Civil Rights in America

UN Declaration of Human Rights

Rise of Dictatorships to 1945

• the first half of the 20th Century saw the rise of several dictatorships where human rights were completely disregarded

• by the time the UN was formed some had ended (Germany, Italy, Japan) while some were firmly entrenched (Soviet Union)

• An intention of the UN was that governments that disregarded basic human rights would be held accountable for their actions

Australia’s Role

• Australia played a prominent role in the creation of the UN and the Declaration

• Dr Herb Evatt, as Foreign Minister, was Australia’s delegate to the formation conferences

• Evatt was a key proponent of human rights and the need for political freedom

• Australia, unfortunately, had failed to live up to the aims of the declaration in the areas of

  • treatment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People

  • the continuation of the White Australia Policy

Article 1

all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights

Success

• despite the nobility of the declaration, it has not prevented several instances of genocide reoccurring since 1948

• examples of this are Rwanda and Former Yugoslavia in the 1990s

• according to Amnesty International, half the world’s governments still imprison people solely because of their beliefs, race, gender or ethnic origin

• one-third of the world’s governments torture their prisoners

• the UN has a very mixed record of success and failures

• it has achieved a great deal in the areas of development, healthy, education, environment

• it has failed to stop conflict, terrorism, nuclear proliferation, abuse of human rights

• it is limited by its budget and is at the mercy of the respect paid to it by its members

Jim Crow Laws

United States in 1865

• in 1861 states that had slavery left the United States and established their own country

• this resulted in the Civil War which finished in 1865

• the northern states who did not have slavery defeated the southern states that wanted to keep slavery

• slavery was abolished in 1865 for the reunited United States of America

What were the Jim Crow Laws?

• in January 1865, the 13th amendment to the Constitution officially abolished slavery in the United States

• some states, mainly in the old south, began imposing restrictions and laws on African Americans

Jim Crow

• by 1900, laws that required that African Americans be segregated from whites were often referred to as ‘Jim Crow’

• this was believed to be a reference to a minstrel-show song, ‘Jump Jim Crow’

• it was a common phrase for African Americans

Laws

• “it shall be unlawful for a black person and white person to play together or in company with each other in any game of cards or dice, dominoes or checkers” - Birmingham, Alabama, 1930

• “marriages are void when one party is a white person and the other is possessed of one-eighth or more black, Japanese, or Chinese blood” - Nebraska, 1911

• “separate free schools shall be established for the education of children of African descent; and it shall be unlawful for any colored child to attend any white school, or any white child to attend a colored school” - Missouri, 1929

• “all railroads carrying passengers in the state (other than street railroads) shall provide equal but separate accommodations for the white and colored races, by providing two or more passenger cars for each passenger train, or by dividing the cars by a partition, so as to secure separate accommodations” - Tennessee, 1891

• “it shall be unlawful for any white prisoner to be handcuffed or otherwise chained or tied to a black person” - Arkansas, 1903

• “no colored barber shall serve as a barber to white women or girls” - Atlanta, Georgia, 1926

• any person… presenting for public acceptance or general information, arguments, or suggestions in favor of social equality of intermarriage between whites and black people, shall be guilty of a misdemeanour and subject to a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars or imprisonment not exceeding six months or both fine and imprisonment in the discretion of the court” - Mississippi, 1929

Brown vs Board of Education - 1954

Context

• in 1896, the supreme court ruled that as long as they were ‘equal’ that separate facilities (restaurants, theatres, restrooms, public schools) were legal for blacks and whites

• however, most black schools were inferior to white schools with poor resources and overcrowded classrooms

Change - Brown versus Board of Education

• in 1954 the US Supreme court ruled unanimously (9-0) that it was unconstitutional to have separate schools for black and white students

• the case began in 1951, when the public school district in Topeka Kansas, refused to enrol the daughter of local black resident Oliver Brown at the school closest to their home, instead requiring her to ride a bus to a black primary school further away

• the Browns filed a lawsuit in the US federal court against the Topeka Board of Education, alleging that its segregation policy was unconstitutional

• many state governments in the South ignored this ruling and kept black students out

• in cases like Little Rock, Arkansas, soldiers were used to protect black students entering schools that had previously only had white students

Little Rock Nine - 1957

• the supreme court did not specify how exactly schools should be integrated

• many schools in the south defied the judgment

• in Arkansas the state armed forces attempted to prevent Black students from attending high school in Little Rock in 1957

• President Eisenhower sent in the army to ensure the 9 students could enter ‘Central High School’

Significance of the Decision

• though the supreme court’s decision in Brown v. Board didn’t achieve school desegregation on its own, the ruling (and the resistance to it across the South) fuelled the civil rights movement

Rosa Parks and the Montgomery Bus Boycott

Rosa Parks

• rosa parks, a black woman, refused to sit at the back of the bus, as was required by law

• she was arrested and convicted of disorderly conduct

• black citizens boycotted all buses in Montgomery in protest

• eventually the bus companies stopped segregating buses because they were losing so much money - up to 80% of their normal revenue

• the US federal court ordered a de-segregation of the buses

Montgomery Bus Boycott December 1955

• following her arrest the Women’s Political Council (WPC) began handing out flyers calling for a boycott of the bus system

• 40 000 black bus riders, the majority of the city’s bus riders, boycotted the system on the first day

• the group demanded courtesy, the hiring of black drivers, and a first come, first seated policy

• black people walked to work or used car pools

• eventually the supreme court judged that segregation of buses was unconstitutional

Significance of Montgomery Bus Boycott

• Martin Luther King Jr emerged as a prominent national leader of the civil rights movement

• his view of nonviolent resistance becomes the approach of the civil rights movement throughout the 1960s

• it showed that this kind of protest could have severe financial consequences for a city

• the boycott brought national and international attention to the civil rights struggle in the United States

The End

• on December 20 1956, the order to integrate buses was served on Montgomery’s officials

• in the year of the boycott, the transit company reportedly lost $3,000,000 in income

• the city lost thousands of additional dollars in taxes. Montgomery retail merchants estimated their losses to be in the millions

The Freedom Rides of 1961

The Murder of Emmett Till

• in august 1955, 14 year old Chicagoan Emmett Till was visiting family in Mississippi and was kidnapped, brutally beaten, shot and dumped in the Tallahatchie River for allegedly whistling at a white woman

• two white men, J.W.Milam and Roy Bryant, were arrested for the murder and acquitted by an all-white jury

• they later boast about committing the murder in a Look magazine interview

May 4, 1961

• the first Freedom Ride, led by CORE director James Farmer, left Washington DC on May 4 1961

• the original interracial group of 7 blacks and 6 whites travelled south on two buses

• three journalists also accompanied the group

• their plan was to ride through virginia, north and south carolina, georgia, alabama and mississipi, ending with a rally in New Orleans on May 17 - the seventh anniversary of the Brown decision'

• the Freedom Riders’ tactics for their journey were to have at least one interracial pair siting in adjoining seats and at least one black Rider sitting up front, while the rest would sit scattered throughout the rest of the bus

• one rider would abide by the South’s segregation rules in order to avoid arrest and to contact CORE and arrange bail for those who were arrested

• the riders were all trained and committed to non-violent direct action. even if attacked, they would not respond with violence in self-defence

• the Freedom Ride met little resistance in the upper South unlike the first ‘Journey of Reconciliation’

• minor trouble was encountered in Virginia and North Carolina

Charlotte, NC - May 8-9, 1961

• in the first significant confrontation of the CORE freedom ride, Joseph Perkins is arrested for trespassing as he attempts to have his shoes shined at a whites-only shoeshine chair in Charlotte

• Perkins refuses to post bail and spends two nights in jail

• on May 10, Judge Howard B. Arbuckle finds Perkins innocent of the trespassing charge based on the precedent set in Boyton v. Virginia

Rock Hill, SC - May 10, 1961

• several white men attack a group of CORE freedom riders at the greyhound bus terminal on may 10 as they attempt to enter the whites only waiting room. John Lewis, Al Bigelow and Genevieve Hughes sustain injuries in the attack, which is broken up by the local police

Atlanta, GA - May 13-14, 1961

• the freedom riders arrive in Atlanta on May 13 and attend a reception with the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr

• they have high hopes that he might join them on the buses, perhaps becoming a freedom rider himself

• for safety reasons, King does not join them. He warns them of the pending danger, since they have been told that the Klan has ‘quite a welcome’ prepared for the Riders in Alabama

• despite the warning, the CORE freedom riders leave Atlanta on May 14, bound for Alabama

Anniston, AL - May 14, 1961

• on May 14, 1961, the freedom riders divide into 2 groups as they depart for Alabama. the buses left an hour apart from each other

• an angry mob of approximately 200 gather at the Greyhound bus terminal to protest the first bus as it arrives in Anniston on May 14

• the violent protesters smash windows, slash tires and threaten the Riders before local police escort the bus out of town

• the bus, followed by a long line of cars and trucks, is forced to pull over as the tires go flat

• the mob resumes its attack, throwing a firebomb through a broken window on the bus

• the riders escape but many suffer smoke inhalation and must be transported to a hospital

Leadership - Martin Luther King Junior and Malcolm X

Martin Luther King

• the most important civil rights figure

• provided the key leadership needed to unite the movement with his inspiring oratory

• commitment to non-violent protest methods ensured that the civil rights movement had ‘moral high ground’

• savvy politician who could speak easily with presidents

• knew the power of the media had and its ability to help the civil rights movement

Main Achievements of MLK

1948 - is ordained a baptist minister

1954 - becomes the pastor of dexter avenue baptist church in montgomery, alabama

1/12/1955 - civil rights activist Rosa Parks refuses to give up her seat on a bus to a white man, sparking the year-long Montgomery bus boycott

30/1/1956 - King’s house is bombed

1957 - the southern christian leadership conference is established, with King serving as president

1960 - King moves to Atlanta and becomes co-pastor of Ebenezer Baptist Church with his father

April 1963 - King is arrested for leading a march in Birmingham, Alabama. while in solitary confinement he writes an essay entitled ‘letter from birmingham jail’

28/8/1963 - during the march on Washington for jobs and freedom, King delivers his famous ‘I have a dream’ speech on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial

1963 - King is named Time magazine’s Man of the Year

2/7/1964 - King stands behind President Lyndon B Johnson as Johnson signs into law the Civil Rights Act of 1964

1964 - is awarded the Nobel Peace Prize

Malcolm X

• Malcolm (Little) X dropped his ‘slave name’ and converted to the Nation of Islam while serving time in jail for burglary and drugs

• became the Nation of Islam’s most famous disciple in 1952

Malcolm’s teachings:

• whites were to blame for the black man’s social problems

• black separatism: blacks should separate from white society. quit trying to act like the white man!

• African-Americans should have pride in their identity and culture

Ballots or Bullets

• Malcolm broke from Nation of Islam in March 1964 because of differences in strategy and doctrine

• in April 1964 Malcolm takes a pilgrimage to Mecca and learns that orthodox Muslims believe in equality of all races

• Malcolm returned to America and radically changes his teachings; it is ok to hate racism and injustice, but it is wrong to hate the white race

• after returning from Mecca, Malcolm begins to preach a new slogan: “Ballots or bullets”

• meaning: “if you and I don’t use the ballot, we’re going to be forced to use the bullet. so let us try the ballot”

• Malcolm X was assassinated at a public meeting on 21 February 1965

White Opposition

How did whites oppose civil rights?

• lynching and violence

  • lynching and other forms of racial violence were used to intimidate and control blacks, often with the support of white communities

• segregationist organisations

  • groups like the Ku Klux Klan openly advocated white supremacy and used terror tactics to oppose civil rights and racial equality

• white citizens’ councils

  • these organisations, founded in the 1950's, promoted white supremacy and sought to maintain segregation through economic and social pressure

• political opposition

  • many southern politicians, both democrats and some republicans, opposed federal civil rights legislation and used their influence to block reforms

• racially biased media

  • media outlets, particularly in the south, sometimes perpetuated racist stereotypes and portrayed civil rights activists in a negative light

• economic discrimination

  • discriminatory hiring practices, pay disparities, and limited job opportunities for blacks were widespread in many industries

• housing discrimination

  • blacks often faced restricted housing options due to discriminatory practices

• opposition to voting rights

  • measures such as literacy tests, poll taxes and other forms of voter suppression were used to stop blacks voting

• racial code words

  • some politicians and media used coded language to appeal to white voter’s racial biases without explicitly mentioning race

Civil Rights for Indigenous Australians

Protectionism (Paternalism)

• 1900s

• this policy was where the Australian government looked after Indigenous Australians like a father would look after his children

• as a result Indigenous Australians rely on a white Australians for their food and clothes and lost possession of their land and lost their traditional skills eg. hunting

Assimilation

• 1920s - 1970

• stolen generations

• in this policy, Aboriginal people were forced to adopt a European lifestyle and be like other Australians living in cities, going to school, living in a regular home etc

• this is the period when the stolen generations take place as the Australian government thought they would have a larger impact by educating Indigenous Australians while they are very young

Integration

• 1970 - 1992

• here Indigenous Australians were encouraged but not forced to live like other Europeans

• most Aboriginal people still felt they had to change their traditional lifestyle in order to progress

Self-determination

• 1992 - today

• from the early 1990s Aboriginal people had more choice to choose how they live

• they could choose between traditional or European lifestyles without any feeling of inferiority

Reconciliation

• 2001 - today

• together with self-determination the government has made an attempt to make up for all the wrongs done to indigenous Australians

• Kevin Rudd’s sorry speech was an example of this as is the upcoming Referendum on 14 October which will give a voice to Indigenous Australians in the government

Day of Mourning

• to mark australia day 1938, the 150th anniversary of white settlement, the Australian Aboriginal League and Aborigines Progressive Association decided on a day of action

• they refused to take part in re-enactments of Arthur Phillip’s landing

• they held a public meeting at the Australian Hall in Elizabeth Street

• the meeting heard that 150 years of misery had to be addressed by giving Indigenous Australians civil rights

• while this meeting took place, another 1 000 000 Australians gathered nearby to celebrate British settlement in 1788

• the two events could not have been more different; one celebrating the arrival of the British, the other commemorating the invasion of traditional Aboriginal lands

Jack Patten (1904-1957)

• president of the Aborigines Progressive Association

• campaigned for Aboriginal representation in parliament, federal government involvement in Aboriginal affairs, review of NSW Protection Board

• organised the Aboriginal ‘Day of Mourning Meeting’

• later served in WWII

• an important early civil rights campaigner for Aboriginal people

Inside the Meeting

• 100 people attended the meeting

• only four non-aboriginal people were allowed, two policemen and two pressmen to write or take photos

• the following resolution was read and voted on:

we, representing the Aborigines of Australia assembled in conference at the Australian Hall, Sydney, on the 26th day of January 1938, this being the 150th anniversary of the Whiteman’s seizure of our country, hereby make protest against the callous treatment of our people by the whitemen during the past 150 years, and we appeal to the Australian nation of today to make new laws for the education and care of Aborigines, we ask for a new policy which will raise our people to full citizen status and equality within the community

Significance of the Day of Mourning

• first major organised protest against the treatment of Indigenous Australians

• it questioned the traditional view of the ‘positive’ nature of European settlement and focused on the word ‘invasion’

• received some coverage in the mainstream media

• Jack Patten gave a speech which was very powerful and positioned him as a very important figure in the struggle

• the Day of Mourning was the first organised event of its kind and resulted in many larger rallies occurring in later years

Post-Script - Meeting with Prime Minister

• prime minister Joseph Lyons agreed to meet a delegation of Aborigines on 31st January 1938

• a 10-point plan was put forward about how he and the Federal Government could help Aborigines

• Lyons simply stated that the Federal Government was not allowed to interfere in Aboriginal affairs under the terms of the Constitution

• Lyons had no will or interest in seeing any significant change in the status of Aboriginal people

Freedom Rides - Australia 1965

Background

• in 1964 Student Action for Aborigines (SAFA) was formed under the leadership of Charles Perkins, an Arrente man, who was a third year arts student at the university

• in 1964 a University of Sydney protest against racial segregation in the United States led to comments from the public urging students to look to their ‘own backyard’

• this led to a fact-finding trip to western New South Wales towns so students could see for themselves the conditions of life for Aboriginal people

• Walgett, Moree, Grafton, Coffs Harbour, Lismore, Taree

Charles Perkins

• the most important Aboriginal activist of his time

• first Aboriginal to gain a degree from University of Sydney in 1966

Walgett RSL Club

• in Walgett, Aboriginal people were unable to join the RSL (even if they had served in WWII)

• the freedom riders protested outside the club and drew attention to this injustice

• there was later a confrontation with white citizens outside the Walgett movie theatre

Moree Baths

• the students travelled to Moree NSW and marched to Moree swimming pool to picket prohibiting Indigenous people from swimming in the pool

• the Moree Pool had numerous policies in place, banning Aboriginal children from swimming at certain times and requiring them to shower before getting in the pool

Bowraville Movie Theatre

• the bus stopped and picketed the movie theatre for demanding that Indigenous people

Why were the Freedom Rides significant?

• captured the attention of the media which brought injustice to people’s notice

• many people started to demand an improved situation for Aboriginal people

• many non-Aboriginal people began to demand social justice for Aboriginal people

• the success of the 1967 referendum, which gave Aboriginals citizenship, was possibly helped by the freedom riders campaign

1967 Referendum

• a vote to change two provisions of the Constitution which discriminated against Aboriginal people

• Aboriginal people were not counted as part of Australia’s population

• to do so meant a change in the constitution which had excluded Aborigines in 1901

• 91% of votes said ‘yes’ that Aboriginal people should be given full citizenship

What did the referendum change?

• Section 51 was changed by deleting the exclusion of Aboriginal people in relation to commonwealth’s ability to pass laws in this area

• section 127 was deleted in relation to excluding Aboriginal people

• The change enabled the Federal Parliament

• did not give them the right to vote, which was introduced in 1962

• did not grant them citizenship, which was common across the country

• was not about equal rights for Aboriginal people

What did it achieve?

• drew public attention to the treatment of Indigenous people

• highlighted inequality between the civil rights granted to Indigenous people in different states

• important symbolic value and was seen by many Australians as a recognition of Aboriginal people as full citizens

• symbol of Indigenous advocacy and was followed by further attempts to challenge the Indigenous affairs policy such as the 1972 Indigenous Tent Embassy

Aboriginal Land Rights Campaign, Tent Embassy and Land Rights Act 1976

The struggle for recognition of land rights

• australia was settled on the basis of terra nullius

• this ignored the land rights of Australia’s indigenous peoples

• gradually more land was claimed, kept, leased and sold

• from the 1960s, in combination with Aboriginal Civil Rights movement, aboriginal people began to pressure for recognition of their land rights

Government rejection of land rights - 1972

• the activists were protesting against the McMahon Liberal Government’s statement in which land rights were rejected in favour of 50-year leases to Aboriginal communities

Aboriginal Embassy, 1972

• late on australia day 1972, four young Aboriginal men erected a beach umbrella on the lawns outside Parliament House in Canberra and put up a sign which read ‘aboriginal embassy’

• over the following months, supporters of the embassy swelled to 2000

• when the police violently dismantled the tents and television film crews captured the violence for the evening news, an outraged public expressed its disgust to the federal government

Demands of Tent Embassy

• full state rights to the Northern Territory under Aboriginal ownership and control with all titles to minerals

• ownership of all other reserves and settlements throughout australia with all titles to minerals and mining rights

• the preservation of all sacred lands

• ownership of certain areas of certain cities with all titles to minerals and mining rights

• as compensation, an initial payment of six million dollars for all other land throughout Australia plus a percentage of the gross national income per annum

Emergence of flag

• flag designed by Harold Thomas and was first flown in Adelaide in 1971 - became a prominent symbol at the tent embassy

Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1976

• aboriginal people could claim Crown Land on basis of traditional ownership

• unable to claim land inside towns

• resulted in 50% of land in Northern Territory being owned collectively by Indigenous people

• land fund - assist indigenous people to acquire and manage land

• today 16% of Australia is owned or controlled by indigenous peoples (an area greater than France and Spain combined)

Native Title in Australia

Overview

• native title recognises some indigenous people have rights and interests to their land that come from their traditional laws and customs and these rights are recognised by australian law

• native title rights and interests may include rights to:

  • live in areas

  • access the area for traditional purposes such as holding ceremonies and meetings

  • protect and manage important places and sites

  • fish, hunt and gather food or resources such as water, wood, stones and ochre

  • teach aboriginal laws and customs on the land

• native title is not the same as land rights

• land rights is a claim for the grant of title to land from Australian Commonwealth, State or Territory governments

Timeline of Native Title

• indigenous australians have been estimated to have lived on the Australian continent for approximately 50 000 years

• on 22nd August 1770 Captain Cook lands in Australia and against orders by the Royal Society of London decides not to make a treaty with the Indigenous people of Australia and instead claims the Australia continent to be ‘terra nullius’, a latin word meaning ‘land belonging to no one’

• 19 June 1946: Edward (Eddie) Koiko Mabo is born

• 1967: Eddie Mabo is employed by the james cook university as a groundsman and gardener until 1975

• 1981: at a lands right conference at james cook university, a group of Murray Islanders with Eddie Mabo decide to take their claim for native title to the High Court of Australia

• may 1982: Mabo and Others v. the State of Queensland commences legal proceedings

• may 1991: The case is heard in the High Court of Australia

• 21st January 1992: Eddie Mabo dies of cancer and is reburied on Murray Island due to vandalism of his gravesite

• 3rd June 1992: The High Court announces the historic decision that invalidates ‘terra nullius’ as a legal doctrine by a majority vote

Political Responses

• Ray Groom, then Liberal Premier of Tasmania, accused Paul Keating of being intent on re-writing Australian history, denying genocide ever occurred in Tasmania

• Tim Fischer, then Federal Leader of the National Party, stated Aboriginal dispossession had been inevitable and was not something to be ashamed of

• in 1996 John Howard, then Liberal leader, claimed that to give Aboriginal people the right to negotiate native title interests was ‘un-Australian’

• Paul Hanson, then a federal MP, believed the fight for land rights was a smoke screen to cover up a more sinister plot by Aboriginal people

Kevin Rudd’s Apology

• Kevin Rudd made his apology speech on the 13th of February 2008

• he apologised for the pain, hurt and suffering experienced by Indigenous people as a result of the Stolen Generation

• it was the first time a prime minister had publicly apologised to the Indigenous people

• it introduced a sorry day as a remembrance, however, there have been hardly any practical effects

Wave Hill Walk Off

• Wave Hill, 1966-1973

• Guringdi people in the Northern Territory refused to work

• when Gough Whitlam became prime minister in 1972, he promised to return their land

• land returned to them in 1975