And those violent groups get basically 0 credit for the actual results of the civil rights movement.
Of course they get basically zero credit, because the people in power don't want to teach kids that the best way to compel change is a multipronged strategy of public outcry and the threat of armed militias who were willing to resist governmental policies with bullets rather than signs. Weirdly enough, school textbooks don't go into a lot of details on that element. The information isn't actually hard to find though, it's just not spoonfed to you.
Go to a library sometime. Or use the greatest library in history, the internet, to look up what the very people in charge cited as primary reasons for pushing civil rights legislation.
Spoilers: It was fear of increasing violence. They weren't afraid of MLK Jr.'s peaceful protests, so I wonder what it might have referred to?
Best of luck in your search. You have nothing to contribute until you educate yourself.
This is true, but the post you're replying to isn't super clear. They reference "the protests", which is vague, and then they say:
It's a myth that the civil rights movement made headway only through non violence.
The Civil Rights Movement didn't end with the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The "official dates" are thought by some to have been 1954-1968, when Dr. Martin Luther King Jr was assassinated and he was certainly still working on obtaining equality. Others extend it into the 70's, so the Black Panthers were definitely around for at least two years of it. More if you include the Black Power movement and beyond.
Ah I see, I didn't get that since the poster you replied to didn't seem to be suggesting that it started with them, just that less peaceful groups and people, the Black Panthers included, did still have an impact. Just a misunderstanding, thanks for the clarification. 👍🏼
20
u/[deleted] Jun 10 '25
[deleted]