Tag Archives: history

The Civil Rights Movement and the Black Freedom Struggle

The following is the final paper I wrote for a course on the Civil Rights Movement.

      American political history is, in its most basic form, a history of struggle between those who experience the full benefits of citizenship and those who are left out of the American experiment. This struggle of “haves” and “have-nots” means legal, social, and economic demands are levied against the ruling classes constantly, with the Black Freedom Struggle representing an important phase of the broader conflict of American history. The Civil Rights Movement was one of the most important steps forward in equalizing the legal rights of black citizens in the United States, but it must be understood under the critical lens of progress, understanding that the Civil Rights Movement did not end the Black Freedom Struggle in the United States. With the shift to the right in American politics leading up to the presidency of Ronald Reagan, much of the struggle between American “haves” and “have-nots” was set back, including the struggle of black people. This rightward shift opened up a new space of economic and social demands to be made by black people, which are still being made today.

The successes of the Civil Rights Movement were primarily in the legal sphere, with leaders like Ella Baker, Bayard Rustin, and Martin Luther King Jr. making clear the disparity in legal rights between whites and blacks in the U.S. The work of the movement in Mississippi, for example, was primarily focused on achieving equal voting rights for black people. Activists, black and white, traveled to Mississippi in order to register African Americans to vote. This was intended to highlight the vast gap between black and white people in the South in terms of their access to the most basic right Americans have as citizens of a democracy, the right to vote. (Carson et al. 1991, 170-171) The demands of mainstream activists in the SCLC and SNCC tended to be legal in nature, and leading up to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, many of the important victories in the struggle for black freedom were victories for equal rights. The division between the legal challenges of the Civil Rights Movement and the social, legal, and economic demands of the radicals was in its infancy in the 1930’s, but it was already visible in the class divisions within the NAACP. (Fairclough 2001, 182-183) Black people less directly affected by the plight of poverty and economic inequality had less interest in demanding fundamental societal changes in these areas, instead they sought legal victories and slow, legislative change.

This interest in legal and civil rights was the special focus of the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950’s and 60’s, with economic questions taking a backseat due to cold war concerns about the radical labor movements which were once to close to the black freedom struggle. (Ransby 2003, 161) Even radical activists like Huey P. Newton focused on the disparities in Constitutional rights between African Americans and whites before later tackling the social and economic conditions of the black community. Influenced by Bobby Seale, Newton and his supporters carried guns to their protests, an act meant to “intimidate the authorities,” and to demonstrate the disconnect in legal rights between citizens of the same country, who supposedly all had the right to carry weapons in self-defense. (Newton 1973, 113) This was a clear departure from what the most radical activists would have been most interested in accomplishing 20 or 30 years earlier.

Since the Civil Rights Movement was so closely tied to legal and civil rights, the signing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and the Fair Housing Act of 1968 represented the culmination of the movement’s efforts toward legal equality. In this sense, the movement can be said to have been “successful” in terms of the goals it established for itself. The equalization of legal rights and access to certain social accommodations for black people, at least on paper, was achieved by the end of the 1960’s. The broader Black Freedom Struggle was far from finished with the end of the Civil Rights Movement, however, with equality of social and economic opportunity never being fully secured for African Americans. The goals of the radical black freedom movements in the 1930’s and 40’s, and the efforts of the radical labor movement, were never accomplished in America. The material conditions of black people remain substantially inferior to those of whites, despite the legislative accomplishments of the 1960’s.

Division in the Democratic Party and disillusionment with Democratic leadership during the period of stagflation in the 1970’s, along with a general unhappiness with liberal policy among more conservative Americans, led to a hard right shift in American politics. People, especially white people, felt their voices were not being heard in government, and many Southern Democrats were turning toward the Republican party in response to the Democrats’ support of the Civil Rights Movement. The active pursual of the “Southern Strategy” to turn the South toward the Republican party also directed America to the political right. Conservative voters, seeing themselves as a “silent majority,” forced right-wing leaders like Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan into power, without regard for how such a rightward turn might affect the least well-off members of American society. Liberal leaders like Jimmy Carter were kept from accomplishing much, with the Carter administration only managing to slow the destruction of the New Deal social safety net, failing to meaningfully reverse the trend. This shift marked the rise of neoliberalism as the leading position in American politics and economic policy, as change which would have profound effects on poor and black people.

African American economic inequality was exacerbated in the 1970’s and 80’s when American politics turned rightward, leading up to Ronald Reagan’s presidency. This shift meant the application of neoliberal austerity measures against poor people in America, with black people being some of the hardest hit. Major cuts to public spending, especially in the area of social welfare programs and social safety net programs, meant that poor people were expected to pull themselves out of their conditions without assistance. The image of the “welfare queen,” usually depicted as an urban black woman abusing the welfare system, was proliferated in order to turn public opinion against social spending. Most recipients of public benefits were, and still are, white, but Presidents Nixon and Reagan both attempted to paint black people as the chief users and abusers of the welfare state. Despite the total falsity of this narrative, racial feelings among whites were used to destroy the systems of social security which had been built up since the New Deal and the Roosevelt administration in the 40’s. The new negative feelings toward black people among whites, along with the reduced support of the state for poor people, meant that the social and economic status of black people slid back substantially during this period.

Mass incarceration also became an issue under Nixon, whose instigation of the drug war specifically targeted black people and his political opponents, often one and the same group. Nixon pushed a message of “law and order,” meaning increased policing of urban black communities. This meant potentially racist and violent police were instructed to monitor and control the behavior of black people, leading to a disproportionate rate of arrests and abuse of black people by police. Reagan, with the help of his wife Nancy, pushed the “War on Drugs” to become a national political phenomenon in the 1980’s, to the extreme detriment of the, now heavily policed, black communities. The mass incarceration of black people, especially black men and fathers, combined with the defunding of social programs designed to help the poor and working classes, severely damaged the structure of the black family. (Class lecture, 12/7) Whereas in the first half of the 20th century, despite great inequality between blacks and whites, the black family unit was stable, the late 20th century saw it destabilized. This, and its broader effects on the economic status of black communities, was probably one of the greatest losses of the rightward turn of the 70’s and 80’s, leaving a permanent mark on the relationship between black people and the rest of American society.

Specific social programs, like affirmative action and public housing, were targeted by the Reagan administration, likely from a racial angle. Defunding of public housing as African Americans began to use such programs was extremely detrimental to the wellbeing of African American families. The already destabilized black family was thrown into further chaos by way of lack of decent housing. (Class lecture, 12/7) By framing the urban black mother as the “welfare queen,” neoliberal politicians and policymakers managed to push black people out of the systems of social support on which white people had been able to rely for almost 50 years. Additionally, black people were kept from taking advantage of programs like affirmative action, which made up for so many lost opportunities for black people, on the grounds that white people and politicians saw them as “unfair.” By depicting black people as atomistic individuals, in this specific case only, the idea that they could pull themselves out of poverty without help was popularized. The possibility of this was actually marginal, but it was solidified in the public imagination along with the implication that poor black people were “too lazy” to do it.

Right-wing social views, specifically on drugs and issues of race, did great damage to the place of African Americans in the U.S., and racism was enforced systemically, despite no legal provision for it anywhere on paper. Though this was partially related to the new War on Drugs and the right shift of politics, it was also a failure of the Civil Rights Movement in a certain sense. The lack of explicit economic demands, and the failure to prepare for continued systemic racism in a post-Jim Crow era, are distinct failures of the Civil Rights Movement. The arrival of “New Jim Crow,” in the form of mass incarceration, police abuses, and political marginalization, was the natural reaction of the racist white establishment to the arrival of new rights for black people; the reaction of the “haves” against the successful assertion of demands by the “have nots.”

If the hard-right turn of American politics in the 1970’s represented any kind of political gain for the Black Freedom Struggle, it was the realization that alternative means of resistance were needed for the next phase of the struggle, and that solidarity among black people, outside the state, was an essential component of liberation. The rise of the Black Power movement in the 70’s is related to the changes undergone in the way black people related to the government, and the way they thought about their place in American society. Even in the late 60’s the struggle turned, under leaders like Huey P. Newton, into a demand for social and economic power previously never accorded to black people. In a post-1964 world, Newton realized that the consciousness of African Americans needed to be raised and directed toward the assertion of power, not just the demand for rights. (Newton 1973, 176-180) Even with rights achieved on paper, without Black Power, those rights were largely worthless. Systemic forces could, and would, remove them again and send black people back to their previously second-class state. This shift to Black Power is partially a recognition that the struggle for black freedom, like the broader American struggle between the powerful and the marginalized, wouldn’t end in 1964, 1965, or 68. It was an ongoing social struggle which, in Newton’s view, tended toward revolutionary ends.

Huey P. Newton’s Black Panther Party, as part of this shift in consciousness, developed programs of mutual aid and social support, systems designed to keep impoverished black people fed, clothed, and educated, and to instigate consciousness and solidarity among the members of their communities. These programs were in direct response to the cutting of funding to New Deal and Great Society programs on which poor African Americans had previously relied. Because the gap in social safety net spending was so detrimental to black people, mutual aid efforts, outside the state, were the most effective way of holding the black community together in the face of neoliberalism. Efforts like the “Breakfast for Children Program” sought to bring support to the people and to spread the ideals of black power and pride in being a part of a black community. These programs were intended to make people “practice that theory [socialism] and inspect that theory,” according to Fred Hampton. (Carson et al. 1991, 505) In addition to serving the people, the Black Panthers were spreading consciousness to the people.

Huey P. Newton said in Revolutionary Suicide, “I do not think that life will change for the better without an assault on the Establishment, which goes on exploiting the wretched of the earth.” (Newton 1973, 3) Without a direct “assault” on the established forces of power, a militant demand for power to be given to the marginalized, real social change is impossible. This is the central failure of the Civil Rights Movement, in its legal victories it forgot that the empowerment of black people was the real goal. The movement was successful on the terms of the establishment, that is on the terms of the legal authority of a racist state, but it failed to bring about radical, fundamental social change. Equality before the law, and the true equality found in radical social change Newton describes in Revolutionary Suicide, are by no means the same thing.

The economic and social demands of the radical struggles in the 1930’s and 40’s remain to be achieved. (Ransby 2003, 155) A program of economic liberation which would repair the harm done by centuries of marginalization of black people must be the goal of the Black Freedom Struggle in the coming century. In light of increasing inequality of wealth and income for all Americans, especially African Americans, policy must be directed toward repairing the fabric of our society, and building a better, more inclusive, new one. The privileges of the ruling class must be abolished, and the benefits accorded to some individuals, and not others, must be equalized. Though the civil rights movement managed to achieve legal equality, the systems of oppression which still inhibit the success of black Americans must be broken up, and the gains made from these systems by white people must be reversed.

The future of the Black Freedom Struggle must be focused on addressing the lack of social and economic means for black people, and the lack of power for the black individual. Huey P. Newton references Friedrich Nietzsche’s Will to Power in his explanation of the purpose of a revolutionary, to work toward the expression of his purpose and power. Nietzsche’s ideas about the individual, in relation to large groups which seek to control him, are influential in Newton’s effort to shift consciousness among black people. “The rising level of consciousness,” says Newton, “led us [black people] to redefine ourselves. People once ashamed to be called Black now gladly accept the label, and our biological characteristics are a source of pride.” (Newton 1973, 172-173) Power and pride in oneself is both a Nietzschean value, and a revolutionary value. This is why the future struggle for black freedom must be about demanding power, and asserting pride in the individual black person, along with pride for the collective population of African Americans.

The rise of the Black Lives Matter movement, which is making substantially more radical demands on the establishment and ruling class to repair the damage done by the marginalization of black people, represents a vehicle for the future of the Black Freedom Struggle. Police violence, and the systemic racism inherent in the drug war, must be tackled head on. By joining hands against the corruption and harm the system does to the black community, Black Lives Matter activists are making it clear that they are opposed to the systems, built on hate, which have kept black people from achieving their full potential as american citizens. This seems to be the direction in which the struggle must move in order to carry on the broader struggle between the privileged and underprivileged classes in American society.

Carson, Clayborne. The Eyes on the Prize: Civil Rights Reader: Documents, Speeches,and Firsthand Accounts from the Black Freedom Struggle, 1954-1990. New York;Penguin, 1991. Print.

Fairclough, Adam. Better Day Coming. New York; Penguin, 2001. Print.
Newton, Huey P. Revolutionary Suicide. New York; Penguin, 1973. Print.

Ransby, Barbara. Ella Baker & the Black Freedom Movement: A Radical Democratic Vision. Miami; University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill Press, 2003. Print.


Leave a comment

Filed under history



Laozi was an important Chinese philosophical and religious figure from between the 6th and 4th centuries B.C. His greatest work was the Tao Te Ching, the main text of the Taoist philosophy, but his life has become shrouded in myths and legends that have obscured his story to the point that even his existence is doubted by some scholars. Despite Laozi’s enigmatic nature, the Tao Te Ching is the cornerstone of a complex spectrum of philosophical and religious movements. Along with the later author Zhuangzi, Laozi serves as the primary thinker behind Taoism as a movement of both thought and practice.

Born Li Er around the village of Quren (modern day Henan Province) in China, Laozi was an important official in the court of the Chinese Zhou Dynasty (1046 B.C.- 256 B.C.) He served as a shi or court scholar, and he worked as an archivist for the Emperor. His position as an archivist and imperial official would have given him access to many of the classics of Chinese thought up to that point, and he would have become a skilled and knowledgeable scholar by the end of his career. Having a broad understanding of other currents of thought would certainly have contributed to his eventual recognition as one of the greatest sages of Chinese history.

The life of Laozi comes to us primarily in the form of legends and parables of his life, as well as through the teachings of the Tao Te Ching. Most of the stories suggest that he never established a school in which to teach his philosophy, but he still managed to gather a large following of disciples and students willing to listen to his work. Among the most famous of those said to have interacted with him was Confucius, yet another great Chinese thinker, whom he criticized for his pride and ambition. The connection between the two thinkers is tenuous at best, and it is unlikely that they ever really met.

One of the central legends of Laozi’s life was the story of his departure for the west. In this tale, Laozi becomes fed up with the degeneracy of court life and the collapsing Zhou Dynasty, and he decides to leave China for the west. Coming to the Xiangu pass (the main overland exit from China at the time) the legendary guardian of Xiangu, Yinxi asked Laozi to write a book of his teachings. He is said to have written a 5,000 character volume of his teachings on the Tao (the way) and the Te (virtue) after which he left, never to be seen again. This story of the writing of the Tao Te Ching is interesting because of how mythical the life of Laozi had become by the time this tale was written.

The primary idea behind Taoism is known as wu-we or non-action. The idea is that by reducing the amount of impact people have on surrounding events, they can more fully allow the Tao, or the way things are, to unfold. By behaving effortlessly, without thinking and planning everything to be done, beings are able to become more effectively in harmony with the Tao. Because of the importance of non-action and lack of control over other beings, rituals and hierarchical religious practices were seen as unnecessary, leaning more to individualistic philosophical systems than religions.

The concept of yin and yang is also important to a Taoist understanding of the world. When something is recognized, it is only in light of that thing’s opposite. Good exists because of evil, light exists because of dark. The taijitu, popularly called a yin/yang symbol, represents the monism of Taoism, while also reflecting the idea of opposites as part of a whole.

As Taoism developed, the more philosophical branch became less and less important, only remaining popular amongst the upper classes, and a more mythical religious Taoism developed. This strain of the tradition centered less on the philosophical ideas of the Tao Te Ching and blended with Chinese folk religion to incorporate alchemy, exorcism, divination, traditional medicine, and obtaining immortality. Where rituals were seen as unnecessary in early Taoism, they became essential to religious Taoism. Individualism gave way to a more traditional, clerical religion.

In religious Taoism Laozi was identified with divinity, and he became an important deity for many Taoists. The ideas in the Tao Te Ching became divinely written scripture in this understanding. Today religious Taoism is an important part of Chinese culture, and priests wearing distinctive vestments can be seen performing rituals in large Taoist temples both in mainland China and Taiwan. Laozi’s life and work have been shrouded in 2500 years of myth and religious experience, but his words can still offer quite a lot to the modern world.

Works Cited
Kaltenmark, Max. “Laozi (Chinese Daoist Philosopher).” Encyclopedia Britannica Online. Encyclopedia Britannica. Web. 02 Aug. 2014. <http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/330163/Laozi&gt;.
“Laozi.” Princeton University. Web. 02 Aug. 2014. <https://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Laozi.html&gt;.

Leave a comment

Filed under history, philosophy

The Development of the A.M.E. Zion Church and its Importance in the Middletown Connecticut Beman Triangle Community

ame zion

Throughout the experience of African Americans in United States History, religion has played an essential role in the growth and development of communities, as well as the fight for equal rights and the spread of education. This is equally true in the Middletown, Connecticut African American community, centered around the neighborhood known as the Beman triangle. The African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church has consistently served as the center of community life and the “backbone” of the Beman Triangle neighborhood of Middletown since the arrival of the Church in the first half of the 19th century. The Church’s role in the fight against slavery and in favor of free blacks was integral to the success of the African American community of Middletown.

The African Methodist Episcopal Church was founded by James Varick between 1796 and 1821 after several independent African American Methodist communities in New York congregated under Varick as General Superintendent of the Church. The Church was founded as a response to the exclusion of African Americans from leadership and worship in the Methodist Episcopal Church in New York City. Founded alongside the African Methodist Episcopal Church of Philadelphia; during this period the churches were at the forefront of African American opposition to oppression and mistreatment in many northern communities, the Beman Triangle community of Middletown among them. (Sernett 1999, 156)

The A.M.E. Zion Church provided a spiritual and social outlet through Christian religious practice, but it also provided the struggling northern black population with guidance and help toward success. Advocacy for the abolition of slavery and opposition to the oppression of their fellow African Americans were the cornerstones of the A.M.E. Zion church. By separating themselves from the older Methodist groups, African Americans were able to redirect their religious expression to focus on the problems facing free and slave populations of blacks during the 19th century. (Pinn 2009, 67-68)

Methodism, out of which the A.M.E. Zion church was born, was developed by theologian John Wesley and his colleagues in Great Britain during the mid-18th century as part of a religious revival within the Church of England. Wesley and his followers were early pioneers of abolitionism and the inclusion of all people in the Church. Itinerant ministers trained by Wesley himself served as the primary vehicle for the rapid spread of Methodism during its infancy, many of them traveling to the United States and preaching to the poor, both white and black.

The Methodist message was based in revivalism, advocating social and church reform. This helped to spread the movement into areas, like the free African American community, where a widespread demand for change was building. Upon the arrival of Methodism in America, it spread rapidly among the black population, appealing to African Americans primarily through its focus on the poor and oppressed. This popularity, as well as the accessibility of Methodist itinerant ministers and church revivals, allowed the Church to flourish among black population in America. (http://docsouth.unc.edu/church/intro.html)

The evangelical revivalism of the Second Great Awakening in the mid 1700’s was essential to the conversion of many free African Americans to Methodism. Where enslaved people were forced to maintain “invisible institutions” in place of an organized church, free blacks were drawn to the evangelical faith of the Methodists which often resembled traditional African religious practice in its strongly participatory nature.

It was during the rapid spread of Methodism during the beginning of the 19th century that the A.M.E. Zion Church spread to Middletown, Connecticut. Between 1823 and 1828, a local group began to congregate in the home of a man named Asa Jeffrey as Methodists in order to practice their faith. It was the eventual establishment of what is today the Cross Street A.M.E. Zion Church that brought together the African Methodist population of Middletown. They had been meeting there for several years leading up to the arrival of the first pastor, James Anderson and the formation of the congregation by the founding trustees Asa Jeffrey, John Hamilton, Joseph Gilbert, Ebenezer DeForest, and George W. Jeffrey. In addition to fulfilling an essential need for social and religious expression within the community, the new church provided political and social assistance to its people. (http://crossstreetchurch.site.wesleyan.edu/the-founding-of-cross-street-a-m-e-zion-church-in-middletown/)

The story of the Beman Triangle often centers on its namesake Beman family, whose religious and social importance within the community allowed them to fight for equality during a period of gross inequality for African Americans in the United States. Jehiel Beman, a shoemaker, was the first of the Beman family to settle in Middletown; serving as an early pastor of the A.M.E. Zion church there. Jehiel was essential to the formation and growth of the Middletown African American community, actively working on behalf of his neighbors and in favor of the abolition of slavery. His work was an essential part of the movements for abolitionism, temperance, and wider availability of education in Connecticut. (http://crossstreetchurch.site.wesleyan.edu/jehiel-beman-community-leader/)

Beman’s work within the abolitionist movement, especially his involvement of the church with the underground railroad, gave the A.M.E. Zion Church its nickname: “Freedom Church.” This kind of work would come to characterize the behavior of the A.M.E. Zion Church in Connecticut and the rest of the country. (Cunningham, Warner 2002, 11) The political involvement of the church was one of the most valuable roles it played, both in Middletown and the rest of the nation. The Beman family helped to promote the idea that the church, and the community as a whole, should participate in the growth and assistance of the African American community, free and enslaved. The A.M.E. Zion Church often helped to set up “stations” for the underground railroad in order to help lead escaped slaves to safety. (Pinn, 69) The Beman triangle would have been just one of many locations where the Church helped in the underground railroad. The political advocacy and activism of the A.M.E. Zion Church in Middletown continued during the 1950’s and 60’s when, working with the NAACP, the Church and its members participated in a march in support of civil rights. (http://crossstreetchurch.site.wesleyan.edu/the-civil-rights-movement/)

Jehiel Beman’s son, Leverett, was behind the creation of of the African American community at the Beman Triangle in Middletown. His idea of quality housing and a close community for the middle-class black population in Middletown led to the development of just such a community around the Cross Street A.M.E. Zion Church. The church was essential in the formation of this community because of the fact that they provided a system for social and economic improvement for local African Americans so well laid out by Jehiel Beman and other pastors in the years leading up to the formation of the community. (Harris 2013, 113)

The Beman family’s importance in African American education and religious life was perhaps as important as their political and social ideas. When, In 1831, schoolteacher Prudence Crandall opened her school to African-American girls, Jehiel Beman worked to recruit students for the school. As a result of the violent protests against it, the Connecticut Assembly enacted a law in 1833 prohibiting out-of-state black people from being educated in Connecticut. (http://crossstreetchurch.site.wesleyan.edu/the-wesleyan-connection/) The Beman family’s emphasis on education continued with Amos Beman, an educated member of the Beman Triangle community who followed in his father Jehiel’s footsteps as a pastor, this time within the Congregational Church. The power of the church as a force for education and social justice for Middletown African Americans was in part due to Amos Beman’s place as a highly educated black man; initially by a student-tutor from Wesleyan University, and then at the Oneida Institute in New York. Amos Beman was an avid abolitionist and advocate of African American education, and his message was heavily reflective of that of his father, Jehiel. (Harris 2013, 111-112)

Advocacy for African American education in Middletown continued into the 20th century as well, with the Rev. William Davage, pastor of the Cross Street Church, founding the Greater Middletown Negro Youth Scholarship Fund, a program designed to help black high school students go to college. Beginning in 1965, the program helped approximately 50 black students to get an education over a period of 25 years. Pressure from this program contributed to Wesleyan University beginning recruitment of African American students that year. (http://crossstreetchurch.site.wesleyan.edu/the-civil-rights-movement/)

Throughout its history, the A.M.E. Zion Church acted in the many social, political, and religious roles it served in Middletown. These essential activities of the church were important factors in its growth and expansion, as well as the success of many African American individuals and organizations during the 19th and 20th centuries.

The Beman Triangle community, centered on the Cross Street Church, was an important expression of the experience of the broader free-black population in the United States in that they suffered through the discrimination and exclusion from much of mainstream society so common to 19th century African Americans. The role of the church in the African American experience during this period is well illustrated in Middletown by the Cross Street Church’s role providing advocacy, political support, education, and religious expression for the Beman Triangle citizens, as well as Middletown’s black population as a whole.

Works Cited
Harris, K.J. 2013 Freedom and Slavery. In African American Connecticut Explored, edited by E. J. Normen, S. K. Close, K. J. Harris and W. M. F. Mitchell, pp. 3-12. Wesleyan University Press, Middletown, CT.

Sernett, Milton C., 1999 African American Religious History: A Documentary Witness. ABC-CLIO, Santa Barbara, CA.

Cunningham, Janice P.; Warner, Elizabeth A. 2002 An African American Neighborhood – Middletown, Connecticut 1847-1930. Cunningham Preservation Assoc., LLC, Middletown, CT.

Hornsby, Alton., 2011 Black America: A State-by-state Historical Encyclopedia. ABC- CLIO, Santa Barbara, CA.

Maffley-Kipp, Laurie F., 2001 “The Church in the Southern Black Community: Introduction.” The Church in the Southern Black Community: Introduction. University of North Carolina, 24 July 2014. <http://docsouth.unc.edu/church/intro.html&gt;.

2014 “Cross Street Church” Cross Street AME Zion Church – Struggle, Jubilee, Vision. Wesleyan University, 24 July 2014. <http://crossstreetchurch.site.wesleyan.edu/the-founding-of-cross-street-a-m-e-zion-church-in-middletown/&gt;.

Leave a comment

Filed under history

Free Speech

     Free speech is an issue which gets a lot of attention from the fringe, but is rarely seriously dealt with by those whose right to speak freely is always well respected. In an AP US History class, my teacher was discussing the Bill of Rights, and the discussion of free speech for unpopular opinions obviously surfaced. I was surprised to hear so many people saying that they didn’t think unpopular groups deserved to have the right to speak or assemble.

      The Westboro Baptist Church came up, among other groups, and the teacher said that no one would be upset if somehow they lost their right to say the things they say. I was first confused by his extremely loose interpretation of the first amendment, but I would not in fact be glad to hear that their rights had been usurped. I am fully in support of gay rights and gay marriage because I feel it isn’t anyone’s business but those involved with the marriage (I also oppose the idea of the federal government infringing on state business), but I also think that someone who wants to criticize my view should be able to.

      I am not claiming some kind of slippery-slope argument whereby the government will take all our rights if they are allowed to take the rights of the extremists, I simply believe that everyone should be able to say what they want, short of (possibly including) libel. Freedom of speech is something that most people take for granted because they do not use it. Those of us who speak our minds on the internet to be viewed by five or ten people are just barely using this freedom. I speak from the standpoint of an American, but most reasonably developed societies have similar, if not identical, ideas on this subject.

      By ignoring the potential of our ability to speak our minds to the government, our religions, our employers, or one another, we are throwing away the right to guide our way of life and its growth. Free speech and reasonable, productive dialogue go hand-in-hand, and maybe the lack of respect for free speech is what is leading to the decline of reasoned dialogue on both the internet and the national (and international) stage.

Check out my small political group over on Facebook

Leave a comment

Filed under philosophy