# data[].attributes.headline
3. Social movements always start at the grassroots level (ordinary people).  Most often, these grassroots social movements are driven by young activists.  Why is this?  What are the advantages and what are the disadvantages of this?over the course of the movement?

# data[].attributes.subject
3. Social movements always start at the grassroots level (ordinary people).  Most often, these grassroots social movements are driven by young activists.  Why is this?  What are the advantages and what are the disadvantages of this?over the course of the movement?

# data[].attributes.body
Grassroot social movements are often driven by young activists as young people are the future. Oftentimes it is seen that younger people hold more modern political and social views that older generations do, as that grew up in a different time. This is why young activists tend to drive modern social movements. There happen to be several advantages as well as disadvantages to this. ONe advantage being that young people are the future. It is a positive thing to see many young people not afraid to fight for what they believe in. However, teh age of these activists could pose a problem as people tend to take youth and yoing adults not seriously. Many would be more likely to listen and agree with an older persson rather than a young person. Over the course of the Civil Rights Movements, this could pose danger, as many young activists could be severely injured or killed through violence. However, young activists have been able to keep the civil rights movement fighting for so many years.

KM

# data[].attributes.body
A form of segregation in which people are legally forced to separate amongst each other based upon factors such as in this case being skin color.

De Jure Segregation is not permitted in mondern life. However, in the past De Jure Segregation was present in schools, banks, movie theaters, grocery stores, and almost everywhere in between.

KM

# data[].attributes.body
A form of segregation in which groups of people seperate even if the law isn't requiring it. Examples being factors such as economic status or political differences.

In modern life De Facto Segregation is seen throughout society in several places. However, a larger population of black people are seen in certain neighborhoods. Despite the fact that deliberate racial segregation is prohibited in schools, this still leads to schools with a majority of black students.

KM

# data[].attributes.body
This is a form of racism deeply embedded as well as normalized within society. It can be seen hidden in laws or regulations within society.

Systemic racism is seen today in the form of police brutality. Black people are stereotyped as dangerous, especially at night, often wearing hoods. Police officers are more suspcious of a black person than they are a white person due to norms that make them think that black people are more dangerous, and less important in society than white people.

KM

# data[].attributes.body
The practice of refusing to respond to any actions with any acts of violence in any way possible, including acts of self defense.
In this modern world an example would be police officers using physical force to stop protests while the protesters stand there in peace without defending themselves or hurting others.

EC

# data[].attributes.body
A strategy to bring mainstream attention to unjust laws in which they intentionally violate the laws.
An example of this in the modern world would to purposely say the word gay in schools down in Florida to protest against the "no gay" law.

EC

# data[].attributes.body
This is the subconscious belief or preference to one group of people over another. People often have an implicit bias due to what they are comfortable with or more familiar with.

In today's society heterosexual people unknowingly favor other heterosexual people rather than people of other sexualities. This is not because they are unsupportive of the LGBTQ community. Instead it is because they are more familiar with heterosexual people. This is also seen in relation to weight. Fit/thinner people feel more comfortable with other fit/thin people over someone who is overweight because that is just what they feel more accustomed to.

KM

# data[].attributes.body
The strive for equal rights to things you were born with, such as social or economic opportunities.
A modern day example for civil rights would be the black lives matter movement.

EC

# data[].attributes.headline
14th Amendment (Equal Protection Clause)

# data[].attributes.subject
14th Amendment (Equal Protection Clause)

# data[].attributes.body
The 14th amendment states that no one should unalive any persons nor take away their right to liberty and property without any sort of law or due process.
A modern day example of the 14th amendment would be to take away the property of a rightfully convicted tax fraud felon.

EC

# data[].attributes.headline
Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s-1970s

# data[].attributes.subject
Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s-1970s

# data[].attributes.body
The main goal of the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s-1970s was to eliminate De Jure Segregation. That being a form of segregation in which people are legally forced to separate amongst each other based upon factors such as in this case being skin color. Segregation laws known as Jim Crow laws were enacted in which forced black people and white people to seperate from one another. They were forced to segregate everywhere from schools to theaters. The Civil Rights Movement attempted to eliminate De Jure Segregation through protests as there wasn't much else that they could do at the time.

KM

# data[].attributes.body
The main goal of the modern civil rights movement is to eliminate De Facto Segregation, systemic racism, and implicit bias. De Facto Segregation is a form of segregation in which groups of people seperate even if the law isn't requiring it. Systemic racism is racism seen embedded deeply in the laws and regulations in society. Implicit bias is a subconscious preference for one group of people over another. Even though De Jure Segregation is illegal, De Facto Segregation, Systemic racism, and implicit bias's are still highly present in modern society. It is often harder to see, as it is not as visible as De Jure Segregation would be. In the modern civil rights movement, people still contain to protest racism, however have also developed new ways to fight racism that they necessarily didn't use in the past. Nowadays people use social media platforms to speak out about what they believe in, as well as to educate others who may not even be aware of these forms of racism.

KM

# data[].attributes.body
In the year 1935 a riot broke out in Harlem, Manhattan because a teenage's theft of a penknife, along with underlying issues that enraged the people that included racial injustice, mistrust of the police and economic hardship. This riot broke out in retaliation against racism and segregation, it was to raise  awareness and try to end racism segregation as a total. In the year 2020 a large protest march lasting for multiple months, all over different regions of the United States, was for the Black Lives Matter movement. This movement is to fight against racism, discriminatory actions against people of color, and anti-black actions. The march was to fight for an end to systemic racism (amongst any other form of racism). Both or theses riots/marches were in favor of raising awareness and trying to put an end to racism whether is be segregation of systemic racism. The riots from the past, like the Harlem riot paved the way for riots/marches today, it helped to show what did and didn't work and gave example of what people should do today. Riots in the past were not entirely successful in achieving civil rights, however they paved the way for protests today. In modern life, the Black Lives Matter Movement fights for civil rights through protests. Protests are successful in the fight for civil rights, as it spreads awareness and draws attention to the issue of civil rights.

EC and KM

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Info Print

Cite

Feedback

Share

This article was most recently revised and updated by

Harlem race riot of 1935, a riot that occurred in the Manhattan neighbourhood of Harlem on March 19-20, 1935. It was precipitated by a teenager's theft of a penknife from a store and was fueled by economic hardship, racial injustice, and community mistrust of the police. It is sometimes considered the first modern American race riot.

The context

Once home to a number of New York's prominent families, Harlem by the early 1900s had become a major centre of African American culture. It provided the backdrop against which the Harlem Renaissance was set. Indeed, the race riot of 1935 is considered the terminating event of that cultural flowering.

By the 1930s African Americans had begun to make some strides toward equality-the first African American since Reconstruction had been elected to Congress; boycotts had resulted in opening up job opportunities for African Americans; and the Congress of Industrial Organizations had become the first union to admit blacks.

Despite those steps, however, racial inequality was still prevalent. The Great Depression had left the national economy in a shambles. Millions of people, of all ethnicities, were out of work. Further, African Americans continued to be the victims of discriminatory practices. They were often the first to be fired and the last to be hired. As homeowners they struggled with redlining policies, unfair rents, and falling property values.

Life in Harlem, as in many urban settings, was difficult during that period. The once-teeming nightclubs that had employed so many blacks closed, and thousands of Southern blacks, hoping to escape poverty and discrimination, settled in Harlem. To add to the residents' frustration, the New York City government generally neglected Harlem, so its streets, playgrounds, and public facilities were often the last on the list to be repaired.

The event

On March 19 Lino Rivera, a 16-year-old black Puerto Rican, was caught stealing a penknife from the S.H. Kress dime store at 256 West 125th Street (across from the Apollo Theater), and the owner called the police. By the time the officers arrived, a crowd had gathered outside the store. The storekeeper, afraid of what the crowd might do if the boy was arrested, asked police to let Rivera go. The officers agreed, and the boy left by the store's backdoor.

No one told the crowd what had happened, and soon rumours spread that the police had killed Rivera. More than 10,000 people took to the streets to protest the perceived police brutality. Black frustration exploded into rioting and the destruction of property. With the onset of looting, storekeepers tried to protect their property by posting such signs as "Black owned" and "We employ black people" in their windows. When the all-white police force arrived to attempt to regain control, the rioters fought them.

The riot continued through the night of March 19 and into the next day. When it ended, 125 people had been arrested, more than 100 people had been injured, and 3 individuals were dead-all of them black. Property damage to some 200 stores was in excess of $2 million.

Legacy

After the riot, New York City Mayor Fiorello La Guardia, who had been in office for slightly more than a year, appointed a biracial commission to investigate the "disturbance" of May 19. When the commission issued its report later that year, La Guardia suppressed it because it painted such a grim picture of conditions among black New Yorkers. Yet La Guardia remained popular with black leaders and voters because he had championed black causes and had included a small number of blacks in city government.

After the riot, the mayor worked to further expand the opportunities for blacks in city government as well as integrate city hospitals and improve sanitation, health care, and fire and police protection. Despite such attempts to improve conditions, La Guardia could do little to alleviate the long-term problems facing Harlem's residents.

Kathleen Kuiper, Senior Editor.

Manhattan, borough of New York City, coextensive with New York county, in southeastern New York state, U.S. The borough, mainly on Manhattan Island, spills over into the Marble Hill section on the mainland and includes a number of islets in the East River. It is bounded by the Hudson River...

Harlem, district of New York City, U.S., occupying a large part of northern Manhattan. Harlem as a neighbourhood has no fixed boundaries; it may generally be said to lie between 155th Street on the north, the East and Harlem rivers on the east, 96th Street (east of Central Park) and...

Harlem Renaissance, a blossoming ( c. 1918-37) of African American culture, particularly in the creative arts, and the most influential movement in African American literary history. Embracing literary, musical, theatrical, and visual arts, participants sought to reconceptualize "the Negro" apart from the white stereotypes that had influenced black peoples' relationship to...

date

March 19, 1935 - March 21, 1935

location

related topics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Harlem race riot of 1935 | United States history

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Harlem race riot of 1935, a riot that occurred in the Manhattan neighbourhood of Harlem on March 19-20, 1935. It was precipitated by a teenager's theft of a penknife from a store and was fueled by economic hardship, racial injustice, and community mistrust of the police. It is sometimes considered

# data[].attributes.headline
Civil Rights Activist From the 1950s-1970s

# data[].attributes.subject
Civil Rights Activist From the 1950s-1970s

# data[].attributes.body
Civil Rights Activist Julian Bond fought for civil rights in several ways. He was one of the original members of the SNCC. This a group that strongly contributed to the civil rights movement. They particpated in the Freedom Rides. This was a form of protest in which a group and white people and black people would ride together on buses in the attempt to fight segregation on buses. As a civil rights activist, Julian's main goals was to eliminate segregation in piblic places such as buses and lunch counters. However, Julian eventully realized tht the problem was bigger than he thought. He new he would have to do even more to get what he wanetd. Julian then proceeded to go door-to-door to citizens houses to converse about what they want the community to look like. Julian then used this information to fight for change in the civil rights movement.

KM

# data[].attributes.body
Civil Rights Activist, feminist, professor of law at UCLA and Columbia Law School, Kimberlé Crenshaw fights for civil rights everyday. A significant part of Kimberlés fight for civil rights includes voicing her own opinion to spread awareness on the issue. Kimberlé has spoken in the Ẅhy cant we wait campaigned, and has co-authored several books, including Black Girls Matter: Pushed Out, Overpoliced and Underprotected, and Say Her Name: Resisting Police Brutality Against Black Woman. She actively fights for civil rights through her own co-founded African American Policy Forum. This was created to  research several ways to enchance social inclusion. In addition, she has hosted workships all over the world, teching people about equality. Civil Rights Activists like Kimberlé are very important in the continuous fight for civil rights, as they constantly are spreading awareness in a peaceful way.

KM

# data[].attributes.body
Civil Rights Activist James Rucker has taken a modern approach to fighting for civil rights. His main goal is to use the internet as well as social media to spread awareness and fight for civil rights. Civil rights activists in the past would never have thought of using the internet as a way of fighting for equality. However, James Rucker has used modern technology in several ways. James has co-founded the most popular website regarding advocacy for black people. They have over 800,000 users on his website. In addition, James has co-founded the CEL. That is a incubator designed to encourage people to fight for what they believe in and for positive change in the civil rights movement. These are just one amongst the many ways in which James Rucker has used social media to create change. If others followed in James's footsteps, far more awareness would be spread regarding the civil rights movement.

KM

# data[].attributes.headline
5. What does “success” mean in the context of social change? To what extent was the Civil Rights Movement successful?

# data[].attributes.subject
5. What does “success” mean in the context of social change? To what extent was the Civil Rights Movement successful?

# data[].attributes.body
Many people assume success means complete accomplishment of a goal, especially in the civil rights movement. However, this is far from the truth. When fighting for something it is incredibly important to celebrate small success's and victories along the way as it will encourage one to reach their goals. Success doesn't have to be one large goal. Even small successes are important. The Civil Rights Movement was moderately successful. Although racism hasn't been eliminated entirely, there have been countlesss victories along the way. This may include voting rights for black people or laws prohibiting slavery and segregation. People of the past never could have imagined life without these things. However, the civil rights movement have successfully accomplished a lot, and continue to fight.

KM

# data[].attributes.body
The Birmingham Civil Rights national monument, located in Birmingham Alabama, is a large memorial shaped as two big walls with dogs coming out of the walls to showcase the dogs that were released during the Birmingham riots. These dogs were placed to remind the people walking through it of the fear that those dogs caused the rioters. It reminds people of the hardship that the Civil Right activists went through. This memorial nowadays gives modern day activist an insight into the past as to what people of then had to face and why they still strive for a better tomorrow.

EC

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Most Beautiful Civil Rights Monuments in America

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In honor of Martin Luther King Jr. Day, AD rounds up the most awe-inspiring tributes to the heroes of a harrowing period in our nation’s past

# data[].attributes.headline
Implicit Bias, Systemic Racism, and De Facto Segregation 

# data[].attributes.subject
Implicit Bias, Systemic Racism, and De Facto Segregation 

# data[].attributes.body
Amongst many of the things that prevent civil rights from being fully achieved is the presense of implicit bias's, systemic racism, and De Facto Segregation. Unlike De Jure Segregation that is easily seen, these forms of racism can sometimes be invisible. Implicit bias is a subconscious preference for a certain group over another. Systemic racism is a form of racism deeply embedded within the laws and regulations of society. De Facto Segregation is a form of segregation in which groups of people seperate even if the law isn't requiring it. "The second highest level of implicit racial preference was among whites tested for bias against blacks, with 48% of whites recorded as having a subconscious preference for other whites over blacks." The second being white people tested for bias against Asian people, with 50% of white people having a subconsciouss preference for white people over Asian people. It is highly difficult to eliminate something that many people don't even realize is there. However, with a continuous spread of awareness more people will begin to learn about this issue.

KM

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The study utilized Implicit Association Tests (IAT) to reveal "hidden bias" among whites, blacks, Asian Americans, and biracial black-white and biracial Asian-white adults. The IAT measures how long it takes for a participant to associate positive or negative words with a given term or image. For example, when someone is prompted with a Caucasian face, if he selects the word "good" significantly more quickly than when the same person is prompted with an Asian American face, he may have an implicit bias in favor of whites. Pew conducted two experiments: one experiment took whites, blacks, and biracial black-white adults, and tested implicit bias among each group in favor of either whites or blacks. The other experiment took, whites, Asian Americans, and biracial Asian-white adults, and tested bias in favor of either whites or Asians.

Bias Among Biracials

In the study, more biracial Asian-white adults than monoracial whites had some form of implicit racial bias. Only 22% of Asian-white biracials were free of racial preference, whereas 30% of whites had no racial preference between whites and Asians. Fewer Asian-white biracials displayed implicit bias when compared to Asians. Only 20% of Asian Americans did not exhibit any subconscious racial preference.

Implicit bias among Asians in the study is notable because it challenges the in-group/out-group theory of bias. The study found only a 4% margin of difference between the percentage of monoracial Asians who favored Asians and the percentage of monoracial Asians who favored Whites - 38% of Asians favored whites over Asians, while 42% of Asians favored other Asians over whites.

White-black biracials had higher total rates of implicit bias than monoracial blacks and whites. Only 23% of white-black biracial adults did not have an implicit racial preference between blacks and whites, whereas 27% percent of monoracial white adults and 26% of monoracial black adults had no implicit preference.

Bias in Favor of Whites

The highest level of implicit racial preference revealed in the entire study was among whites being tested for bias against Asian Americans, with 50% of whites tested in the study revealing a subconscious preference for other whites over Asians. Thirty percent of whites had no implicit bias, and 19% of whites had a subconscious preference for Asians.

The second highest level of implicit racial preference was among whites tested for bias against blacks, with 48% of whites recorded as having a subconscious preference for other whites over blacks. Twenty-seven percent of whites tested had no preference between whites and blacks, and 25% of whites preferred blacks.

A higher percentage of biracial black-white adults and biracial Asian-white adults displayed implicit bias in favor of whites, when compared to bias in favor of their respective minority group.

Effect of Politics, Education, Age

The study suggests that the frequency and magnitude of racial bias does not significantly differ by age, education level, or political party. Republicans and Democrats hold similar levels of implicit bias, the study suggests. And contrary to some hypotheses that younger generations will no longer be racist, the age of survey respondents had no significant effect on levels of implicit bias. Although some previous Pew studies have shown that millennials are more racially tolerant than older generation, the IAT tests imply otherwise.

Stanford professor Shanto Iyengar, a consultant to the Pew study, said measuring implicit racial bias rather than explicit bias reveals a much higher frequency of prejudice. Morin wrote, "The IAT is useful in detecting views that individuals may be reluctant to divulge to others or even to admit to themselves."

When asked how to dismantle these implicit biases, Morin told NBC News, "Simply knowing that you hold these biases is an important first step [in dismantling implicit bias]. It makes you think twice when making the hiring decision. That way, it keeps these biases in check." Morin continued, "I do not know if it's impossible to lose [biases], but it is certainly true from the literature that it's possible to contain them ... We aren't race neutral but maybe we're moving in that direction."
Pew conducted this study from February to April this year and had a sample size of around 2500 respondents who were fielded from the British polling site YouGov. Rich Morin said to examine these results critically, given potential biases in sampling. He noted that those who took the test did so voluntarily and that the study did not include people without internet access. For the purposes of the study, the "Asian" category included people of East and Southeast Asian ancestry, such as Chinese, Koreans, Vietnamese, etc. The study did not include people of South Asian descent (Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Sri Lankans, etc.).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Study Reveals Americans' Subconscious Racial Biases

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The study utilized Implicit Association Tests (IAT) to reveal "hidden bias" among whites, blacks, Asian Americans, and biracial black-white and biracial Asian-white adults. The IAT measures how long it takes for a participant to associate positive or negative words with a given term or image.

# data[].attributes.body
The civil rights act of 1964 was one of the main goals during the activist march to Washington. This act was to help ban all discrimination based on race, skin color, or religion. In 1964 president John F. Kennedy introduced the bill right before his passing, and after his passing Lyndon B. Johnson passed the civil rights act. Because of this act is it now illegal to use or do anything discriminatory against people say of color. This act and movement has helped to desegregate the United States, and continues to do so because without it racism would still be legal and the civil rights movement would not have had accomplished nearly as much as they set out to do.

EC

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Eyes on the Prize | Article

The Supreme Court Declares Bus Segregation Unconstitutional (1956)
After African Americans boycotted the Montgomery, Alabama bus system for over a year, the local bus company had agreed to desegregate its buses because it had lost so much revenue. The city and state, however, insisted that bus drivers continue to enforce Jim Crow laws. A Federal District Court then ruled that segregation on the buses was illegal. The Supreme Court affirmed that decision, Browder v. Gayle, in November 1956, handing NAACP lawyers a major victory. The following month, when the Supreme Court indicated that it would not hear an appeal of that decision, all avenues to delay bus integration had been exhausted. The next day, December 21, 1956, thousands of black riders were on the buses again - and sitting in any seats they chose. Yet the troubles did not end. Shots were fired at the buses and Rev. Ralph Abernathy's home and church were bombed. The success of the protests led the boycott leaders to form the Southern Christian Leadership Conference with another rising community leader, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., as its president.

The 1960 Presidential Election
The presidential election of 1960 was one of the closest in history. During the campaign, Republican Richard M. Nixon and Democrat John F. Kennedy mostly avoided civil rights issues, afraid to alienate Southern voters. In October of that year, civil rights leader Martin Luther King, Jr. was arrested at a sit-in in Atlanta. Word reached the Kennedy campaign and two aides, Harris Wofford and Sargent Shriver, arranged for the candidate to make a sympathetic call to King's wife, Coretta Scott King. Meanwhile, Robert Kennedy called the judge in the case.

"It's time for all of us to take off our Nixon button," Martin Luther King, Sr. said after the Kennedy brothers' show of support. Because state Democratic parties held a lock on the political process in the South, baseball great Jackie Robinson and other African Americans had been supporting the Republican candidate. Republicans had attracted African American votes since the days of Abraham Lincoln, emancipation, and the Fifteenth Amendment. Now that tradition of support vanished - Kennedy received 68 percent of the black vote and won the presidency.

The Desegregation of Interstate Travel (1960)
In the months following John F. Kennedy's inauguration, civil rights activists were disappointed that the president did not introduce any new legislation on the issue. However, the Supreme Court had issued a ruling in December 1960 that interstate buses and bus terminals were required to integrate. This legal development inspired members of the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE) to ride Greyhound buses from Washington, D.C. to New Orleans, Louisiana. The black and white volunteers, known as Freedom Riders, would find out whether the law would be enforced in the land of Jim Crow. CORE director James Farmer recalled, "What we had to do was to make it more dangerous politically for the federal government not to enforce federal law than it would be for them to enforce federal law... This was not civil disobedience really, because we would be merely doing what the Supreme Court said we had a right to do."

The Supreme Court Orders Ole Miss to Integrate (1962)
In 1954, in Brown v. Board of Education, the U.S. Supreme Court ordered the integration of public schools. The landmark decision ended an era of "separate but equal" treatment of African Americans that in practice had proven anything but equal. Yet Southern states defied the court's decision. In Mississippi, Medgar Evers and other African American applicants were denied admission to the University of Mississippi, known as Ole Miss. In January 1961, James Howard Meredith, a nine-year Air Force veteran and student at Jackson State College, applied for admission to Ole Miss. When his application was returned, he took his case to court with the help of an NAACP legal team. The issue ended up before the Supreme Court, which ruled that Meredith should be allowed to attend the state-funded school. With the support of angry mobs of white Mississippians, Governor Ross Barnett did everything he could to prevent Meredith from enrolling, although his efforts were ultimately futile. Hatred directed toward Meredith as a symbol of integration would lead a white man from Memphis to shoot and wound the activist during his 1966 "march against fear."

The March on Washington (1963)
African American activist A. Philip Randolph had been fighting for equality since he founded a union, the Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters, in 1925. In 1941, he planned a march on Washington to demand jobs for African Americans in the booming wartime economy. That protest was called off after President Franklin D. Roosevelt agreed to ban discrimination by defense industries or government.

Two decades later, Randolph decided a march was required to speed the rate of change in the nation. President John F. Kennedy asked that the march be called off, afraid that it would hurt his civil rights bill. Faced with Randolph's determination, however, Kennedy endorsed the protest.

On August 28, 1963, a quarter of a million black and white people - more than twice as many as had been expected - marched to the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C. in a show of unity, racial harmony and support for the civil rights bill. Bob Dylan, Joan Baez and other folk singers entertained the crowd before John Lewis of SNCC and others made speeches. Civil rights leader Martin Luther King, Jr. gave one of his best known speeches, inspiring the assembled crowd with the words, "I have a dream."

Randolph also spoke: "Fellow Americans, we are gathered here in the largest demonstration in the history of this nation. Let the nation and the world know the meaning of our numbers. We are not a pressure group, we are not an organization or a group of organizations, we are not a mob. We are the advance guard of a massive moral revolution for jobs and freedom."

The Civil Rights Act of 1964
Support for a federal Civil Rights Act was one of the goals of the 1963 March on Washington. President John F. Kennedy had introduced the bill before his assassination. His successor, Lyndon B. Johnson, signed it into law on July 2, 1964. It achieved many of the aims of a Reconstruction-era law, the Civil Rights Act of 1875, which was passed but soon overturned.

The landmark 1964 act barred discrimination based on race, color, religion, or national origin in public facilities - such as restaurants, theaters, or hotels. Discrimination in hiring practices was also outlawed, and the act established the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to help enforce the law. Although the law attempted to legislate fair election practices, not all the ways used to deny blacks a vote could be covered; the Voting Rights Act of 1965 would be required to address this issue comprehensively.

The 1964 Presidential Election
In the presidential election of 1964, incumbent Democrat Lyndon B. Johnson soundly defeated Republican Barry Goldwater. After defeating the more progressive Nelson Rockefeller for the Republican nomination, Goldwater won electoral votes from only his home state of Arizona and the five states of the Deep South. Yet Goldwater's nomination marked a conservative shift within the party.

At the Democratic convention in Atlantic City that summer, the delegation from Mississippi had found itself with challengers of its own. The Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party sent black and white delegates to the convention to replace the delegation of the whites-only Mississippi Democratic Party. The MFDP worked the rules to their advantage, embarrassed President Johnson and then rejected his compromise of two "at large" seats. Nominally, the MFDP had failed, but televised proceedings of sharecroppers and field workers like Fannie Lou Hamer taking on the entrenched political forces inspired more people to become politically active.

Lyndon Johnson's "We Shall Overcome" speech
On March 15, 1965, just days after the "Bloody Sunday" confrontation in Selma, Alabama that shocked the nation, President Lyndon Johnson addressed a joint session of Congress and the American people in a nationally televised speech. He announced the voting rights legislation he would be introducing. "Their cause must be our cause, too," he said, referring to civil rights activists. "[A]ll of us... must overcome the crippling legacy of bigotry and injustice. And we shall overcome." In his closing words, the president invoked a rallying cry of the civil rights movement. An SCLC staffer watching the speech with Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr. remembered seeing a tear of joy run down the minister's cheek. Upon passage, Johnson's legislation would be known as the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

The Voting Rights Act of 1965
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 had one major flaw. It did not address all the legal and illegal methods whites had used to systematically deny blacks the right to vote in state and local elections. As legislation to amend this omission wound its way through Congress, Martin Luther King, Jr. led a march from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama, in March 1965. At its conclusion, activists presented Governor George Wallace with a petition asking him to remove obstacles to voter registration. Americans saw the heroes of the civil rights movement on the national news, and then heard about the Ku Klux Klan's murder of a white homemaker from Michigan named Viola Liuzzo who had volunteered for the cause. Support for the Voting Rights Act increased.

On August 6, 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the act into law with Alabama NAACP activist Rosa Parks by his side. Laying out the importance of the bill, Johnson said, "The vote is the most powerful instrument ever devised by man for breaking down injustice and destroying the terrible walls which imprison men because they are different from other men."

The Kerner Commission Report (1968)
Appointed by President Lyndon B. Johnson, a commission chaired by Governor Otto Kerner of Illinois explored the reasons behind the Detroit riots of 1967. The commission presented a report in February 1968. "Our nation is moving toward two societies, one black, one white - separate and unequal," the report said. "What white Americans have never fully understood - but what the Negro can never forget - is that...white institutions created [the ghetto], white institutions maintain it, and white society condones it."

Detroit had seemed immune to the race riots that overwhelmed dozens of American cities - after all, the local economy was excellent and black culture and commerce were thriving in the music of Motown. However, urban renewal projects appeared designed to sweep away black neighborhoods, complaints about Detroit police abuse were not addressed, and blacks found limits to career advancement in the auto industry. Following five days of riots during which military tanks rolled through the streets, 41 were dead, hundreds injured and thousands left homeless.

As soon as the Kerner Commission Report was published, controversy emerged when a host of the social science researchers who worked on the study protested that the report had eliminated their major finding: the riots were actually protests against racial oppression. The Kerner Commission's recommendations for reform included suggestions for economic empowerment that came with a large increase in the federal budget - but the president was unwilling to pay this price in the face of escalating military costs for the war in Vietnam.

The 1968 Election
Richard Nixon, the Republican candidate, won a three way race in the presidential election of 1968 against Independent George Wallace and Democrat Hubert Humphrey. It was a year of tumult. Major turmoil had shaken the Democratic Party that summer. Incumbent president Lyndon B. Johnson had decided not to run for reelection as Eugene McCarthy won many early delegates on an anti-war platform. Robert Kennedy entered the race as well and was campaigning in Indianapolis when news came that Martin Luther King, Jr. had been killed. Later that summer Kennedy won the California primary and was himself assassinated. The Democratic Party convention, held in Chicago that year, became a center of protests and riots as Mayor Richard Daley had the city police enforce curfews and brutally suppress protesters.

The Attica Prison Riot (1971)
In 1971, the Attica State Correctional Facility in upstate New York was overcrowded and the conditions for prisoners were inhumane. The majority of prisoners were minorities. A group of five prisoners representing the inmate population sent a letter to the authorities requesting reforms, including such humble changes as more frequent showers and more toilet paper. At the time, inmates were allotted one bucket of water a week as a "shower" and given only one bar of soap and one roll of toilet paper a month. The prisoners also asked for more visits and less censorship of their mail. The new commissioner of correctional services, Russell Oswald, asked for more time to make the reforms. Understanding Oswald's reply to be a delaying tactic, the prisoners took over the facility on September 9 and kept 40 guards as hostages. One guard, injured during the uprising, died in hospital. After four days of negotiations, state troopers and correctional officers took the prison back by force, killing ten hostages and twenty-nine inmates, and brutalized other inmates they had recaptured.

The National Black Political Convention (1972)
"Economic, cultural, and spiritual depression stalk Black America, and the price for survival often appears to be more than we are able to pay." This was the state of the union according to delegates to the first National Black Political Convention, March 10-12, 1972. The disparate group included elected officials and revolutionaries, integrationists and black nationalists, Baptists and Muslims (the widows of Martin Luther King, Jr. and Malcolm X - Coretta Scott King and Betty Shabazz - both attended). They met in Gary, Indiana, a majority black city where they were welcomed by a black mayor, Richard Hatcher. The one group that was excluded was whites (for that reason, Roy Wilkins of the NAACP, an organization that supported integration, criticized the meeting). Participants were buoyed by the spirit of possibility, and themes of unity and self-determination.

Delegates created a National Black Political Agenda with stated goals including the election of a proportionate number of black representatives to Congress, community control of schools, national health insurance, and the elimination of capital punishment. The news media fixed on the most controversial debates about the recognition of a Palestinian homeland and the use of busing to integrate schools, but for the most part the convention was united.

When published, the Agenda included a note addressing the notion that the process was idealistic: "At every critical moment of our struggle in America we have had to press relentlessly against the limits of the 'realistic' to create new realities for the life of our people. This is our challenge at Gary and beyond, for a new Black politics demands new vision, new hope and new definitions of the possible. Our time has come. These things are necessary. All things are possible."

The Federal Court Order to Integrate Boston Schools
During the 1950s and 1960s, Ruth Batson of the NAACP and other activists investigated Boston public schools and found tremendous differences and inequities in the staffing, supplying and maintenance of schools that served mostly white or mostly black students. They held meetings and rallies, organized freedom schools and independent busing programs, and successfully lobbied for state legislation to demonstrate the segregated and unequal nature of Boston schools. The Boston School Committee continued to reject the notion that the schools were essentially a segregated system and took steps to maintain that segregation. So the NAACP turned to the federal courts. In 1974, US District Court Judge W. Arthur Garrity, Jr. found the city of Boston guilty of unconstitutional and intentional segregation in its schools. The remedy proposed by the court was desegregation; the most controversial aspect of his plan was two-way busing - sending black students into predominantly white schools and white children into predominantly black schools.

The Bakke Case and the Status of Affirmative Action in 1978
From the late 1960s on, local governments and businesses attempted to level the economic playing field through a set of assistance programs for minorities known as Affirmative Action. Although opponents claimed that Affirmative Action gave minorities an unfair advantage, those in favor argued that the strategy reduced the towering advantages of patronage, exclusive experience and economic power that whites had enjoyed for centuries. In 1974, Allan Bakke, a white applicant to medical school, sued the University of California, claiming that he had suffered discrimination when less qualified minority students were given places in the medical school class that rejected him. The case went to the Supreme Court.

Bakke's lawyer argued that constitutional rights were meant for individuals and not for racial groups. In June 1978, the nine justices of the Supreme Court handed down six separate opinions. Some of the justices felt that race should not be used in the admissions process while others felt that race was a legitimate factor. The Court ruled that the school's application system was unconstitutional. However, the decision written by Associate Justice Lewis Powell also held that race could be used as a factor in admissions.

Because of the number of opinions in the case, the legal status of Affirmative Action continues to be debated. In 2003, the Supreme Court reaffirmed Powell's core holding that race could be considered in the admissions policy of the University of Michigan law school.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Milestones Of The Civil Rights Movement | American Experience | PBS

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Take a closer look at milestones that occured during the civil rights movement.

# data[].attributes.body
Implicit bias is a form of racism where you are not inadvertently racist but subconsciously racist. These things come from having years of misinformation such as the fact that black people have a higher pain tolerance than white people or stereotypes that every person of color is either a hoodlum or a robber. These stereotypes come from years of misinformation and rapid lies that spread all across the nation. Growing up in societies both then and now hearing these stereotypes, even though we know not everyone is bad, it's still put into out heads that every person of color is bad. With that we subconsciously think less of people of color and think the worst in them. This is why more people of color have been and still are more wrongfully convicted than white people. This issue is embedded into our society with roots so deep that it's nearly impossible to break. This issue from many years ago is still trying to be undone in today's society and is an ongoing issue that will take seemingly forever to break.

EC

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
There's a word for why we're all probably at least a little bit racist, even if we really don't want to be: Implicit bias.

It's a term that describes what's happening when, despite our best intentions and without our awareness, racial stereotypes and assumptions creep into our minds and affect our actions.

It seeps into just about every aspect of life, including areas like criminal justice that can have deadly consequences. Thirty years of neurology and cognitive psychology studies show that it influences the way we see and treat others, even when we're absolutely determined to be, and believe we are being, fair and objective.

That's why implicit racial bias has been called " the new diversity paradigm - one that recognizes the role that bias plays in the day-to-day functioning of all human beings."

Here's what you need to know about how it works, how it permeates American life from education to health to policing, and why, as Obama suggested, it can be even more insidious than the kinds of racism that are most familiar to us.

What is implicit bias?

The first step in understanding how implicitracial bias works is to understand the general concept of implicit bias, which can shape the way we think about lots of different qualities: age, gender, nationality, even height.

You can think of it generally as "thoughts about people you didn't know you had."

Two of the leading scholars in the field, Mahzarin Banaji and Anthony G. Greenwald, capture it well in the title of a book they wrote about the concept. It's called Blindspot: Hidden Biases of Good People.
You can think of it generally as "thoughts about people you didn't know you had"
What do these "blind spots" look like, and how do they shape behavior? Well, if you have a stereotype about Asian people that labels them as "foreign," implicit bias means you might have trouble associating even Asian-American people with speaking fluent English or being American citizens. If you've picked up on cultural cues that women are homemakers, it means you might have a harder time connecting women to powerful roles in business despite your conscious belief in gender equality.

The effects aren't always negative: if you have a positive attitude about your alma mater, implicit bias could mean you feel more at ease around someone who you know also graduated from there than you do around people who went to other schools.

But there are a couple of things that make implicit bias especially fascinating and potentially insidious:

First, since our thoughts often determine our actions, implicit bias can lead to discriminatory behaviors (more on those below). Second, it is impossible to detect without taking a test. In other words, you can't sit down and do introspection about your biases, and you can't just decide not to let them affect your attitudes and actions. Implicit bias lives deep in your subconscious, and it is largely separate from the biases you know you have.

How does implicit racial bias affect the way we think about race?

Implicit bias comes from the messages, attitudes, and stereotypes we pick up from the world we live in, and research over time and from different countries shows that it tends to line up with general social hierarchies.

Studies have shown that people have implicit biases that favor Germans over Turks (in Germany), Japanese over Koreans (in Japan), men over women (when it comes to career-related stereotypes), youth over elderly, and straight people over gay people.

So it's no surprise race is a prime area for implicit bias, and if you live in America, you can probably make an educated guess about some of the ways it tends to play out: among other things, there's a widespread preference for light-skinned over dark-skinned and white over black.

How is this related to regular old racism?

Implicit racial bias tends to work against the same groups that are the victims of the type of overt racism that you hear from white supremacists or the subtler bigotry of people who believe that racial minorities suffer from cultural pathology or who actively defend racial and ethnic stereotypes.

But it can also affect the minds of people who would say - honestly - that they are horrified by these types of attitudes. That's because the implicit associations we hold often don't align with our declared beliefs.
The implicit associations we hold often don't align with our declared beliefs
As Cynthia Lee, a professor at the George Washington University School of Law, has explained, "The social science research demonstrates that one does not have to be a racist with a capital R, or one who intentionally discriminates on the basis of race, to harbor implicit racial biases."

In all areas touched by implicit bias, including race, we tend to hold biases that favor the group that we belong to (what researchers call our "ingroup"). But research has shown that we can also hold implicit biases against our ingroup. So yes, white Americans generally have implicit biases against other races, but racial minorities can hold implicit biases against themselves, too. These results are rarely reflective of conscious attitudes.

How do you figure out whether you have implicit racial bias?

To evaluate implicit bias, scientists mostly use tests that measure reaction time and rely on the idea that if we closely associate two concepts in our minds, they'll be easy for us to sort together. And if we don't associate them, they'll be harder, and take more time, to sort together.

The most popular of these tests is the Implicit Association Test, or IAT. Anthony Greenwald and his colleagues invented it in the mid-1990s. An organization called Project Implicit, maintained by Greenwald, Mahzarin Banjai, and Brian Nosek, allows people to take it online. The test is basically a video game that you play on a computer, the object of which is to sort categories of pictures and words.

Here's an example of how it measures implicit racial bias: in the black-white race attitude test, test takers are asked to sort pictures of white and black people's faces, and positive and negative words, by pressing one of two keys on the keyboard. It turns out that most people are able to do this more quickly when the white faces and positive words are assigned to the same key (black faces and negative words are assigned to the other key), compared with when white faces and negative words are assigned to the same key (and black faces and positive words are assigned to the other key). The difference in the time it takes a user to respond in different situations is the measure of implicit bias. Try a test yourself at Project Implicit.
"[M]y hands were literally frozen when I had to associate black with good"
Here's how Banaji explained the way taking the IAT feels, in a 2013 interview with the Boston Globe:

"So when I took the test ... it was stunning for me to discover that my hands were literally frozen when I had to associate black with good. It's like I couldn't find the key on the keyboard, and doing the other version, the white-good, black-bad version was trivial. So the first thought that I had was: 'Something's wrong with this test.' Three seconds later, it sunk in that this test was telling me something so important that it would require a re-evaluation of my mind, not of the test."

How do the implicit racial biases the IAT reveals play out in reality?

Implicit racial bias can shape our beliefs and assumptions, color the way we treat other people, and even help decide what "feels true" for us when it comes to larger social and political issues.

Banaji explained that in one version of the IAT, researchers took famous Asian Americans such as Connie Chung, Michael Chang, and Kristi Yamaguchi and picked white foreigners such as Hugh Grant, Katarina Witt, and Gerard Depardieu, and asked test takers to connect them to American symbols and foreign symbols. They found it was easier to associate Hugh Grant with American symbols than Connie Chung. "That shows how deeply the category 'American' is white" in many people's minds, she said.
It was easier to associate Hugh Grant with American symbols than Connie Chung
She went on to explain what she said were the connotations of implicit bias when it comes to politics: "The reason I especially like that result is that in the first Obama election and since then, the issue has come up about these 'birthers,' and I think what we captured there was a little bit of a birther in all of us. I think this is where conscious attitudes matter. You and I say, 'I consciously know Barack Obama was born in this country, and I believe this because the evidence is there.' For some people who we might write off as the lunatic fringe, the association to be American is to be white. I can see for them that feels true."

What are the main areas in which implicit racial bias affects our everyday lives?

Implicit biases are pervasive. Researchers say everyone possesses them, even people like judges, who have avowed commitments to impartiality.

And they don't just stay tucked away in our unconscious until they're revealed by a computer game. They determine how we behave. There is increasing evidence that implicit bias - including implicit racial bias, which the IAT measures - predicts behavior in the real world. This behavior, of course, harms the people who are members of groups that are the subjects of negative implicit bias.

For example, research has shown that it can affect health care: in one study, despite self-reporting very little explicit bias, two out of three clinicians were found to harbor implicit bias against blacks and Latinos. And it turns out that this affected the care that black patients got: the stronger the clinicians' implicit bias against blacks relative to whites, the lower the black patients rated them on all four sub-scales of patient-centered care. It's also been connected to racial discrimination in hiring, performance evaluations, housing discrimination, and even perceptions of neighborhood crime.

How does implicit bias affect criminal justice?

Criminal justice - from arrests to police shootings to juries' perceptions of defendants - is such a rich area for implicit racial bias to operate that it deserves its own separate discussion.

To understand the gaping racial disparities in criminal justice, it helps to understand implicit bias. As Vox's German Lopez has explained:

Part of the problem is outright racism among some judges and cops, socioeconomic disparities that can drive more crime, and drug laws that disproportionately affect black Americans. But the other explanation is that cops, like everyone else, carry this implicit bias, which experts agree affects how they police people of different races. Since these are the people who carry out the initial steps of law enforcement, this bias might launch a cascading effect of racial disparities that starts with simple arrests and ends in prison or death.

These are a few ways implicit bias has been found to operate at every level of the criminal justice system:

Studies have shown that a person's level of implicit racial bias predicts the amount of shooter bias - meaning, how much easier it is to shoot African Americans compared with white people in a video game situation. And when researchers at the University of Colorado Boulder and California State University Northridge reviewed a decade of empirical evidence about cops and implicit bias in 2012, they found police officers seem to possess implicit bias that might make them more likely to shoot black suspects than white ones.

Writing for the Yale Law Journal in 2013, L. Song Richardson and Phillip Atiba Goff demonstrated that the triage practices by which defense attorneys accept their cases can be informed by implicit racial bias, and argued that the overwhelming case loads and time constraints create an environment in which implicit bias has an outsize influence on judgments.

In a 2013 Law and Society Review article, Casey Reynolds examined how jurors unknowingly enter the courtroom with a set of inferences informed by implicit bias that can determine how they decide what constitutes "reasonable doubt."

In a 2013 article for Court Review, Kimberly Papillon addressed the idea that well-meaning judges can have neurophysiological responses that activate implicit racial biases, concluding, "Assuming that judges can simply try harder to be fair, take more time when making decision, or utilize their egalitarian value systems to eliminate bias in their decision-making process is naïve. The solutions should be tailored to the neurophysiologic reactions that infuse bias into the sentencing decisions."

Can you get rid of implicit racial bias?

The good news is that there is some evidence that implicit biases, including implicit racial biases, are malleable.
There are studies that demonstrate that you can at least produce shifts
Several different approaches have shown promise for getting rid of implicit bias, generally, which all apply to implicit racial bias, too.

Counter-stereotypic training: People can be trained, using visual or verbal cues, to develop new associations that contrast with the stereotypes they hold.

Exposure to individuals who defy stereotypes: Being made aware of people who challenge the assumptions that fuel our biases - for example, male nurses, elderly athletes, or female scientists - has shown potential to decrease them.

Intergroup contact: Simply having contact with the people about whom you have bias can reduce it. But researchers have found the contact typically has to involve individuals sharing equal status and common goals, a cooperative rather than competitive environment, and the presence of support from authority figures, laws, or customs.

Education efforts aimed at raising awareness about implicit bias: The criminal justice and health-care realms especially have embraced this approach.

Taking the perspective of others: Considering contrasting viewpoints and recognizing multiple perspectives can reduce automatic implicit bias.

Mindfulness-meditation techniques: New research suggests that these can reduce implicit bias by short-circuiting negative associations.

While these methods are promising, implicit biases are really tough to shake. As Banaji told the Boston Globe, "I would say we should not be naïve about how easily we can change them. On the other hand, there are studies that demonstrate that you can at least produce shifts."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Implicit bias means we're all probably at least a little bit racist

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
There's a word for why we're all probably at least a little bit racist, even if we really don't want to be: Implicit bias. It's a term that describes what's happening when, despite our best intentions and without our awareness, racial stereotypes and assumptions creep into our minds and affect our actions.

# data[].attributes.body
Police brutality was present before the civil rights movement even began in the 1950s. Police brutality is the unneccessary abuse or violence imposed by the police, typically upon black people. Police officers are taught to assume black people are moore dangerous than black people. They are taught to become suspicious of a black person if they are simply doing things like walking at night or wearing a hood.  In 2019, 1140 police violence deaths (1080–1190) occurred in males and 53 (51–55) occurred in females. It is highly likely that several of these deaths were the direct fault of the police officer. Policy brutality was a significant part of many people's lives in the past, and continues to carry into modern day. On May 25, 2020, George Floyd was killed through a terrible case of police brutality. The civil rights movement swung into action after this horrible incident occured, hoping to prevent such a thing from occuring again.

KM

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Fatal police violence by race and state in the USA, 1980-2019: a network meta-regression

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We found that more than half of all deaths due to police violence that we estimated in the USA from 1980 to 2018 were unreported in the NVSS. Compounding this, we found substantial differences in the age-standardised mortality rate due to police violence over time and by racial and ethnic groups within the USA.