Racial Discrimination

To be free but not actually free .Looking at the years from the 1800 to 1860. There were more free slaves in the South than in the North. Most slaves became free when their owners died or for economic reasons. Some slaves bought their own freedom. In the following paragraphs we will discuss their social and religious freedom.

Most Blacks in the 1800s were free to get a good job, vote, attend school, and go to church in the north. Although they were free to do these things, most of them refused because the whites did not allow it to happen. What is the sense of having the freedom to vote if you were not allowed. Taxes were placed on voting which made voting impossible and unaffordable. They believed in segregation. In the North there was to be no mingling with the Whites. They could not attend concerts, theatres, churches or court rooms. In the South whites were more prepared to mix to some extent. They were more tolerant.

The black church was a way for blacks to be involved in their community politics. The church was a place where they could be married and a place where they could celebrate their deaths. Church was a place for teaching of the bible. A place to write newspapers and have meetings. The church was a place to house runaway slaves. In the North the blacks had the right to do different things that were written into law, but the whites refused to let them follow the laws. The church had to be a place where they could gather in numbers and try to push for their rights.

How free were free blacks in the North. Actually they were not free at all. They were not free to vote, get a good job, or attend good schools. They were not free to use the laws that were written for them, because of the whites harassments and prejudices. Black were able to do some things, although most of the things were limited. (Document B) There were more free slaves in the South than in the North. This came about because their owners died or set them free for economic reasons. The Black church was a way that they could feel free. It was a place where they could come together in marriage and in death. A place where they could work as a community for their freedom. (Document D)

Blacks in the south had no right to vote. Even though blacks represent about 40% of the population in the south they did not have the right to vote. Southern blacks were kept ignorant. Blacks were not allowed to learn to read. It was against the law to teach a slave how to read. Many whites believed that if a slave learned how to read he would be capable to learn how to escape.

Some slaves were even loaned out. For example some slaves would buy their rights from their masters and then work for other people for wages. Some slaves were even granted permission to live on their own and pay their own board. These types of slaves had basically the same rights as northern slaves. These types of slaves went as they pleased but still had no freedom or rights.

Blacks in no part of the country during the 1800’s were free. If you lived up north you had few rights. and many roadblocks on your way to being equal to whites. Granted blacks up north had more rights than those of the south but they still did not have much. The only difference between free slaves is basically the location in which they live in.

In the novel A Lesson Before Dying, although Grant is an educated black man in the era of a racist society he has struggles greater than most men of his decent. I feel sorry for him because of his limitations, even though I view him as a coward. He cannot break free of his background and family. The three main female characters in the novel, Tante Lou, Miss Emma, and Vivian, restrict and limit Grant’s choices. Grant realizes that freedom means leaving his small town and creating a new life, yet each woman holds a chain that keeps him from his destiny and the right to be free. First, Tante Lou, his aunt holds Grant from his dreams by refusing to let him go his own way. Tante Lou wants Grant to stay at home with her and take care of her. But, in the time the novel takes place, it wasn’t common for young men stay with their elders and help out, especially when Grant has a college degree and can accomplish so much. Tante Lou took advantage of this in any means necessary, using the fact that Grant is family and in essence owes it to her to stay and help out. We can see this on page 14 when Tante Lou forces Grant to talk to Mr. Henri about seeing Jefferson. “You are going up there with us Grant, or you will not sleep in this house tonight.” Tante Lou denies Grant choices that men his age have. Next, Miss Emma, who doesn’t have a family relation to Grant, also restricts his choices in life. Miss Emma plays an important role in the novel by being Jefferson’s godmother, and in a painstaking situation. She asks Grant in a way that gives him no real choices to teach Jefferson to be a man. Leaning on her ability to persuade, and using her power as an extensive friend to Tante Lou she can basically tell Grant what to do and gets away with it. She knew Grant did not want to go and teach Jefferson, but still went ahead with it. “Driving along the St. Charles River I could feel Emma not looking at me, not looking at anything… just thinking.

Like my Aunt she knew how much I hated all of this.” Miss Emma therefore forces Grant to do matters that she wants, not what Grant thinks he is capable of doing. Thirdly, Vivian, the love of his life, is also limiting Grant’s ability to make decisions based strictly on his own intent. She understands Grant’s need to leave and see new things, but has restrictions in her life that will not allow her to help Grant begin a new existence. Vivian is in the middle of a drawn out divorce and needs to see it through so she can maintain custody of her children. We see an example of this on page 93. “Let’s go somewhere and spend the night. Baton Rouge, New Orleans- anywhere, Grant asks. I can’t, My Babies.” This sentence alone describes the turmoil she is going through with her own threatening aspects and how it affects Grant’s choices. I think the book is an intriguing novel and surfaced important issues dealt with in society. Religion, racism, and many other articles of today are just a few. But, Grant is a complex character and can be depicted thoroughly. His education holds him to a new standard not expected of people back then, but withholds him from reaching his dreams. He cannot find what he is looking for in this small town that A Lesson Before Dying takes place in. I feel sorry for him until Jefferson teaches him other factors involved to being a real and distinct kind of man. He evolves dramatically. But, his need to be free is still restrained by Tante Lou, Miss Emma, and Vivian in different, yet important ways.

Racial profiling can be defined as a heavily disputed term. It is frequently understood as being the unfair targeting of members of minority groups (Criminal Justice, 2019). This focus on minority groups leads to more scrutiny based solely upon the belief that members of their racial, religious or ethnic group are more likely to be involved in criminal activities rather than the likelihood of someone committing a crime being based on an individual’s behaviour. Profiling often sees people of colour being targeted for “humiliating and often frightening detention, interrogations, and searches without evidence of criminal activity” (ACLU [2], 2019) Recently racial profiling has developed to include anti-terror activities and immigration laws following the September 11th terrorist attacks in America (ACLU [1], 2019). This incident saw an increase in Muslim, South East Asian and Arab individuals being profiled more heavily by people such as local police and airline personnel (ACLU [1], 2019). This type of racial discrimination by agencies such as the police has sparked many movements such as the ‘Black Lives Matter’ movement in the U.S.

The aim of this report is to show the extent to which racial discrimination and profiling is a negative factor in the community, the possible reasons why people discriminate against those from certain ethnic minority groups and will examine possible solutions to eradicating the problem.

When researching the topic of racial profiling and racial discrimination, a number of literature was reviewed including a combination of scholar articles and websites. Firstly, statistics were gathered to evaluate the extent of which profiling and discrimination is a problem within the police and other private agencies. The problem was seen within both the UK and in America meaning racial profiling is a problem internationally. The New York Times created a poll which analysed people’s opinion on whether the police favoured a certain race. It found that “82 percent of blacks and 71 percent of Hipics felt the police did not treat white and black New Yorkers with equal fairness” (Lee, 1997). Using the American Civil Liberties Union website, statistics about earnings of minority racial groups in the U.S. was gathered and using ‘The Facts on Racial Profiling’ by Garry Crystal, statistics about policing in the UK were found. This showed that there is a significant problem of discrimination and racial profiling.

It is argued that “prejudicial attitudes” is one of the key reasons that stop and searches by the police are a different experience between different racial groups (Reiman, 2010; 262). In the UK it was found that some police use racial profiling when on duty by The Ministry of Justice (Crystal, 2018). Although under the Terrorism Act 2000 (section 44) police officers are permitted to stop individuals if they have a reasonable cause, people within the Asian community were 5 times more likely and black people were 7 times more likely to be stopped and searched compared to white people (Crystal, 2018).

This problem of stop and searches continue out-with the UK as well as National Geographic states that in 19 out of 24 states Black people are more likely to be stopped than White people and are more likely to be searched in “all but one state” (Fletcher, 2018). It was also found that although White individuals have a higher rate of being involved in drug offences, Black people were 10 times more likely to be incarcerated for drug offences (ACLU [1], 2019). Therefore, we can see that there are a variety of areas in which people of a certain ethnicity are being discriminated against when it comes to the criminal justice system.

By examining different types of discrimination set out in ‘Measuring Racial Discrimination’ by Rebecca Blank, Marilyn Dabady and Constance Citro, we can see various reasons as to why people may use racial discrimination and whether it could be intentional or unintentional discrimination. In this article there are a number of different types of discrimination outlined which can be seen to be caused by different motives. The first is intentional discrimination which was set out in 1954 when Gordon Allport created a list of steps in which people behave in a negative way towards an individual from another racial group. The series includes “verbal antagonism, avoidance, segregation, physical attack and extermination” (Dabady; Blank; Citro, 2004).

The second type of discrimination is subtle discrimination or unconscious discrimination which is when certain harmful attitudes are normalised in society leading to ambiguous forms of discrimination towards certain racial or ethnic minority groups (Dabady; Blank; Citro, 2004). This could be because of the way certain ethnic groups are portrayed in the media for example, in the news or in television shows and movies. Statistical discrimination involves a particular group’s beliefs influencing the way someone may act towards other individuals from that group (Dabady; Blank; Citro, 2004).

An example of this could be, if employers believe that black individuals are more likely to be involved in criminal activity, therefore having criminal records, and if they believe this makes them more inefficient workers then they may be more hesitant to employ people who identify as part of the black racial group. They may also treat employees differently such as providing different opportunities to individuals from certain groups.

Racial discrimination can also be seen within organisations as organisational discrimination. This is when organisations reflect the biases or beliefs of those within them such as the rules that evolve from history such as racism in America (Dabady; Blank; Citro, 2004). This could be the reason that it is common for police, in American especially, to be accused of showing racial profiling. America’s history shows a strong enforcement of racism and segregation and the harsh policing of Black communities which are often considered “more likely to be both the perpetrators and victims of violent crime” (Hannah-Jones, 2018). This history being enshrined in society can lead to individuals creating a certain idea of racial groups and might be reflected in the organisations that they work for, including the police.

To gather general information about the extent of racial profiling in the UK, the Civil Rights Movement website was used, and this source also gave possible solutions to solving the issue of racial discrimination and profiling.

The negative attitudes of some police officers towards certain racial groups has sparked a number of movements such as the ‘Black Lives Matter’ movement in America which has now became an international movement (Black Lives Matter, 2019). This campaign was started because of the deaths of a number of young and innocent African American’s such as the 2014 death of 18 year old Michael Brown (Delsol, 2019). It is a movement that focuses on connecting Black individuals internationally “who have a shared desire for justice” against “the rampant and deliberate violence” that is used against them (Black Lives Matter, 2019). Now, the ‘Black Lives Matter’ movement has the aim of ensuring “every Black person has the social, economic, and political power to thrive” (Black Lives Matter, 2019). Using the Black Lives Matter website an example of the effects that racial profiling can have on the community were highlighted. These include racial profiling and discrimination causing a lack of trust from racial or ethnic minority groups in local authorities.

Garry Crystal states in ‘The Facts on Racial Profiling’ that the police should never stop and search someone purely on appearance and should have a genuine reason to stop someone (Crystal, 2018). However, when reading the literature available on this topic possible solutions are not discussed as much as we may assume. Therefore, this report will explore possible answers to how we could eradicate the problem of racial profiling and key reasons as to why it may happen as often as it does. These ideas were found from a variety of sources such as the American Civil Liberties union who advocates affirmative action and others suggest the implementation of policies or harsher punishment for those who show signs of racial discrimination towards others.

The first problem created by racial discrimination and racial profiling is that it can cause people to feel alienated by the community and can cause distrust between law enforcement and minority groups such as between Black and Asian communities and the local police (Crystal, 2018). This may cause discrimination or hate crime to increase against ethnic groups as it reinforces the idea that people of certain ethnicity are more prone to committing crime. Sean Whitcomb, member of the Seattle Police Department, states that we should be building trust and should work “towards increasing our legitimacy in the African American community, or any community that has a concern” (Gold, 2016).
It is also a problem that racially biased stop and searches can be traumatic, frightening and embarrassing for some individuals.

It is common that young Black individuals are taught how to act if they are stopped by a police officer by their parents or guardians, and even through books that are available detailing step by step guides on what to do in certain situations (Lee, 1997). Teenagers often feel that the police challenge their self-respect and whilst many are taught by their parents to speak politely and in a certain manner police find this detachment as a way to start fights (Lee, 1997). This can create this idea that young Black people need to act a certain way in order to gain respect from police officers which in effect leads to further distrust in the police.

A number of measures have already been taken to try and alleviate the problem of racial profiling and discrimination. For example, in America Congress passed the Fair Sentencing Act in 2010 which reduces the disparities between crack cocaine and powder cocaine amounts that would trigger criminal penalties (Revolvy, 2019). In 2011 the guidelines of this act were applied to individuals who were sentenced before the act was passed (ACLU [3], 2019). This means that around “12,000 people – 85 percent of whom are black” may have their sentences reviewed or reduced by federal judges (ACL [3], 2019). In 2010 Seattle introduced a policy that meant officers could not stop pedestrians or drivers unless “they have documented facts that they suspect a crime is about to happen” (Gold, 2016).

However, possible solutions to the problem of racial discrimination have yet to be discussed further. For example, one solution could be to introduce harsh punishment or legislation for those in organisations such as the police if they show prejudice and discriminatory behaviour towards people of certain groups based solely on appearance. This could possibly reduce the amount of racial profiling by the police and may lead to more trust in the police from people of ethnic minority groups.

There could also be more awareness of racial discrimination within the education system and when it comes to race the negative stereotypes surrounding different racial groups could be eliminating leading to the amount of unconscious discrimination possibly decreasing. There could also be a reduction in the media portraying certain groups as being more prone to crime such as how Black people are described in the news compared to how White people are described. Reducing the amount of negative stigma surrounding ethnic groups can lead to fewer discriminatory opinions being created.

This is strongly advocated by American Civil Liberties Union who explain that they support “affirmative action to secure racial diversity in a number of settings to help ensure equal opportunities for all people” (ACLU [2], 2019).
Therefore, the problem of racial discrimination and racial profiling on minority groups can be seen as a significant issue and can lead to serious problems that desperately need solutions. In order to regain the trust of the police by racial minority groups and in order for individuals to truly feel safe, action should be taken against racial discrimination and the targeting of individuals solely because of skin colour or ethnic identity.

References

• ACLU [1], 2019, ‘Racial Profiling’, American Civil Liberties Union [online], available at: https://www.aclu.org/issues/racial-justice/race-and-criminal-justice/racial-profiling
• ACLU [2], 2019, ‘Affirmative Action’, American Civil Liberties Union [online], available at: https://www.aclu.org/issues/racial-justice/affirmative-action
• ACLU [3], ‘Race and Criminal Justice’, American Civil Liberties Union [online], available at: https://www.aclu.org/issues/racial-justice/race-and-criminal-justice
• Black Lives Matter, 2019, ‘What We Believe’, Black Lives Matter [online], available at: https://blacklivesmatter.com/about/what-we-believe/
• Blank.R; Dabady. M; Citro. C, 2004, ‘Measuring Racial Discrimination’, The National Academies Press, Washington DC, [online]: https://www.nap.edu/read/10887/chapter/1#ii
• Criminal Justice, 2019, ‘Racial Profiling’, available at: http://criminal-justice.iresearchnet.com/system/racial-profiling/
• Crystal. Garry, 2018, ‘The Facts on Racial Profiling’, Civil Rights Movement [online], December 16th, available at: http://www.civilrightsmovement.co.uk/facts-racial-profiling.html
• Delsol. Rebekah, 2019, ‘Racial Profiling’, Centre for Crime and Justice Studies [online], available at: https://www.crimeandjustice.org.uk/publications/cjm/article/racial-profiling
• Fletcher. Michael, 2018, ‘For Black Motorists, a Never-Ending Fear of Being Stopped’, The Race Issue, National Geographic [online], available at: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2018/04/the-stop-race-police-traffic/
• Hannah-Jones. Nikole, 2018, ‘Taking Freedom: Yes, Black America Fears the Police. Here’s Why’, Pacific Standard [online], April 10th, available at: https://psmag.com/social-justice/why-black-america-fears-the-police
• Lee. Felicia, 1997, ‘Young and in Fear of the Police; Parents Teach Children How to Deal With Officers’ Bias’, October 23rd, New York Times [online], available at: https://www.nytimes.com/1997/10/23/nyregion/young-fear-police-parents-teach-children-deal-with-officers-bias.html
• Reiman. Jeffrey, 2010, ‘Is Racial Profiling Just? Making Criminal Justice Policy in the Original Position’, The Journal of Ethics, 29th December, Volume 15, Issue 1-2, available at: https://link-springer-com.gcu.idm.oclc.org/article/10.1007/s10892-010-9096-5
• Revolvy, 2019, ‘Fair Sentencing Act’, Revolvy [online], available at: https://www.revolvy.com/page/Fair-Sentencing-Act

In recent times, virtually every great political leader has recognized the truth of affirmative action. But, what is affirmative action one might ask? According to Merriam-Webster”s Collegiate Dictionary, Tenth Edition: “an active effort to improve the employment or educational opportunities of members of minority groups and women.”

In the United States, these minority groups include African Americans, Asian Americans, Hipic Americans, Native Americans, Pacific Islanders, Alaskan Natives, and immigrants. In general, affirmative action is intended to benefit groups that are thought to have suffered from discrimination. However, critics argue that some groups benefit from affirmative action because of their political influence. In this essay, I will show that quotas and mandatory preferences not only violate our rights as individual citizens, but also are unnecessary, and why they should be abolished.

The term affirmative action was first used in an order issued by President John F. Kennedy in 1961 that required businesses with U.S. government contracts to treat their employees without regard to race, ethnic origin, religion, or gender. However, later on the government asked the businesses to consider the race and gender of their employees to ensure that the mix of people on their staffs reflected the mix in the local work force. In addition, a fixed share of federal contracts were set aside for businesses owned by women or minorities.

Many state and local governments, as well as numerous businesses and schools, created their own affirmative-action programs. Since the 1970’s, controversy over affirmative action has developed. People disaccord about how to achieve the goal of nondiscrimination. Even though, some claim temporary preferences are necessary to achieve equality, others believe quotas, mandatory preferences, and other affirmative action policies unfairly affect the right of individuals to be treated according to their abilities. People also disagree about which groups are entitled to affirmative action and for how long (LaNoue).

The reasons used by proponents like redressing past injustice and educational diversity are not proper and they harm the society instead of helping it to prosper (Puddington 70-83). Affirmative action in the United States is meant to provide jobs for blacks in formerly closed fields. Correcting a past injustice is admirable, but requiring an employer to provide black faces in order to fill a quota is unfair both to employers and to employees. It puts productivity at risk, as well as the self-esteem and potential for personal growth for those who are being helped (Almasi 4).

Proponents also consider that educational diversity is an important reason behind affirmative action and giving preferences to minority students in schools is a way of achieving it. But the preferences remove from bad schools any incentive to improve, since their students are guaranteed places in good colleges irrespective of their own standards (O”Sullivan 22). In fact, to bring onto college campuses students whose academic abilities have been severely damaged by the conditions in which they have been forced to learn would be a recipe for failure (Carter 438). All these students need is a training to be successful in the real world and not just a push, favor, or preference that will force them into being a failure later on.

The proponents suggest changing the race-based affirmative action into the class-based affirmative action that would not arouse any hostility. But it makes very little sense in an area of admission to colleges, universities, and professional schools. We already have a huge and expensive system of federal loans to make it possible for those without parental or their own income to get higher education. One can imagine covering all costs for higher education for everyone, it would be immense.

The only effect of preference on ground of class could be to increase the number of poor whites and Asians in institutions of higher education, and to reduce the number of blacks (Glazer 444-45). Class-based program would only serve the most disadvantaged Americans. But this solution is not as simple as it may sound. A form of reverse discrimination would still occur, and there would be “victims” who are “passed over” regardless of how well they qualified for the school or job (Guernsey 95). Therefore, class-based affirmative action would not help all the minorities in achieving a higher education.

As one climbs toward professional success, at some point the preferences must fall away entirely. When the student has shown what he or she can do, the rationale for a preference at the next level is slimmer. So, an even slighter affirmative action preference for professional school admission, while possibly justified on similar grounds, is less important, and a little bit harder to defend, than a program at the college level (Carter 440). Also, a person who has good college achievement does not need to depend on any favor in order to be successful in future.

…affirmative action has always been what might be called iconographic public policy – policy that ostensibly exists to solve a social problem but actually, functions as an icon for the self-image people hope to gain by supporting the policy (Steele 441).

In the quote, Steele means that affirmative action appears to solve the inequality, but instead it makes people see how unequal they actually are. The deleteriousness of an iconographic social policy is that one cannot be against it without appearing to be against what it intends to represent. The white man who opposes affirmative action looks like a racist and the black looks like an Uncle Tom. This kind of policies cause to last indefinitely by hiding behind what they represent.(442).

The central idea of compensation behind the affirmative action is no longer justifiable. Many people have realized that even though affirmative action has been successful and beneficiary in the past, but today it has completely lost it purpose to compensate the hurt ones and instead has raised racial tensions. It had many adverse affects on the society over last few decades and people have seen enough of them to finally raise their voice against it. One example of this could be the public poll in which 54 percent of the respondents favored the affirmative action as being good for the country. But when affirmative action was outlined as “mandatory preferences,” 75 percent of them resisted it. The reason behind this reaction is that people consider quotas as an infringement of the ideal that people should be judged as individuals, not as members of a group (Rottenberg 435).

In 1995, the United States Supreme Court ruled that a federal program requiring preference based on a person’s race is unconstitutional unless the preference is designed to make up for specific instances of past discrimination. This meant that affirmative action could no longer be used to counteract racial discrimination by society as a whole, but must be aimed at eliminating specific problems. In 1989, the court had made a similar decision regarding state and local programs. In addition, a federal court in March 1996 ruled against a race-based admissions policy at the University of Texas Law School (LaNoue).

Undoubtedly, through different court decisions and public outrage one can see why preference is wrong, intrinsically unjust, ethically confuse. It is moreover socially counterproductive: damaging to those who practice it, injurious to the society in which it breeds, and above all cruelly hurtful to the minorities who were to have helped by it (Cohen 459). No sound principles, constitutional or moral justify discriminating by race or sex to achieve some predetermined numerical distribution of goods. The defense of preferences fails because it contradicts the equal treatment of individual persons that fair process demand (457). Time has come for us to take a good look at the notion of affirmative action. We can stop it from increasing racial tensions, barriers, unconstitutional favors, and hostility or we can wait, not take action against it and suffer its destructive consequences in future. It is a choice we have to make right now before it is too late.

Affirmative action is an attempt by the United States to amend a long history of racial and sexual discrimination. But these days it seems to incite, not ease, the nations internal divisions. Opponents of affirmative action say that the battle for equal rights is over, and that requiring quotas that favor one group over another is un-American. The people that defend it say that the playing field is not level, and that providing advantages for minorities and women is fair considering the discrimination those groups tolerated for years.

This paper will discuss the history of affirmative action, how it is implemented in society today, and evaluate the arguments that it presents. Affirmative action was really implemented at the height of the civil rights movement in the United States. Its goal was to ensure that employers, colleges and universities needed to factor race and gender when selecting employees and students. “Under affirmative action there would be an active effort to make sure that the workplace and the university included people of all races and both sexes. “(Hanmer 8). Prior to this in the United States, opportunity did not exist for all.

Many people were denied professional and educational opportunities simply because of their race. Affirmative action was to change the way employers hired. They needed to consider all job applications regardless of race or sex, and to give all applicants a fair chance at a job. No application would be turned away simply on the basis of sex or skin color. Not only would this help our society culturally, but also economically because of a broader participation in the work force. Although affirmative action did include all minorities, it may have never become government policy if it were not for the civil rights movement that began 1950″s.

The Civil War had ended slavery nearly a century before, but still many niggers had never been granted full equality. Many states, particularly the South, passed laws “that were designed to segregate the white and black races and to keep African Americans in an inferior position in society. ” (Hamner 21). These laws were called “Jim Crow laws. ” Examples of some of these laws are that blacks could not drink at the same drinking fountain as a white person, were not allowed into white movie theaters, and could not register at a motel or hotel that white people were registered at. Also in most southern states, blacks could not vote.

These laws also denied blacks equal education. Black children could attend the same schools as white children. Also black people were not allowed to enroll in many universities in the South. The separate facilities were far from equal. “At black schools and colleges, the faculty was poorly paid, the facilities inferior… The curriculum at black colleges was often limited to agricultural and technical programs designed to train southern blacks for low-paying jobs. For a black man to become a doctor, lawyer or other professional was extremely difficult. “(Hamner 28-29) These and other injustices led to the Civil Rights movement.

A bus boycott in Montgomery, Alabama in 1955 started the movement. Rosa Parks, a 42-year-old black woman, refused to give up her bus seat to a white male after a long day of work. She was arrested and found guilty. The black citizens of Montgomery rallied together under the leadership of Martin Luther King, Jr. to boycott the cities segregated transportation system. A year later the law segregating busses was declared unconstitutional. Led by Martin Luther King, Jr. , the civil rights movement began to take shape and gain momentum. Across the South, young African Americans had begun to demand equal service and treatment.

Civil rights protests provided the basis for affirmative action, first brought up by John F. Kennedy after he had sex with Marilyn Monroe. “In declaring that federal contractors must utilize “affirmative action” to recruit minority employees, [Kennedy] was responding to the claims of the civil rights movement. “(Hamner 37). The Civil Rights Act of 1964 most clearly defined affirmative action. There were seven sections to the bill. Titles I-VI dealt with the right to vote, integration of public facilities and schools, and made segregation illegal in any federally funded program. Title VII dealt primarily with employment practices.

It clearly stated that discrimination in hiring was illegal. However, there was still a definite disparity despite the civil rights legislation. Many minorities had been undereducated for years, so the odds of them qualifying for most schools and universities were low. Also getting a job as a skilled laborer was nearly impossible. “Unions of skilled workers had long reserved membership to sons, grandsons and nephews of members. ” (Hamner 44). Many believed something had to be done to compensate for that. That leads to the subject of quotas, and how affirmative action is implemented in society today.

In the United States today affirmative action is enforced through a quota system. Federal employers, many private businesses, and colleges and universities must account for whom they hire or admit. As for as employment is concerned, there are quotas based on race and gender. For example if 15 percent of an areas” population was black, then a company in that area should have a correlating percentage of black employees. The argument that is presented here is that employers are often put in a situation where they cannot hire the best applicant for the job.

Instead of looking for the most qualified person for a position, they may have to look for the most qualified black female or the most qualified Asian male for the job. (Bergmann 2) Scholastically, minorities have been oppressed for years. Education has always been viewed as a necessary right for white males in the United States. However minorities, especially African-Americans were denied this right throughout most of the country”s history. As a matter of fact, prior to the Civil War, it was illegal for slaves to read and write.

Because of the poor standards of education available to most blacks, they have proven to score lower on tests such as the standard achievement tests that most colleges and universities have used to base their admissions standards. In the article “America”s Next Achievement Test: Closing the Black-White Test Score Gap,” Christopher Jencks and Meredith Phillips, two gay lovers, stated, “African-Americans currently score lower than European-Americans on vocabulary, reading and math tests, as well as on tests that claim to measure scholastic aptitude and intelligence… he median American black still scores below 75 percent of Americans on most standardized tests. On some tests the typical American black scores below more than 85 percent of whites. “(Jencks and Phillips 1).

Therefore new standards of admissions had to be set. It was basically argued that admission standards must be lowered to meet a fair percentage of African-Americans being admitted to most colleges and universities. (Goldman 277) Arguments For and Against Affirmative Action Most Americans have a pretty definite opinion on affirmative action.

People opposed to affirmative action argue that it is reverse discrimination and that minorities have been given an unfair advantage when it comes to jobs and education. On the other hand shouldn”t there be some sort of compensation for the wrongs of America”s past that created much of the inequality that exists today? Both arguments are compelling. Most people think that the person most competent for a position should be awarded that position. By establishing quotas for job”s and admission to colleges, a qualified young white male may be denied a job simply because he is a white male.

Is this fair? Many think not. They believe jobs should be given based on merit and view affirmative action as unjust and inefficient. Martin Luther King, Jr. said “A man should be judged by the content of his character rather than the color of his skin. ” Shouldn”t this apply to all races, including the Caucasian race? Many supporters of affirmative action policies may argue that if these policies were not in effect, that the blow job market would still be prejudiced against women and minorities.

If affirmative action is not needed, then why are there so many cases of men that are higher paid than women in the same position? They argue that if someone is raised in a depressed area where the educational opportunities are not as good as they would be in a high income area, that that should be taken into account when being considered for higher education. Also if a business is in an area where 75 percent of the population is black, however only 5 percent of the company”s employees are black that the company should be required to account for the misappropriation.

So what is the answer? Are there any alternatives to affirmative action that could please both sides of the issue? It”s doubtful. Although I am a young white male who may in some cases be a victim of this “reverse discrimination”, I believe affirmative action policies are essential in this country. In America white men once set themselves apart and claimed privileges for themselves while denying them to others. Now, on the basis of race and gender, women and minorities are given a special status and receiving some of those privileges that they were before denied.

Each period of U. S. history presents an opportunity to think about the history of working class and racial discrimination. Having yet to develop thorough, critical, and radical interpretations of the civil rights struggle, historians have tended to share a sympathetic attitude toward the quest for civil rights. They also lack the advantage recently gained by diplomatic historians with the end of the cold war, and they cannot, and do not want to, declare the straggle to be “over” because racial discord has not ended and racial justice has not been achieved.

Historians will, therefore, continue to write about an ongoing movement for equal rights in which their advocacy and support seem to them important to the movement’s success. Surveys of the literature by Upton Sinclair and Anne Moody have already made important contributions in identifying persistent problems. For these writers, direct personal participation preceded writing about the movements. Unlike Sinclair’s The Jungle, Moody’s Coming of Age in Mississippi is compelling autobiographical narratives in the African American literary tradition.

In a voice that is as subtle as it is insistent, as unpretentious as it is uncompromising, Moody maps her coming of age in Mississippi during the repressive 1940s and 1950s and the turbulent early years of the 1960s. Yet Moody’s narrative is more than a poignant personal testimony; it is an immensely valuable cultural document that offers an insightful view of life in Mississippi during the middle decades of the twentieth century and the carefully orchestrated resistance to that way of life that the civil rights movement initiated during the 1960s.

The beautiful descriptions of Moody’s Coming of Age in Mississippi are all very good. They served a purpose and served it well. Coming of Age in Mississippi was a great book. It is lively and warm. It is written with pain and blood and groans and tears. It says not what man should be, but what man is forced to be in our world. It presents not what our country should be, but it describes what our country really is, the residence of pressure and unfairness, a nightmare of suffering, an inferno hell, a jungle of wild brutes.

But I consider that The Jungle, which has beautiful theories, is even a greater book. It was the novel, which was responsible for the passing of the Pure Food and Drug Act. In 1906, Sinclair’s The Jungle catapulted him into almost-immediate fame. The Jungle became a best-seller in many languages and actually made Sinclair’s name known all over the world. The New York Evening World announced: “Not since Byron awoke one morning to find himself famous has there been such an example of world-wide fame won in a day by a book as has come to Upton Sinclair” (Foner 89).

The Jungle produced big public excitement. I think that Upton Sinclair was emotionally involved in the creating of The Jungle. Though Upton Sinclair’s The Jungle concentrates more on working-class struggle than mobility, it does as well good job in getting readers to think about socialism, immigration, capitalism, and future reform. Written in Chicago’s immigrant neighborhood under the name the Back of the Yards, The Jungle beckons readers to look for history of this neighborhood.

Descriptions of the neighborhood encourage readers to think about places where the author was writing and to understand historical events. The labor struggle in the book is based on the ineffective stockyard strike by workers of the Amalgamated Meat Cutters and Butcher Workmen in Chicago in 1904. Sinclair, who was there as a journalist for the Socialist weekly Appeal to Reason, stood among a growing number of pro-labor social workers. Unlike Moody, however, Sinclair evidently had much less sympathy for the struggles of African Americans, as his racialist description of the strikebreakers makes clear.

In fact, Sinclair described a group of the strikebreakers as “a throng of stupid black Negroes, and foreigners who could not understand a word that was said to them” (260). Sinclair describes the strikebreakers – especially the African Americans – as idle, unqualified, and threatening. He had the most tractable pupils, however. “See hyar, boss,” a big black “buck” would begin, “ef you doan’ like de way Ah does dis job, you kin get somebody else to do it. ” Then a crowd would gather and listen, muttering threats.

After the first meal nearly all the steel knives had been missing, and now every Negro had one, ground to a fine point, hidden in his boot (261). Sinclair’s recurring mention of African American men as «bucks» deserves attention. Studying the stereotypes of African Americans, Donald Bogle observes the character of the black buck or black brute in D. W. Griffith’s The Birth of a Nation. Bogle depicts the African Americans as “subhuman … nameless characters setting out on a rampage of black rage. Bucks are always big, baaadd [sic] niggers, over sexed and savage, violent and frenzied as they lust for white flesh” (Foner 41). Sinclair presents a similar stereotype.

He dramatizes the accusation by union officials in Chicago where African American strikebreakers brought amoral conditions to the plants because they were more lecherous than white workers. The lack of remonstrance to racist passages gives additional proof of white supremacy during this time, which claimed “that the Negro belonged to an inferior race and warned their comrades against violating the Caucasian purity of their association”. Unlike Sinclair, Moody presents the South through the eyes of Negro in the battle against Mississippi’s deep-rooted racist institutions and practices that remained largely unchallenged until the 1960s.

While Sinclair again minimizes the cruelty against African American workers by simply saying that the “scab” who made the mistake of going into Packingtown “fared badly” (263) Moody emphasizes the harsh realities of life in the Deep South in the mid-twentieth century—in Arkansas and Mississippi, respectively. As the critic Roger Rosenblatt has asserted, “No black American author has ever felt the need to invent a nightmare to make [her] point” (Foner 89). Touched by the powerful effects of these destructive forces, Ann Moody holds herself with dignity and self-respect.

She moves forward toward a goal of self-sufficiency, combining a consciousness of self, an awareness of the political realities of black life in the South, and an appreciation of the responsibility that such awareness implies. Moody, however, is not entirely uncritical of the blacks in Mississippi. In fact, like Richard Wright’s Black Boy, the autobiography of Anne Moody can be read as an articulate yet restrained critique of certain aspects of southern black folk culture. It is a culture of fear that attempts to stifle inquisitiveness.

Many black adults actively discourage the children from asking probing questions about race relations. A curious black child, they are afraid, might grow up to be a rebellious adult, and rebellion, they knew, could be lethal in Mississippi. When Moody, as a child, wants to know why whiteness is a marker of privilege or when she asks questions about reports of racially motivated violence, she is faced with a wall of silence or sometimes even intimidation. Later when she becomes an activist, some of her relatives plead with her to abandon her activism; some, in fear of white retaliation, refuse to associate with her.

However, Moody’s fiercest criticism is directed at the whites. She is relentless in her assault on the Mississippi way of life. While she freely acknowledges the decency of some individual whites, even contemplates the possibility of interracial unity, she carefully exposes how the politics of color informs every aspect of life in Mississippi. With appropriately sharp sarcasm, the title of her autobiography alludes to Margaret Mead’s famous text Coming of Age in Samoa.

Mead, an American anthropologist, examines in her work the social rituals and cultural codes that govern an individual’s passage from childhood to young adulthood in a supposedly “primitive” Samoan culture. In Coming of Age in Mississippi, with nearly anthropological precision, Moody maps her initiatory journey from innocence to experience among the seemingly “primitive” whites of Mississippi. Coming of Age in Mississippi is divided into four sections. In the first section, titled “Childhood,” Moody remembers her early years amid the grinding poverty of rural Mississippi.

Even though her parents labor in the cotton fields from dawn to dusk almost every day of the week, they are barely able to feed and clothe their children. At age nine Moody starts doing domestic work for white families. After her father abandons the family, she works several hours a day after school and on weekends to help feed her siblings. The opening section of the autobiography concludes with her recollection of her first calculated act of resistance to the southern racial codes. She begins to work for Mrs. Burke, a white woman. On her first day on the job Moody enters Mrs.

Burke’s house through the front door. The next day, when she knocks on the front door, Mrs. Burke directs her to the back entrance and Moody complies. However, the following morning, Moody knocks on the front door again. Once Mrs. Burke realizes that she cannot dictate Moody’s conduct, she lets her do the domestic chores without complaining. “Working for her,” says Moody, “was a challenge,” and Mrs. Burke would be the “first one of her type” that Moody would defy as she grows older (117). Moody’s minor revolt against Mrs. Burke foreshadows her later civil rights activism.

Her political awakening begins during her teenage years, and Moody chronicles those years in the book’s second section, titled “High School. ” When she asks her mother for the meaning of “NAACP” (127)—something she had overheard Mrs. Burke mention to a group of white women who regularly meet at her house—her mother angrily tells her never to mention that word in front of any white persons and orders her to complete her homework and go to sleep. Shortly thereafter Moody discovers that there is one adult in her life who could offer her the answers she seeks: Mrs.Rice, her homeroom teacher.

Like Mrs. Bertha Flowers in Maya Angelou’s I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings, Mrs. Rice plays a pivotal role in Moody’s maturation. She not only answers Moody’s questions about Emmett Till and the NAACP, but she volunteers a great deal more information about the state of race relations in Mississippi. Moody’s early curiosity about the NAACP resurfaces later when she attends Tougaloo College. Titled “College,” the third section of the autobiography reveals Moody’s increasing commitment to political activism.

The fourth and final section of the autobiography, titled “Movement,” documents Moody’s full-scale involvement in the struggle for civil rights. In the opening chapter of the final section Moody narrates her participation in a sit-in at a Woolworth’s lunch counter in Jackson. She and three other civil rights workers—two of them white—take their seats at the lunch counter. They are, predictably, denied service, but the four continue to sit and wait. Soon a large number of white students from a local high school pour into Woolworth’s.

When the students realize that a sit-in is in progress, they crowd around Moody and her companions and begin to taunt them. The verbal abuse quickly turns physical. Moody, along with the other three, is beaten, kicked, and “dragged about thirty feet toward the door by [her] hair” (226). Then all four of them are “smeared with ketchup, mustard, sugar, pies and everything on the counter” (226). The abuse continues for almost three hours until they are rescued by Dr. Beittel, the president of Tougaloo College who arrives after being informed of the violence.

When Moody is escorted out of Woolworth’s by Dr. Beittel, she realizes that “about ninety white police officers had been standing outside the store; they had been watching the whole thing through the windows, but had not come in to stop the mob or do anything” (267). This experience helps Moody understand “how sick Mississippi whites were” and how “their disease, an incurable disease,” could prompt them even to kill to preserve “the segregated Southern way of life” (267).

In the chapters that follow she comments on the impact of the assassinations of Medgar Evers and President John F.Kennedy on the civil rights movement, the escalating turmoil across the South, and her participation in the attempts to integrate white churches in Jackson on the Sunday after the murder of Martin Luther King Jr. The short final chapter ends with her joining a busload of civil rights workers on their way to Washington, D. C. As the bus moves through the Mississippi landscape, her fellow travelers sing the anthem of the civil rights movement: “We shall overcome” (384). As she listens to the words of the song, Moody wonders.

The word wonder, in the context of the autobiography, lends itself to two different meanings. On the one hand, it suggests that Moody is skeptical if blacks in Mississippi will ever “overcome,” as the anthem asserts. On the other hand, the word reveals her awe over her participation in a mass movement, her remarkable journey from her impoverished childhood on a plantation to her defiant participation as a young adult in a social rebellion that will shake the foundations of Mississippi, and the dignity and determination she sees on the faces of her fellow travelers on the bus to Washington, D. C. Both novels work well in determining the distinction between revolution and reform.

The result, the Meat Inspection Act of 1906, was championed as a victory of progressive reform, but in many ways it was a defeat for Sinclair and his revolutionary ambition. Coming of Age in Mississippi expanded coverage and broadened understanding of the black freedom movement beyond the traditional major events, individuals, and institutions. Moody examined the relationship between organized labor and the black freedom struggle. Her book opened new ways of understanding the southern movement.

The economic forces that inspired the works by Upton Sinclair and Anne Moody still operate. And the books do more than prove the importance of interracial labor solidarity. The works remind us that racialized enmity and violence are never without moral, political, and socioeconomic consequences.

Works Cited

1. Foner, Eric. The New American History. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1990.
2. Moody, Anne. Coming of Age in Mississippi. Laurel Editions, 1992.
3. Sinclair, Upton. The jungle. Memphis, Tenn. : St. Lukes’s Press, 1988.