01/31/02 (The Missing Peace)
I choose this site because it involved an interview with the first nine African American students that integrated Central High School.
I thought that The Civil Rights reading was good. One of the major things that caught my attention was the fact that they stressed this movement was run by “ordinary people”. I liked what Ernest Green had to say about his experience of being one of only nine African American sent to integrate Little Rock High School in 1957. He said, “We were all ordinary kids. You really do have the ability to do a lot more than either you’ve been told or you’ve been led to believe by your surroundings.” I just thought that this was cool because we learn in school about how great of leaders were in the Civil Rights Movement, but it is important that they were all ordinary people that strove to be their best and were concerned with justice and equality for all.
To comment also on the other chapter, I found it interesting to hear the take on how the Cold War may have been prevented. I know that Roosevelt’s death was set to happen by God’s plan and would not have been changed, but I was interested in what he had done in earlier times. Roosevelt had decided to let members of the anti-civil rights South to take Wallace off the vice president ticket and put in Truman. The reading said that southern politicians that hated Wallace’s idea of equal pay for equal work, and other ideas, convinced Roosevelt that Wallace’s ideas would cost votes and that is why he was removed. It just gets to me that they would be so selfish as to get someone off the ballot that could help the country, just because of a couple issues you don’t agree with. If we followed that same mentality now, who knows where we would be.
I choose this site because it involved an interview with the first nine African American students that integrated Central High School. It discussed their involvement and how they were chosen to be the first. I also liked the fact that they put at the bottom the names of the nine and what they went on to do. The reason I liked it was because it shows the people that thought nothing of them and that thought they were stupid, that they are as smart as any others and should be given the right to a good education.
Owing to it, you can learn about various legal claims made by black people. Besides, you can also get some info about a wide range of actions in the 50s,e.g. about the events in Montgomery.
found that piece of reading extremely fascinating. I would say that it was also
very inspiring, because it moved me in various ways.
of all, there are a few ideas I cannot agree with. I disagree with the idea that
it is easy to fight injustice if the majority acts against it. I think that the
situation of many African countries, which are controlled by one dictator, who
is supported only by an army and a small group of the most rich and influential,
proves my argument. It is incredibly difficult to stand up for your rights in
such circumstances, otherwise nowhere in the world people would be forced to
live in oppression on the daily basis.
thing I disagree with is the author's noteabout Poland and its civil rights
movement. Not many of Polish historians would share the opinion that it
what I like about the author is his belief in the effectiveness of peaceful
methods. I think that the example of Black people in the US, in contrast to the
Irish Catholics, can support the attitude for non-violence. Although violence
wasn't excluded from the Northern Ireland conflict, instead of solving it, it
only fueled the whole controversial issue.
I am sure that the majority of people is aware of all the terrible conditions of
black people in slavery. However, not many people realize how much they suffered
after the abolition. I think that the text makes you realize that their
situation, in some respects, did not improve. From my point of view, it even
worsened. Actually, black people faced
when they were finally freed, they entered a completely different reality. The
new world seemed so close, at hand, but it was not accessible for them.
I was really surprised with the great range of non-violent methods which black
people came up with. Sit-ins, bus boycotts and other actions proved how well
they were organised. Not only could they act together, but also prepare everyone
for any possible
I found a bit paradoxical was the fact that the movement was, if not initiated,
at least supported by the church, which a century before, was one of the best
tools in maintaining slavery and convincing people of its fairness.
thing that was surprising for me was King's rejection to unite SCLC with CORE.
In my opinion, such a decision revealed his lack of tolerance and
next fragment, which concerned the Cold War was interesting, too. It was strange
to read about the event form the perspective of an American author. What I'm not
used to, Poland was not mentioned in connection with it, although it played a
great role in it.
I was really surprised with the passage about supporting communism in the
States. I always considered the US to be homogenous in its attitude towards
regimes. I almost cannot believe that, among the influential, there were people
in that piece of reading you can find the origins of terrorism targeted at the
States. Having been involved in so many conficts and having used them for its
own interest, it is no surprise that the US made so many enemies almost on all
sorry but, again, I've forgotten to include the website address, which is
associated with my response and which I found very informative:
to it, you can learn about various legal claims made by black people. Besides,
you can also get some info about a wide range of acions in the 50s,e.g. about
the events in Montgomery.
is a website about the Rosenberg trial. What haunts me is that from what
I know about what happened there are some holes to the story and they may have
not been guilty. I just wonder if the threat of communism sent the government on
a witch hunt.
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/trudoc.htm This is the speech that Truman gave before congress about the threat of communism and what should be done to stop it from growing.
again I have some problems with this book. I wish that I could respond to the
section on the civil was, but alas it was not to be. And it may be for the best.
Now I have all new things to complain about. I just want to get one thing clear.
I am not a passifist but I am not violent. Given the choice I would opt for
peace. But if I felt that I had to I myself would go to war. I just wanted to
make that clear for future reference.
first thing I want to bring up is the sentence, "The civil rights movement
brought fundamental change by nonviolent direct action..." This is
something that I want to question. From what I know of human nature, I know that
all action toward changing the civil rights for Black Americans could not have
been nonviolent. I do understand that most of the actions toward civil rights
were nonviolent and I would have it no other way. But human nature will be human
nature and I believe that some people will act like caged animals when they are
oppressed, black or white. I just wanted to respond to the sentence and clarify
On page 223 the last philosophy of the nonviolent movement reads, " Non-cooperation with evil is a moral obligation." My question to this is, what is evil? Segregation? Rock music? Being "different"? (salem witch trials) The only reason that I bring this up is that people will have righteous reasons for every evil. Hitler said that God was on his side. Should we now believe that and cooperate with him or someone like him? And even you mentioned a joke about WWI when both France and Germany thought that God was on their side. So whose side should we fight for? Evil is something that is an opinion in many many cases. If we had a list of evil that had been outlined from God for every century it would have been a lot easier. Now we just have to question and not make statements that can be used by both sides.
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/rosenb/ROSENB.HTM is a website about the Rosenberg trial. I have been interested in this trial for a few years. When I hear something about it I always turn an ear. But what haunts me is that from what I know about what happened there are some holes to the story and they may have not been guilty. I just wonder if the threat of communism sent the government on a witch hunt.
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/trudoc.htm This is the speech that Truman gave before congress about the threat of communism and what should be done to stop it from growing. This speech was given on March 12, 1947. Only 4 years before the Rosenbergs were convicted.
Sorry this is late!!
www.archives.state.al.us/govs_list/g_wallac.html On George Wallace.
I read about the events during the times of the Civil Rights
the words of George Wallace stood out to me.
For myself, being the result of a racially-mixed marriage, I was
intrigued to learn as to why Wallace fought for segregation in the South.
Wallace was not initially racist. According
to a biography of his life, in 1958 he ran for the position of governor of
Alabama and had the support of the NAACP. I
was very surprised to learn this information.
our book by Junkhe and Hunter, I was under the impression that he was a staunch,
full-blown racist. The more I read
about him, the more I realized that he was a conforming racist.
By this I mean that he appeared to be racist in order to benefit his
political campaign and career. His
first attempt for governor failed so he decided to support segregation to gain
the votes of the majority of white southernors at that time.
is no surprise that with the votes on his side, he was finally
wanted the races to function like states. I
could not believe that his so-called theory on freedom still included
segregation. He treated racial
integration, especially amalgamation or racially-mixed marriages as a foreign or
wonder if deep down, George Wallace was in denial about his true feelings
towards racism. At the end of his
career, his coalition included black political orginizations and as he worked
for a more economically stable state, he gained a significant number of black
supporters. I believe that many
racists Southerners and even Northerners followed the beliefs of fellow
"white Americans" in order to get ahead politically, socially, and
National Security Council document 68.
focused more on the chapter on the Cold War.
This chapter seemed to
Here is the web site I mentioned before. All it is, is the NSC 68 document.
website I have chose is basically a timeline of the civil rights
website I have chose is basically a timeline of the civil rights
Back to top
Journal Postings home page Group C Journals Page LAS 301-01 home page
Questions? Comments? Email me