts On File, 1979.

5 

Price, Steven D., comp. Civil Rights, 1967-68. Vol. 2. New York: Facts On File, 1973.

6 

Sobel, Lester A., ed. Civil Rights, 1960-66. New York: Facts On File, 1967.

See also: Brown v. Board of Education; Civil disobedience; Civil Rights Act of 1964; Civil rights and liberties; Commission on Civil Rights, U.S.; Congress of Racial Equality; Du Bois, W. E. B.; Jackson, Jesse; King, Martin Luther, Jr.; National Association for the Advancement of Colored People; Segregation

Citation Types

Type
Format
MLA 9th
Jackson, Charles C. "Civil Rights Movement." Ethics: Questions & Morality of Human Actions, 3rd Edition, edited by George Lucas & John K. Roth, Salem Press, 2019. Salem Online, online.salempress.com/articleDetails.do?articleName=Ethics_0373.
APA 7th
Jackson, C. C. (2019). Civil Rights movement. In G. Lucas & J. K. Roth (Eds.), Ethics: Questions & Morality of Human Actions, 3rd Edition. Salem Press. online.salempress.com.
CMOS 17th
Jackson, Charles C. "Civil Rights Movement." Edited by George Lucas & John K. Roth. Ethics: Questions & Morality of Human Actions, 3rd Edition. Hackensack: Salem Press, 2019. Accessed December 14, 2025. online.salempress.com.