af.blackmilkmag.com
Nuwe resepte

Studente van die hoërskool in Chicago boikot 'walglike' middagete

Studente van die hoërskool in Chicago boikot 'walglike' middagete


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.


Hoërskoolleerlinge in Chicago het begin om 'n skoolmiddagete te boikot wat volgens hulle erg beperk en nie gesond is nie

'Ons glo dat ordentlike kos 'n mensereg is,' het die studente in 'n aanlyn petisie gesê.

Studente aan die Roosevelt High School in Chicago het begin boikot op Aramark, die internasionale voedselverskaffer wat die distrik, Chicago Public Schools, bedien.

Onder sy kliënte bedien Aramark opvoedkundige fasiliteite, besighede, korrektiewe fasiliteite en verskeie groot sportarena's - waaronder Citi Field, die Rogers -sentrum en Quicken Loans Arena.

In 'n aanlyn -petisie waarin verbeterde skoolmiddagete gevra word, voer Roosevelt -studente aan dat Aramark se "opsies te min is, die porsies te klein is, die kos smaak sleg en dat dit ongesond is. Ons glo dat ordentlike voedsel 'n mensereg is, 'lui die petisie. 'N Federale subsidieprogram stel die meerderheid studente in staat om gratis skoolmiddagete te kry, maar' die kos is walglik ', het een student aan WBEZ gesê.

'N Blog wat deur Roosevelt -studente bekendgestel is, "die School Lunch Project", dokumenteer die etes wat aan studente beskikbaar is en vra dat skoolamptenare beter opsies vir die distrik eis.

Studente sê dat hulle ten minste die opsie moet kry om die kampus te verlaat vir middagete as Aramark nie 'n beter en voedsamer middagete kan voorsien nie. Baie van die opsies wat tans beskikbaar is, soos pizza en kaasburgers, is in wese kitskositems.

Intussen het Aramark bevestig dat hy bewus is van die versoekskrif teen die huidige maaltydopsies, en "ondersoek dit saam met CPS en die skoolhoof."


Waarom die Woolworth se sit-in gewerk het

Ek was op 1 Februarie 1960 toe vier swart studente by Woolworth & rsquos se etenstafel in Greensboro, N.C., gaan sit en koffie bestel. Soos TIME berig het, het die blanke klante hulle versigtig dopgehou, en die wit kelnerinne het hul streng beleefde versoeke om diens geïgnoreer. & Rdquo

Ses jaar het verloop sedert die uitspraak van die Hooggeregshof Brown teenoor die Onderwysraad verklaar segregasie in openbare skole ongrondwetlik en aparte fasiliteite was inherent ongelyk, het hoofregter Earl Warren & mdash aangevoer, maar suidelike state (en selfs sommige stede in die noorde) het desperaat vasgeklou aan hul tradisies van rasse -uitsluiting. Om Jim Crow deur die regstelsel uit te daag, was 'n geleidelike, stuk -stuk proses, en 'n groot aantal Amerikaners het ongeduldig geword.

Die vier jong mans, eerstejaars aan die North Carolina Agricultural and Technical College, het tot sluitingstyd bly sit en 'n paar dae later teruggekeer met nog 300 studente, vasbeslote om die vyf-en-dime-blankes te integreer.

Hierdie vorm van voetsoolvlak-aktivisme, bekend as 'n & ldquosit-in, & rdquo het oor die volgende paar weke na stede in byna elke suidelike staat versprei. TIME het die & ldquounique-protes teenoor Jim Crow & rdquo toegeskryf aan die begin van 'n golf van betogings wat van Noord-Carolina na Suid-Carolina na Virginia na Florida na Tennessee en in Deep South Alabama begin het. swaggerers, rednecked hatemongers, [en] die Ku Klux Klan, en hulle het ook simpatie getrek deur blanke universiteitstudente, sowel as diegene in Noordelike stede wat picketers buite Woolworth & rsquos en soortgelyke winkels in New York, Madison en Boston opgeruk het.

Woolworth en rsquos word in Julie 1960 gedegregeer, met ander winkels en restaurante.

Die sitplekke wat by die middagete ingeburger is, veroorsaak swembaddens by swembaddens en strande, kniel by kerke in, lees in by biblioteke en instap in teaters en pretparke. Diegene wat aan hierdie regstreekse optrede deelgeneem het, moes stoïsse kalmte handhaaf te midde van wit teistering, mondelings en fisies. Baie was versigtig om die wit standaarde van versorging, aantreklikheid en maniere na te kom, selfs al het dit die diepgewortelde rasse-etiket ontwrig. In sommige stede het koppige amptenare bloot openbare parke en swembaddens gesluit eerder as om dit te integreer, maar die strategie werk in baie ander.

Sit-ins was nie nuut nie; die NAACP sowel as die Congress of Racial Equality (CORE) het dit in die noorde en die suide georganiseer na die Tweede Wêreldoorlog en mdash, maar in die laat 1950's en vroeë 1960's het 'n nasionale beweging ontstaan. Die insetsels was nie net belangrik omdat hulle gewerk het nie, maar ook omdat hulle tienduisende mense gemobiliseer het om deel te neem aan 'n verskeidenheid konfronterende dade waaruit die burgerregtebeweging bestaan ​​het.

Dieselfde geld boikotte, wat gebruik is as 'n strategie om rasse-ongelykheid aan te spreek sedert die & ldquoDon & rsquot Buy Where You Can & rsquot Work & rdquo-aksies van die Depressie-era Noord, waarin swartes geweier het om in winkels te koop wat hulle nie as werknemers sou huur nie. Hulle pogings is dikwels gestrem deur hofbevele teen piekelyne, en hul sukses was sterk afhanklik van plaaslike persdekking, maar die boikotte het uiteindelik honderde werkgeleenthede vir swartes in stede soos Chicago en Cleveland opgelewer. Aktiviste het hierdie strategie gedurende die 1950's en 1960's herleef en die belangrikheid van ekonomiese geleenthede in swart gemeenskappe beklemtoon. Die bekendste boikot in die Amerikaanse geskiedenis het plaasgevind in Montgomery, Ala., In 1955. Nadat verskeie swart vroue, waaronder Rosa Parks, gearresteer is omdat hulle geweier het om hul busstoele aan wit passasiers af te staan, het Afro-Amerikaners 'n boikot van die stad & rsquos -busstelsel. Dit het 381 dae geduur, met 'n geskatte 40 000 deelnemers. TIME beskryf die boikot as 'n kragtige ekonomiese wapen, en inderdaad, Afro -Amerikaners was verantwoordelik vir 75% van die Montgomery- en rsquos -busbestuur. In 1956 het die Hooggeregshof beslis dat geskeide sitplekke op openbare vervoer die 14de wysiging oortree.

Net so het die 1963 -optog in Washington, waar dr King sy toespraak oor 'I Have a Dream' gehou het, sy oorsprong in die burgerregte -aktivisme van die veertigerjare. In 1941 het A. Philip Randolph en Bayard Rustin 100,000 mense gemobiliseer om op die hoofstad van die land te marsjeer om rassediskriminasie in die Amerikaanse weermag te protesteer. Geen optog het daardie jaar plaasgevind nie; die beplanning alleen het president Roosevelt effektief onder druk geplaas om 'n uitvoerende bevel uit te reik waarin die oorlogsbedrywe gesegregeer word. Maar die idee vir 'n optog in Washington het nooit heeltemal verdwyn nie, en die klimaat van protes in die 1960's het dit nuwe lewe gegee. In 1963 het Randolph en Rustin, met hulp van 'n verskeidenheid burgerregte -leiers en groepe, die destydse grootste politieke byeenkoms in die Amerikaanse geskiedenis gereël.

Al hierdie strategieë vir sosiale beweging het dit gemeen dat dit sake soos gewoonlik ontwrig en openbare ruimte gebruik om 'n skouspel te maak wat aandag trek. Selfs toe hulle nie die tipe letterlike konfrontasie wat in 1965 op die Edmund Pettus -brug plaasgevind het, kon uitlok nie, het hulle simboliese krag gehad. Alhoewel die nuusdekking wat hierdie gebeure ontvang nie universeel ondersteun is nie, het 'n enorme hoeveelheid mediafokus op televisie en in die koerante uiteindelik die oorsaak van burgerregte versterk. Teen 1960 het byna elke Amerikaner 'n televisiestel en kon hy kyk hoe die beweging op die aandnuus ontvou. Beelde van nie -gewelddadige betogers wat wrede slae verduur, het die openbare mening ten gunste van die beweging laat val.

Daaropvolgende Amerikaanse sosiale bewegings het die krag van die sit-in erken en dit aangepas om hul eie stryd aan te spreek. In die sewentigerjare het gay-bevrydingsaktiviste byvoorbeeld ldquokiss-ins en rdquo by anti-gay-ondernemings georganiseer as 'n manier om sigbaarheid en bewustheid te bevorder, en gedurende die 1980's het AIDS-voorspraakgroep ACT-UP opgevoer en ldquodie-ins & rdquo in Manhattan, om die omvang te verteenwoordig van 'n gesondheidskrisis wat deur die regering verwaarloos is. Onlangs is die-ins gebruik om die polisie se brutaliteit te protesteer.

Die protes taktiek van die burgerregtebeweging, van die Woolworth & rsquos sit-ins tot die Selma-optogte, toon die krag van gewone mense wat kollektief optree. Hierdie strategieë het uiteindelik die weg gebaan vir die aanvaarding van die Wet op Burgerregte van 1964 en die Wet op Stemreg van 1965. Net so belangrik was dit dat swart Amerikaners 'n gevoel van waardigheid en eiewaarde kon uitspreek wat deurlopend, gewelddadig ontken is. hulle. Op hierdie manier was hulle voorlopers van vandag se sosiale geregtigheidsaktivisme, veral die oproep tot #blacklivesmatter teen polisie -brutaliteit. Ons kan sulke huidige protesoptredes sien as die voortsetting van 'n lang en onvoltooide grondbeweging. Net soos in die sestigerjare hang oorwinnings af van sterkte in getalle sowel as die instrumentale rol van die media in die vorming van 'n verhaal van die stryd.

Sascha Cohen is 'n PhD -kandidaat in die geskiedenisdepartement aan die Brandeis Universiteit. Haar proefskrif ondersoek Amerikaanse humor in die 1970's en 1980's. Haar eie satiriese skryfwerk kan gevind word in McSweeneys.


Waarom die Woolworth se sit-in gewerk het

Ek was op 1 Februarie 1960 toe vier swart studente by Woolworth & rsquos se etenstafel in Greensboro, N.C., gaan sit en koffie bestel. Soos TIME berig het, het die blanke klante hulle versigtig dopgehou, en die wit kelnerinne het hul streng beleefde versoeke om diens geïgnoreer. & Rdquo

Ses jaar het verloop sedert die uitspraak van die Hooggeregshof Brown teenoor die Onderwysraad verklaar segregasie in openbare skole ongrondwetlik en aparte fasiliteite is inherent ongelyk, het hoofregter Earl Warren & mdash aangevoer, maar suidelike state (en selfs sommige stede in die noorde) het desperaat vasgeklou aan hul tradisies van rasse -uitsluiting. Om Jim Crow deur die regstelsel uit te daag, was 'n geleidelike, stuk -stuk proses, en 'n groot aantal Amerikaners het ongeduldig geword.

Die vier jong mans, eerstejaars aan die North Carolina Agricultural and Technical College, het tot sluitingstyd bly sit en 'n paar dae later teruggekeer met nog 300 studente, vasbeslote om die vyf-en-dime-blankes te integreer.

Hierdie vorm van voetsoolvlak-aktivisme, bekend as 'n & ldquosit-in, & rdquo het oor die volgende paar weke na stede in byna elke suidelike staat versprei. TIME het die & ldquounique-protes teenoor Jim Crow & rdquo toegeskryf aan die begin van 'n golf van betogings wat van Noord-Carolina na Suid-Carolina na Virginia na Florida na Tennessee en in Deep South Alabama begin het. swaggerers, rednecked hatemongers, [en] die Ku Klux Klan, en hulle het ook simpatie getrek deur blanke universiteitstudente, sowel as diegene in Noordelike stede wat picketers buite Woolworth & rsquos en soortgelyke winkels in New York, Madison en Boston opgeruk het.

Woolworth en rsquos word in Julie 1960 gedegregeer, met ander winkels en restaurante.

Die sitplekke wat by die middagete ingeburger is, veroorsaak swembaddens by swembaddens en strande, kniel by kerke in, lees in by biblioteke en instap in teaters en pretparke. Diegene wat aan hierdie regstreekse optrede deelgeneem het, moes stoïsse kalmte handhaaf te midde van wit teistering, mondelings en fisies. Baie was versigtig om die wit standaarde van versorging, aantreklikheid en maniere na te kom, selfs al het dit die diepgewortelde rasse-etiket ontwrig. In sommige stede het koppige amptenare bloot openbare parke en swembaddens gesluit eerder as om dit te integreer, maar die strategie werk in baie ander.

Sit-ins was nie nuut nie; die NAACP sowel as die Congress of Racial Equality (CORE) het dit in die noorde en die suide georganiseer na die Tweede Wêreldoorlog en mdash, maar in die laat 1950's en vroeë 1960's het 'n nasionale beweging ontstaan. Die insetsels was nie net belangrik omdat hulle gewerk het nie, maar ook omdat hulle tienduisende mense gemobiliseer het om deel te neem aan 'n verskeidenheid konfronterende dade waaruit die burgerregtebeweging bestaan ​​het.

Dieselfde geld boikotte, wat gebruik is as 'n strategie om rasse-ongelykheid aan te spreek sedert die & ldquoDon & rsquot Buy Where You Can & rsquot Work & rdquo-aksies van die Depressie-era Noord, waarin swartes geweier het om in winkels te koop wat hulle nie as werknemers sou huur nie. Hulle pogings is dikwels gestrem deur hofbevele teen piekelyne, en hul sukses was sterk afhanklik van plaaslike persdekking, maar die boikotte het uiteindelik honderde werkgeleenthede vir swartes in stede soos Chicago en Cleveland opgelewer. Aktiviste het hierdie strategie gedurende die 1950's en 1960's herleef en die belangrikheid van ekonomiese geleenthede in swart gemeenskappe beklemtoon. Die bekendste boikot in die Amerikaanse geskiedenis het plaasgevind in Montgomery, Ala., In 1955. Nadat verskeie swart vroue, waaronder Rosa Parks, gearresteer is omdat hulle geweier het om hul busstoele aan wit passasiers af te staan, het Afro-Amerikaners 'n boikot van die stad & rsquos -busstelsel. Dit het 381 dae geduur, met 'n geskatte 40 000 deelnemers. TIME beskryf die boikot as 'n kragtige ekonomiese wapen, en inderdaad, Afro -Amerikaners was verantwoordelik vir 75% van die Montgomery- en rsquos -busbestuur. In 1956 het die Hooggeregshof beslis dat geskeide sitplekke op openbare vervoer die 14de wysiging oortree.

Net so het die 1963 -optog in Washington, waar dr King sy toespraak oor 'I Have a Dream' gehou het, sy oorsprong in die burgerregte -aktivisme van die veertigerjare. In 1941 het A. Philip Randolph en Bayard Rustin 100,000 mense gemobiliseer om op die hoofstad van die land te marsjeer om rassediskriminasie in die Amerikaanse weermag te protesteer. Geen optog het daardie jaar plaasgevind nie; die beplanning alleen het president Roosevelt effektief onder druk geplaas om 'n uitvoerende bevel uit te reik waarin die oorlogsbedrywe gedelegeer is. Maar die idee vir 'n optog in Washington het nooit heeltemal verdwyn nie, en die klimaat van protes in die 1960's het dit nuwe lewe gegee. In 1963 het Randolph en Rustin, met hulp van 'n verskeidenheid burgerregte -leiers en groepe, die destydse grootste politieke byeenkoms in die Amerikaanse geskiedenis gereël.

Al hierdie strategieë vir sosiale beweging het dit gemeen dat dit sake soos gewoonlik ontwrig en openbare ruimte gebruik om 'n skouspel te maak wat aandag trek. Selfs toe hulle nie die tipe letterlike konfrontasie wat in 1965 op die Edmund Pettus -brug plaasgevind het, kon uitlok nie, het hulle simboliese krag gehad. Alhoewel die nuusdekking wat hierdie gebeure ontvang nie universeel ondersteun is nie, het 'n enorme hoeveelheid mediafokus op televisie en in die koerante uiteindelik die oorsaak van burgerregte versterk. Teen 1960 het byna elke Amerikaner 'n televisiestel en kon hy kyk hoe die beweging op die aandnuus ontvou. Beelde van nie -gewelddadige betogers wat wrede slae verduur, het die openbare mening ten gunste van die beweging laat val.

Latere Amerikaanse sosiale bewegings het die krag van die sit-in erken en dit aangepas om hul eie stryd aan te spreek. In die sewentigerjare het gay-bevrydingsaktiviste byvoorbeeld ldquokiss-ins en rdquo by anti-gay-ondernemings georganiseer as 'n manier om sigbaarheid en bewustheid te bevorder, en gedurende die 1980's het AIDS-voorspraakgroep ACT-UP opgevoer en ldquodie-ins & rdquo in Manhattan, om die omvang te verteenwoordig van 'n gesondheidskrisis wat deur die regering verwaarloos is. Onlangs is die-ins gebruik om die polisie se brutaliteit te protesteer.

Die protes taktiek van die burgerregtebeweging, van die Woolworth & rsquos sit-ins tot die Selma-optogte, toon die krag van gewone mense wat kollektief optree. Hierdie strategieë het uiteindelik die weg gebaan vir die aanvaarding van die Wet op Burgerregte van 1964 en die Wet op Stemreg van 1965. Net so belangrik was dit dat swart Amerikaners 'n gevoel van waardigheid en eiewaarde kon uitspreek wat deurlopend, gewelddadig ontken is. hulle. Op hierdie manier was hulle voorlopers van vandag se sosiale geregtigheidsaktivisme, veral die oproep tot #blacklivesmatter teen polisie -brutaliteit. Ons kan sulke huidige protesoptredes sien as die voortsetting van 'n lang en onvoltooide grondbeweging. Net soos in die sestigerjare hang oorwinnings af van sterkte in getalle sowel as die instrumentale rol van die media in die vorming van 'n verhaal van die stryd.

Sascha Cohen is 'n PhD -kandidaat in die geskiedenisdepartement aan die Brandeis Universiteit. Haar proefskrif ondersoek Amerikaanse humor in die 1970's en 1980's. Haar eie satiriese skryfwerk kan gevind word in McSweeneys.


Waarom die sit-in van Woolworth gewerk het

Ek was op 1 Februarie 1960 toe vier swart studente by Woolworth & rsquos se etenstafel in Greensboro, N.C., gaan sit en koffie bestel. Soos TIME berig het, het die blanke klante hulle versigtig dopgehou, en die wit kelnerinne het hul streng beleefde versoeke om diens geïgnoreer. & Rdquo

Ses jaar het verloop sedert die uitspraak van die Hooggeregshof Brown teenoor die Onderwysraad verklaar segregasie in openbare skole ongrondwetlik en aparte fasiliteite was inherent ongelyk, het hoofregter Earl Warren & mdash aangevoer, maar suidelike state (en selfs sommige stede in die noorde) het desperaat vasgeklou aan hul tradisies van rasse -uitsluiting. Om Jim Crow deur die regstelsel uit te daag, was 'n geleidelike, stuk -stuk proses, en 'n groot aantal Amerikaners het ongeduldig geword.

Die vier jong mans, eerstejaars aan die North Carolina Agricultural and Technical College, het tot sluitingstyd bly sit en 'n paar dae later teruggekeer met nog 300 studente, vasbeslote om die vyf-en-dime-blankes te integreer.

Hierdie vorm van voetsoolvlak-aktivisme, bekend as 'n & ldquosit-in, & rdquo het oor die volgende paar weke na stede in byna elke suidelike staat versprei. TIME het die & ldquounique-protes teenoor Jim Crow & rdquo toegeskryf aan die begin van 'n golf van betogings wat van Noord-Carolina na Suid-Carolina na Virginia na Florida na Tennessee en in Deep South Alabama begin het. swaggerers, rednecked hatemongers, [en] die Ku Klux Klan, en hulle het ook simpatie getrek deur blanke universiteitstudente, sowel as diegene in Noordelike stede wat picketers buite Woolworth & rsquos en soortgelyke winkels in New York, Madison en Boston opgeruk het.

Woolworth en rsquos word in Julie 1960 gedegregeer, met ander winkels en restaurante.

Die middagete het sitplekke ingebring by swembaddens en strande, ingekniel by kerke, voorlesings by biblioteke en instap in teaters en pretparke. Diegene wat aan hierdie regstreekse optrede deelgeneem het, moes stoïsse kalmte handhaaf te midde van wit teistering, mondelings en fisies. Baie was versigtig om die wit standaarde van versorging, aantrekkingskrag en maniere na te kom, selfs al het dit die diepgewortelde rasse-etiket ontwrig. In sommige stede het koppige amptenare bloot openbare parke en swembaddens gesluit eerder as om dit te integreer, maar die strategie werk in baie ander.

Sit-ins was nie nuut nie; die NAACP sowel as die Congress of Racial Equality (CORE) het dit in die noorde en die suide georganiseer na die Tweede Wêreldoorlog en mdash, maar in die laat 1950's en vroeë 1960's het 'n nasionale beweging ontstaan. Die insetsels was nie net belangrik omdat hulle gewerk het nie, maar ook omdat hulle tienduisende mense gemobiliseer het om deel te neem aan 'n verskeidenheid konfronterende dade waaruit die burgerregtebeweging bestaan ​​het.

Dieselfde geld boikotte, wat gebruik is as 'n strategie om rasse-ongelykheid aan te spreek sedert die & ldquoDon & rsquot Buy Where You Can & rsquot Work & rdquo-aksies van die Depressie-era Noord, waarin swartes geweier het om in winkels te koop wat hulle nie as werknemers sou huur nie. Hulle pogings is dikwels gestrem deur hofbevele teen piekelyne, en hul sukses was sterk afhanklik van plaaslike persdekking, maar die boikotte het uiteindelik honderde werkgeleenthede vir swartes in stede soos Chicago en Cleveland opgelewer. Aktiviste het hierdie strategie gedurende die 1950's en 1960's herleef en die belangrikheid van ekonomiese geleenthede in swart gemeenskappe beklemtoon. Die bekendste boikot in die Amerikaanse geskiedenis het plaasgevind in Montgomery, Ala., In 1955. Nadat verskeie swart vroue, waaronder Rosa Parks, gearresteer is omdat hulle geweier het om hul busstoele aan wit passasiers af te staan, het Afro-Amerikaners 'n boikot van die stad & rsquos -busstelsel. Dit het 381 dae geduur, met 'n geskatte 40 000 deelnemers. TIME beskryf die boikot as 'n kragtige ekonomiese wapen, en inderdaad, Afro -Amerikaners was verantwoordelik vir 75% van die Montgomery- en rsquos -busbestuur. In 1956 het die Hooggeregshof beslis dat geskeide sitplekke op openbare vervoer die 14de wysiging oortree.

Net so het die 1963 -optog in Washington, waar dr King sy toespraak oor 'I Have a Dream' gehou het, sy oorsprong in die burgerregte -aktivisme van die veertigerjare. In 1941 het A. Philip Randolph en Bayard Rustin 100,000 mense gemobiliseer om op die hoofstad van die land te marsjeer om rassediskriminasie in die Amerikaanse weermag te protesteer. Geen optog het daardie jaar plaasgevind nie; die beplanning alleen het president Roosevelt effektief onder druk geplaas om 'n uitvoerende bevel uit te reik waarin die oorlogsbedrywe gedelegeer is. Maar die idee vir 'n optog in Washington het nooit heeltemal verdwyn nie, en die klimaat van protes in die 1960's het dit nuwe lewe gegee. In 1963 het Randolph en Rustin, met hulp van 'n verskeidenheid burgerregte -leiers en groepe, die destydse grootste politieke byeenkoms in die Amerikaanse geskiedenis gereël.

Al hierdie sosiale bewegingsstrategieë het dit gemeen dat dit sake soos gewoonlik ontwrig en openbare ruimte gebruik om 'n skouspel te maak wat aandag trek. Selfs toe hulle nie die tipe letterlike konfrontasie wat in 1965 op die Edmund Pettus -brug plaasgevind het, kon uitlok nie, het hulle simboliese krag gehad. Alhoewel die nuusdekking wat hierdie gebeure ontvang nie universeel ondersteun is nie, het 'n enorme hoeveelheid mediafokus op televisie en in die koerante uiteindelik die oorsaak van burgerregte versterk. Teen 1960 het byna elke Amerikaner 'n televisiestel en kon hy kyk hoe die beweging op die aandnuus ontvou. Beelde van nie -gewelddadige betogers wat wrede slae verduur, het die openbare mening ten gunste van die beweging laat val.

Daaropvolgende Amerikaanse sosiale bewegings het die krag van die sit-in erken en dit aangepas om hul eie stryd aan te spreek. In die sewentigerjare het byvoorbeeld gay-bevrydingsaktiviste & ldquokiss-ins & rdquo by anti-gay-ondernemings georganiseer as 'n manier om sigbaarheid en bewustheid te bevorder, en gedurende die 1980's het die AIDS-voorspraakgroep ACT-UP opgevoer en ldquodie-ins & rdquo in Manhattan, om die omvang te verteenwoordig van 'n gesondheidskrisis wat deur die regering verwaarloos is. Onlangs is die-ins gebruik om die polisie se brutaliteit te protesteer.

Die protes taktiek van die burgerregtebeweging, van die Woolworth & rsquos sit-ins tot die Selma-optogte, toon die krag van gewone mense wat kollektief optree. Hierdie strategieë het uiteindelik die weg gebaan vir die aanvaarding van die Wet op Burgerregte van 1964 en die Wet op Stemreg van 1965. Net so belangrik was dit dat swart Amerikaners 'n gevoel van waardigheid en eiewaarde kon uitspreek wat deurlopend, gewelddadig ontken is. hulle. Op hierdie manier was hulle voorlopers van vandag se sosiale geregtigheidsaktivisme, veral die oproep tot #blacklivesmatter teen polisie -brutaliteit. Ons kan sulke huidige protesoptredes sien as die voortsetting van 'n lang en onvoltooide grondbeweging. Net soos in die sestigerjare hang oorwinnings af van sterkte in getalle sowel as die instrumentale rol van die media in die vorming van 'n verhaal van die stryd.

Sascha Cohen is 'n PhD -kandidaat in die geskiedenisdepartement aan die Brandeis Universiteit. Haar proefskrif ondersoek Amerikaanse humor in die 1970's en 1980's. Haar eie satiriese skryfwerk kan gevind word in McSweeneys.


Waarom die Woolworth se sit-in gewerk het

Ek was op 1 Februarie 1960 toe vier swart studente by Woolworth & rsquos se etenstafel in Greensboro, N.C., gaan sit en koffie bestel. Soos TIME berig het, het die blanke klante hulle versigtig dopgehou, en die wit kelnerinne het hul streng beleefde versoeke om diens geïgnoreer. & Rdquo

Ses jaar het verloop sedert die uitspraak van die Hooggeregshof Brown teenoor die Onderwysraad verklaar segregasie in openbare skole ongrondwetlik en aparte fasiliteite was inherent ongelyk, het hoofregter Earl Warren & mdash aangevoer, maar suidelike state (en selfs sommige stede in die noorde) het desperaat vasgeklou aan hul tradisies van rasse -uitsluiting. Om Jim Crow deur die regstelsel uit te daag, was 'n geleidelike, stuk -stuk proses, en 'n groot aantal Amerikaners het ongeduldig geword.

Die vier jong mans, eerstejaars aan die North Carolina Agricultural and Technical College, het tot sluitingstyd bly sit en 'n paar dae later teruggekeer met nog 300 studente, vasbeslote om die vyf-en-dime-blankes te integreer.

Hierdie vorm van voetsoolvlak-aktivisme, bekend as 'n & ldquosit-in, & rdquo het oor die volgende paar weke na stede in byna elke suidelike staat versprei. TIME het die & ldquounique-protes teenoor Jim Crow & rdquo toegeskryf aan die begin van 'n golf van betogings wat van Noord-Carolina na Suid-Carolina na Virginia na Florida na Tennessee en in Deep South Alabama begin het. swaggerers, rednecked hatemongers, [en] die Ku Klux Klan, en hulle het ook simpatie getrek deur blanke universiteitstudente, sowel as diegene in Noordelike stede wat picketers buite Woolworth & rsquos en soortgelyke winkels in New York, Madison en Boston opgeruk het.

Woolworth en rsquos word in Julie 1960 gedegregeer, met ander winkels en restaurante.

Die middagete het sitplekke ingebring by swembaddens en strande, ingekniel by kerke, voorlesings by biblioteke en instap in teaters en pretparke. Diegene wat aan hierdie regstreekse optrede deelgeneem het, moes stoïsse kalmte handhaaf te midde van wit teistering, mondelings en fisies. Baie was versigtig om die wit standaarde van versorging, aantreklikheid en maniere na te kom, selfs al het dit die diepgewortelde rasse-etiket ontwrig. In sommige stede het koppige amptenare bloot openbare parke en swembaddens gesluit eerder as om dit te integreer, maar die strategie werk in baie ander.

Sit-ins was nie nuut nie; die NAACP sowel as die Congress of Racial Equality (CORE) het dit in die noorde en die suide georganiseer na die Tweede Wêreldoorlog en mdash, maar in die laat 1950's en vroeë 1960's het 'n nasionale beweging ontstaan. Die insetsels was nie net belangrik omdat hulle gewerk het nie, maar ook omdat hulle tienduisende mense gemobiliseer het om deel te neem aan 'n verskeidenheid konfronterende dade waaruit die burgerregtebeweging bestaan ​​het.

Dieselfde geld boikotte, wat gebruik is as 'n strategie om rasse-ongelykheid aan te spreek sedert die & ldquoDon & rsquot Buy Where You Can & rsquot Work & rdquo-aksies van die Depressie-era Noord, waarin swartes geweier het om in winkels te koop wat hulle nie as werknemers sou huur nie. Hulle pogings is dikwels gestrem deur hofbevele teen piekelyne, en hul sukses was sterk afhanklik van plaaslike persdekking, maar die boikotte het uiteindelik honderde werkgeleenthede vir swartes in stede soos Chicago en Cleveland opgelewer. Aktiviste het hierdie strategie gedurende die 1950's en 1960's herleef en die belangrikheid van ekonomiese geleenthede in swart gemeenskappe beklemtoon. Die bekendste boikot in die Amerikaanse geskiedenis het plaasgevind in Montgomery, Ala., In 1955. Nadat verskeie swart vroue, waaronder Rosa Parks, gearresteer is omdat hulle geweier het om hul busstoele aan wit passasiers af te staan, het Afro-Amerikaners 'n boikot van die stad & rsquos -busstelsel. Dit het 381 dae geduur, met 'n geskatte 40 000 deelnemers. TIME beskryf die boikot as 'n kragtige ekonomiese wapen, en inderdaad, Afro -Amerikaners was verantwoordelik vir 75% van die Montgomery- en rsquos -busbestuur. In 1956 het die Hooggeregshof beslis dat geskeide sitplekke op openbare vervoer die 14de wysiging oortree.

Net so het die 1963 -optog in Washington, waar dr King sy toespraak oor 'Have a Dream' gehou het, sy oorsprong in die burgerregte -aktivisme van die veertigerjare. In 1941 het A. Philip Randolph en Bayard Rustin 100,000 mense gemobiliseer om op die hoofstad van die land te marsjeer om rassediskriminasie in die Amerikaanse weermag te protesteer. Geen optog het daardie jaar plaasgevind nie; die beplanning alleen het president Roosevelt effektief onder druk geplaas om 'n uitvoerende bevel uit te reik waarin die oorlogsbedrywe gedelegeer is. Maar die idee vir 'n optog in Washington het nooit heeltemal verdwyn nie, en die klimaat van protes in die 1960's het dit nuwe lewe gegee. In 1963 het Randolph en Rustin, met hulp van 'n verskeidenheid burgerregte -leiers en groepe, die destydse grootste politieke byeenkoms in die Amerikaanse geskiedenis gereël.

Al hierdie sosiale bewegingsstrategieë het dit gemeen dat dit sake soos gewoonlik ontwrig en openbare ruimte gebruik om 'n skouspel te maak wat aandag trek. Selfs toe hulle nie die tipe letterlike konfrontasie wat in 1965 op die Edmund Pettus -brug plaasgevind het, kon uitlok nie, het hulle simboliese krag gehad. Alhoewel die nuusdekking wat hierdie gebeure ontvang nie universeel ondersteun is nie, het 'n enorme hoeveelheid mediafokus op televisie en in die koerante uiteindelik die oorsaak van burgerregte versterk. Teen 1960 het byna elke Amerikaner 'n televisiestel en kon hy kyk hoe die beweging op die aandnuus ontvou. Beelde van nie -gewelddadige betogers wat wrede slae verduur, het die openbare mening ten gunste van die beweging laat val.

Daaropvolgende Amerikaanse sosiale bewegings het die krag van die sit-in erken en dit aangepas om hul eie stryd aan te spreek. In die sewentigerjare het gay-bevrydingsaktiviste byvoorbeeld ldquokiss-ins en rdquo by anti-gay-ondernemings georganiseer as 'n manier om sigbaarheid en bewustheid te bevorder, en gedurende die 1980's het AIDS-voorspraakgroep ACT-UP opgevoer en ldquodie-ins & rdquo in Manhattan, om die omvang te verteenwoordig van 'n gesondheidskrisis wat deur die regering verwaarloos is. Onlangs is die-ins gebruik om die polisie se brutaliteit te protesteer.

Die protes taktiek van die burgerregtebeweging, van die Woolworth & rsquos sit-ins tot die Selma-optogte, toon die krag van gewone mense wat kollektief optree. Hierdie strategieë het uiteindelik die weg gebaan vir die aanvaarding van die Wet op Burgerregte van 1964 en die Wet op Stemreg van 1965. Net so belangrik was dit dat swart Amerikaners 'n gevoel van waardigheid en eiewaarde kon uitspreek wat deurlopend, gewelddadig ontken is. hulle. Op hierdie manier was hulle voorlopers van vandag se sosiale geregtigheidsaktivisme, veral die oproep tot #blacklivesmatter teen polisie -brutaliteit. Ons kan sulke huidige protesoptredes sien as die voortsetting van 'n lang en onvoltooide grondbeweging. Net soos in die sestigerjare hang oorwinnings af van sterkte in getalle sowel as die instrumentale rol van die media in die vorming van 'n verhaal van die stryd.

Sascha Cohen is 'n PhD -kandidaat in die geskiedenisdepartement aan die Brandeis Universiteit. Her dissertation explores American humor in the 1970s and 1980s. Her own satirical writing can be found in McSweeneys.


Why the Woolworth’s Sit-In Worked

I t was Feb. 1, 1960, when four black students sat down at Woolworth&rsquos lunch counter in Greensboro, N.C., and ordered coffee. As TIME reported, &ldquothe white patrons eyed them warily, and the white waitresses ignored their studiously polite requests for service.&rdquo

Six years had passed since the landmark Supreme Court decision Brown vs. The Board of Education declared segregation in public schools unconstitutional &mdash separate facilities were inherently unequal, argued Chief Justice Earl Warren &mdash but Southern states (and even some cities in the North) clung desperately to their traditions of racial exclusion. Challenging Jim Crow through the legal system was a gradual, piecemeal process, and large numbers of Americans were growing impatient.

The four young men, freshmen at North Carolina Agricultural and Technical College, remained seated until closing time, and returned with 300 more students a few days later, determined to integrate the whites-only five-and-dime.

This form of grassroots activism, known as a &ldquosit-in,&rdquo spread to cities in nearly every Southern state over the next several weeks. TIME credited the &ldquounique protest against Jim Crow&rdquo with initiating a wave of demonstrations that &ldquoraced from North Carolina to South Carolina to Virginia to Florida to Tennessee and into Deep South Alabama.&rdquo Although the sit-ins &ldquowashed up some familiar flotsam: the duck-tailed swaggerers, rednecked hatemongers, [and] the Ku Klux Klan,&rdquo they also attracted sympathy from white college students, as well as those in Northern cities picketers marched outside of Woolworth&rsquos and similar variety stores in New York, Madison, and Boston.

Woolworth&rsquos desegregated in July of 1960, with other stores and restaurants following suit.

The lunch-counter sit-ins spawned wade-ins at pools and beaches, kneel-ins at churches, read-ins at libraries, and walk-ins at theaters and amusement parks. Those who participated in these direct actions had to maintain stoic composure in the midst of white harassment, both verbal and physical. Many were careful to adhere to white standards of &ldquorespectable&rdquo grooming, dress, and manners, even as they disrupted deep-rooted racial etiquette. In some cities, stubborn officials simply shut down public parks and pools rather than integrating them, but the strategy worked in many others.

Sit-ins were not new &mdash the NAACP as well as the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE) organized them in both the North and the South following World War II &mdash but in the late 1950s and early 1960s, a national movement emerged. The sit-ins mattered not only because they worked, but also because they mobilized tens of thousands of people to participate in an assortment of confrontational acts that made up the civil rights movement.

The same went for boycotts, which had been used as a strategy for addressing racial inequality since the &ldquoDon&rsquot Buy Where You Can&rsquot Work&rdquo actions of the Depression-Era North, in which blacks refused to shop at stores that would not hire them as employees. Their efforts were often stymied by court injunctions against picket lines, and their success was heavily dependent on local press coverage, but the boycotts ultimately yielded hundreds of jobs for blacks in cities like Chicago and Cleveland. Activists revived this strategy during 1950s and 1960s, stressing the importance of economic opportunities in black communities. The most well-known boycott in American history took place in Montgomery, Ala., in 1955. After several black women, including Rosa Parks, were arrested for refusing to give up their bus seats to white passengers, African Americans organized a boycott of the city&rsquos bus system. It lasted 381 days, with an estimated 40,000 participants. TIME described the boycott as a &ldquopowerful economic weapon,&rdquo and indeed, African Americans accounted for 75% of Montgomery&rsquos bus ridership. In 1956, the Supreme Court ruled that segregated seating on public transit violated the 14th Amendment.

Likewise, the 1963 March on Washington, where Dr. King delivered his &ldquoI Have a Dream&rdquo speech, had roots in 1940s civil rights activism. In 1941, A. Philip Randolph and Bayard Rustin mobilized 100,000 people to march on the nation&rsquos capital in order to protest racial discrimination in the U.S. military. No march actually took place that year the planning alone effectively pressured President Roosevelt to issue an executive order desegregating the war industries. But the idea for a Washington march never fully disappeared, and the climate of protest in the 1960s gave it new life. In 1963, Randolph and Rustin, with help from an assortment of civil rights leaders and groups, organized what was then the largest political rally in American history.

What all of these social-movement strategies had in common was that they disrupted business-as-usual and used public space to make a spectacle that commanded attention. Even when they failed to provoke the type of literal confrontation that occurred in 1965 on the Edmund Pettus Bridge, they had symbolic power. Although the news coverage that these events received was not universally supportive, an enormous amount of media focus both on television and in the papers ultimately bolstered the cause of civil rights. By 1960, almost every American had a television set, and could watch the movement unfold on the evening news. Images of nonviolent protesters enduring brutal beatings swayed public opinion in favor of the movement.

Subsequent American social movements recognized the power of the sit-in, and modified it to address their own struggles. In the 1970s, for instance, gay liberation activists organized &ldquokiss-ins&rdquo at anti-gay businesses as a way of promoting visibility and awareness, and during the 1980s, AIDS advocacy group ACT-UP staged &ldquodie-ins&rdquo in Manhattan, to represent the magnitude of a health crisis that had been neglected by the government. Recently, die-ins have been used to protest police brutality.

The protest tactics of the civil rights movement, from the Woolworth&rsquos sit-ins to the Selma marches, demonstrate the power of ordinary people taking collective action. These strategies ultimately paved the way for the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Just as importantly, they allowed black Americans to express a sense of dignity and self-worth that had been consistently, violently denied to them. In this way, they were precursors to today&rsquos social justice activism, particularly the #blacklivesmatter call to action against police brutality. We can see such current protests as the continuation of a long and unfinished grassroots movement. Now as in the 1960s, victories depend on strength in numbers as well as the instrumental role of the media in shaping a narrative of the struggle.

Sascha Cohen is a PhD candidate in the history department at Brandeis University. Her dissertation explores American humor in the 1970s and 1980s. Her own satirical writing can be found in McSweeneys.


Why the Woolworth’s Sit-In Worked

I t was Feb. 1, 1960, when four black students sat down at Woolworth&rsquos lunch counter in Greensboro, N.C., and ordered coffee. As TIME reported, &ldquothe white patrons eyed them warily, and the white waitresses ignored their studiously polite requests for service.&rdquo

Six years had passed since the landmark Supreme Court decision Brown vs. The Board of Education declared segregation in public schools unconstitutional &mdash separate facilities were inherently unequal, argued Chief Justice Earl Warren &mdash but Southern states (and even some cities in the North) clung desperately to their traditions of racial exclusion. Challenging Jim Crow through the legal system was a gradual, piecemeal process, and large numbers of Americans were growing impatient.

The four young men, freshmen at North Carolina Agricultural and Technical College, remained seated until closing time, and returned with 300 more students a few days later, determined to integrate the whites-only five-and-dime.

This form of grassroots activism, known as a &ldquosit-in,&rdquo spread to cities in nearly every Southern state over the next several weeks. TIME credited the &ldquounique protest against Jim Crow&rdquo with initiating a wave of demonstrations that &ldquoraced from North Carolina to South Carolina to Virginia to Florida to Tennessee and into Deep South Alabama.&rdquo Although the sit-ins &ldquowashed up some familiar flotsam: the duck-tailed swaggerers, rednecked hatemongers, [and] the Ku Klux Klan,&rdquo they also attracted sympathy from white college students, as well as those in Northern cities picketers marched outside of Woolworth&rsquos and similar variety stores in New York, Madison, and Boston.

Woolworth&rsquos desegregated in July of 1960, with other stores and restaurants following suit.

The lunch-counter sit-ins spawned wade-ins at pools and beaches, kneel-ins at churches, read-ins at libraries, and walk-ins at theaters and amusement parks. Those who participated in these direct actions had to maintain stoic composure in the midst of white harassment, both verbal and physical. Many were careful to adhere to white standards of &ldquorespectable&rdquo grooming, dress, and manners, even as they disrupted deep-rooted racial etiquette. In some cities, stubborn officials simply shut down public parks and pools rather than integrating them, but the strategy worked in many others.

Sit-ins were not new &mdash the NAACP as well as the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE) organized them in both the North and the South following World War II &mdash but in the late 1950s and early 1960s, a national movement emerged. The sit-ins mattered not only because they worked, but also because they mobilized tens of thousands of people to participate in an assortment of confrontational acts that made up the civil rights movement.

The same went for boycotts, which had been used as a strategy for addressing racial inequality since the &ldquoDon&rsquot Buy Where You Can&rsquot Work&rdquo actions of the Depression-Era North, in which blacks refused to shop at stores that would not hire them as employees. Their efforts were often stymied by court injunctions against picket lines, and their success was heavily dependent on local press coverage, but the boycotts ultimately yielded hundreds of jobs for blacks in cities like Chicago and Cleveland. Activists revived this strategy during 1950s and 1960s, stressing the importance of economic opportunities in black communities. The most well-known boycott in American history took place in Montgomery, Ala., in 1955. After several black women, including Rosa Parks, were arrested for refusing to give up their bus seats to white passengers, African Americans organized a boycott of the city&rsquos bus system. It lasted 381 days, with an estimated 40,000 participants. TIME described the boycott as a &ldquopowerful economic weapon,&rdquo and indeed, African Americans accounted for 75% of Montgomery&rsquos bus ridership. In 1956, the Supreme Court ruled that segregated seating on public transit violated the 14th Amendment.

Likewise, the 1963 March on Washington, where Dr. King delivered his &ldquoI Have a Dream&rdquo speech, had roots in 1940s civil rights activism. In 1941, A. Philip Randolph and Bayard Rustin mobilized 100,000 people to march on the nation&rsquos capital in order to protest racial discrimination in the U.S. military. No march actually took place that year the planning alone effectively pressured President Roosevelt to issue an executive order desegregating the war industries. But the idea for a Washington march never fully disappeared, and the climate of protest in the 1960s gave it new life. In 1963, Randolph and Rustin, with help from an assortment of civil rights leaders and groups, organized what was then the largest political rally in American history.

What all of these social-movement strategies had in common was that they disrupted business-as-usual and used public space to make a spectacle that commanded attention. Even when they failed to provoke the type of literal confrontation that occurred in 1965 on the Edmund Pettus Bridge, they had symbolic power. Although the news coverage that these events received was not universally supportive, an enormous amount of media focus both on television and in the papers ultimately bolstered the cause of civil rights. By 1960, almost every American had a television set, and could watch the movement unfold on the evening news. Images of nonviolent protesters enduring brutal beatings swayed public opinion in favor of the movement.

Subsequent American social movements recognized the power of the sit-in, and modified it to address their own struggles. In the 1970s, for instance, gay liberation activists organized &ldquokiss-ins&rdquo at anti-gay businesses as a way of promoting visibility and awareness, and during the 1980s, AIDS advocacy group ACT-UP staged &ldquodie-ins&rdquo in Manhattan, to represent the magnitude of a health crisis that had been neglected by the government. Recently, die-ins have been used to protest police brutality.

The protest tactics of the civil rights movement, from the Woolworth&rsquos sit-ins to the Selma marches, demonstrate the power of ordinary people taking collective action. These strategies ultimately paved the way for the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Just as importantly, they allowed black Americans to express a sense of dignity and self-worth that had been consistently, violently denied to them. In this way, they were precursors to today&rsquos social justice activism, particularly the #blacklivesmatter call to action against police brutality. We can see such current protests as the continuation of a long and unfinished grassroots movement. Now as in the 1960s, victories depend on strength in numbers as well as the instrumental role of the media in shaping a narrative of the struggle.

Sascha Cohen is a PhD candidate in the history department at Brandeis University. Her dissertation explores American humor in the 1970s and 1980s. Her own satirical writing can be found in McSweeneys.


Why the Woolworth’s Sit-In Worked

I t was Feb. 1, 1960, when four black students sat down at Woolworth&rsquos lunch counter in Greensboro, N.C., and ordered coffee. As TIME reported, &ldquothe white patrons eyed them warily, and the white waitresses ignored their studiously polite requests for service.&rdquo

Six years had passed since the landmark Supreme Court decision Brown vs. The Board of Education declared segregation in public schools unconstitutional &mdash separate facilities were inherently unequal, argued Chief Justice Earl Warren &mdash but Southern states (and even some cities in the North) clung desperately to their traditions of racial exclusion. Challenging Jim Crow through the legal system was a gradual, piecemeal process, and large numbers of Americans were growing impatient.

The four young men, freshmen at North Carolina Agricultural and Technical College, remained seated until closing time, and returned with 300 more students a few days later, determined to integrate the whites-only five-and-dime.

This form of grassroots activism, known as a &ldquosit-in,&rdquo spread to cities in nearly every Southern state over the next several weeks. TIME credited the &ldquounique protest against Jim Crow&rdquo with initiating a wave of demonstrations that &ldquoraced from North Carolina to South Carolina to Virginia to Florida to Tennessee and into Deep South Alabama.&rdquo Although the sit-ins &ldquowashed up some familiar flotsam: the duck-tailed swaggerers, rednecked hatemongers, [and] the Ku Klux Klan,&rdquo they also attracted sympathy from white college students, as well as those in Northern cities picketers marched outside of Woolworth&rsquos and similar variety stores in New York, Madison, and Boston.

Woolworth&rsquos desegregated in July of 1960, with other stores and restaurants following suit.

The lunch-counter sit-ins spawned wade-ins at pools and beaches, kneel-ins at churches, read-ins at libraries, and walk-ins at theaters and amusement parks. Those who participated in these direct actions had to maintain stoic composure in the midst of white harassment, both verbal and physical. Many were careful to adhere to white standards of &ldquorespectable&rdquo grooming, dress, and manners, even as they disrupted deep-rooted racial etiquette. In some cities, stubborn officials simply shut down public parks and pools rather than integrating them, but the strategy worked in many others.

Sit-ins were not new &mdash the NAACP as well as the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE) organized them in both the North and the South following World War II &mdash but in the late 1950s and early 1960s, a national movement emerged. The sit-ins mattered not only because they worked, but also because they mobilized tens of thousands of people to participate in an assortment of confrontational acts that made up the civil rights movement.

The same went for boycotts, which had been used as a strategy for addressing racial inequality since the &ldquoDon&rsquot Buy Where You Can&rsquot Work&rdquo actions of the Depression-Era North, in which blacks refused to shop at stores that would not hire them as employees. Their efforts were often stymied by court injunctions against picket lines, and their success was heavily dependent on local press coverage, but the boycotts ultimately yielded hundreds of jobs for blacks in cities like Chicago and Cleveland. Activists revived this strategy during 1950s and 1960s, stressing the importance of economic opportunities in black communities. The most well-known boycott in American history took place in Montgomery, Ala., in 1955. After several black women, including Rosa Parks, were arrested for refusing to give up their bus seats to white passengers, African Americans organized a boycott of the city&rsquos bus system. It lasted 381 days, with an estimated 40,000 participants. TIME described the boycott as a &ldquopowerful economic weapon,&rdquo and indeed, African Americans accounted for 75% of Montgomery&rsquos bus ridership. In 1956, the Supreme Court ruled that segregated seating on public transit violated the 14th Amendment.

Likewise, the 1963 March on Washington, where Dr. King delivered his &ldquoI Have a Dream&rdquo speech, had roots in 1940s civil rights activism. In 1941, A. Philip Randolph and Bayard Rustin mobilized 100,000 people to march on the nation&rsquos capital in order to protest racial discrimination in the U.S. military. No march actually took place that year the planning alone effectively pressured President Roosevelt to issue an executive order desegregating the war industries. But the idea for a Washington march never fully disappeared, and the climate of protest in the 1960s gave it new life. In 1963, Randolph and Rustin, with help from an assortment of civil rights leaders and groups, organized what was then the largest political rally in American history.

What all of these social-movement strategies had in common was that they disrupted business-as-usual and used public space to make a spectacle that commanded attention. Even when they failed to provoke the type of literal confrontation that occurred in 1965 on the Edmund Pettus Bridge, they had symbolic power. Although the news coverage that these events received was not universally supportive, an enormous amount of media focus both on television and in the papers ultimately bolstered the cause of civil rights. By 1960, almost every American had a television set, and could watch the movement unfold on the evening news. Images of nonviolent protesters enduring brutal beatings swayed public opinion in favor of the movement.

Subsequent American social movements recognized the power of the sit-in, and modified it to address their own struggles. In the 1970s, for instance, gay liberation activists organized &ldquokiss-ins&rdquo at anti-gay businesses as a way of promoting visibility and awareness, and during the 1980s, AIDS advocacy group ACT-UP staged &ldquodie-ins&rdquo in Manhattan, to represent the magnitude of a health crisis that had been neglected by the government. Recently, die-ins have been used to protest police brutality.

The protest tactics of the civil rights movement, from the Woolworth&rsquos sit-ins to the Selma marches, demonstrate the power of ordinary people taking collective action. These strategies ultimately paved the way for the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Just as importantly, they allowed black Americans to express a sense of dignity and self-worth that had been consistently, violently denied to them. In this way, they were precursors to today&rsquos social justice activism, particularly the #blacklivesmatter call to action against police brutality. We can see such current protests as the continuation of a long and unfinished grassroots movement. Now as in the 1960s, victories depend on strength in numbers as well as the instrumental role of the media in shaping a narrative of the struggle.

Sascha Cohen is a PhD candidate in the history department at Brandeis University. Her dissertation explores American humor in the 1970s and 1980s. Her own satirical writing can be found in McSweeneys.


Why the Woolworth’s Sit-In Worked

I t was Feb. 1, 1960, when four black students sat down at Woolworth&rsquos lunch counter in Greensboro, N.C., and ordered coffee. As TIME reported, &ldquothe white patrons eyed them warily, and the white waitresses ignored their studiously polite requests for service.&rdquo

Six years had passed since the landmark Supreme Court decision Brown vs. The Board of Education declared segregation in public schools unconstitutional &mdash separate facilities were inherently unequal, argued Chief Justice Earl Warren &mdash but Southern states (and even some cities in the North) clung desperately to their traditions of racial exclusion. Challenging Jim Crow through the legal system was a gradual, piecemeal process, and large numbers of Americans were growing impatient.

The four young men, freshmen at North Carolina Agricultural and Technical College, remained seated until closing time, and returned with 300 more students a few days later, determined to integrate the whites-only five-and-dime.

This form of grassroots activism, known as a &ldquosit-in,&rdquo spread to cities in nearly every Southern state over the next several weeks. TIME credited the &ldquounique protest against Jim Crow&rdquo with initiating a wave of demonstrations that &ldquoraced from North Carolina to South Carolina to Virginia to Florida to Tennessee and into Deep South Alabama.&rdquo Although the sit-ins &ldquowashed up some familiar flotsam: the duck-tailed swaggerers, rednecked hatemongers, [and] the Ku Klux Klan,&rdquo they also attracted sympathy from white college students, as well as those in Northern cities picketers marched outside of Woolworth&rsquos and similar variety stores in New York, Madison, and Boston.

Woolworth&rsquos desegregated in July of 1960, with other stores and restaurants following suit.

The lunch-counter sit-ins spawned wade-ins at pools and beaches, kneel-ins at churches, read-ins at libraries, and walk-ins at theaters and amusement parks. Those who participated in these direct actions had to maintain stoic composure in the midst of white harassment, both verbal and physical. Many were careful to adhere to white standards of &ldquorespectable&rdquo grooming, dress, and manners, even as they disrupted deep-rooted racial etiquette. In some cities, stubborn officials simply shut down public parks and pools rather than integrating them, but the strategy worked in many others.

Sit-ins were not new &mdash the NAACP as well as the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE) organized them in both the North and the South following World War II &mdash but in the late 1950s and early 1960s, a national movement emerged. The sit-ins mattered not only because they worked, but also because they mobilized tens of thousands of people to participate in an assortment of confrontational acts that made up the civil rights movement.

The same went for boycotts, which had been used as a strategy for addressing racial inequality since the &ldquoDon&rsquot Buy Where You Can&rsquot Work&rdquo actions of the Depression-Era North, in which blacks refused to shop at stores that would not hire them as employees. Their efforts were often stymied by court injunctions against picket lines, and their success was heavily dependent on local press coverage, but the boycotts ultimately yielded hundreds of jobs for blacks in cities like Chicago and Cleveland. Activists revived this strategy during 1950s and 1960s, stressing the importance of economic opportunities in black communities. The most well-known boycott in American history took place in Montgomery, Ala., in 1955. After several black women, including Rosa Parks, were arrested for refusing to give up their bus seats to white passengers, African Americans organized a boycott of the city&rsquos bus system. It lasted 381 days, with an estimated 40,000 participants. TIME described the boycott as a &ldquopowerful economic weapon,&rdquo and indeed, African Americans accounted for 75% of Montgomery&rsquos bus ridership. In 1956, the Supreme Court ruled that segregated seating on public transit violated the 14th Amendment.

Likewise, the 1963 March on Washington, where Dr. King delivered his &ldquoI Have a Dream&rdquo speech, had roots in 1940s civil rights activism. In 1941, A. Philip Randolph and Bayard Rustin mobilized 100,000 people to march on the nation&rsquos capital in order to protest racial discrimination in the U.S. military. No march actually took place that year the planning alone effectively pressured President Roosevelt to issue an executive order desegregating the war industries. But the idea for a Washington march never fully disappeared, and the climate of protest in the 1960s gave it new life. In 1963, Randolph and Rustin, with help from an assortment of civil rights leaders and groups, organized what was then the largest political rally in American history.

What all of these social-movement strategies had in common was that they disrupted business-as-usual and used public space to make a spectacle that commanded attention. Even when they failed to provoke the type of literal confrontation that occurred in 1965 on the Edmund Pettus Bridge, they had symbolic power. Although the news coverage that these events received was not universally supportive, an enormous amount of media focus both on television and in the papers ultimately bolstered the cause of civil rights. By 1960, almost every American had a television set, and could watch the movement unfold on the evening news. Images of nonviolent protesters enduring brutal beatings swayed public opinion in favor of the movement.

Subsequent American social movements recognized the power of the sit-in, and modified it to address their own struggles. In the 1970s, for instance, gay liberation activists organized &ldquokiss-ins&rdquo at anti-gay businesses as a way of promoting visibility and awareness, and during the 1980s, AIDS advocacy group ACT-UP staged &ldquodie-ins&rdquo in Manhattan, to represent the magnitude of a health crisis that had been neglected by the government. Recently, die-ins have been used to protest police brutality.

The protest tactics of the civil rights movement, from the Woolworth&rsquos sit-ins to the Selma marches, demonstrate the power of ordinary people taking collective action. These strategies ultimately paved the way for the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Just as importantly, they allowed black Americans to express a sense of dignity and self-worth that had been consistently, violently denied to them. In this way, they were precursors to today&rsquos social justice activism, particularly the #blacklivesmatter call to action against police brutality. We can see such current protests as the continuation of a long and unfinished grassroots movement. Now as in the 1960s, victories depend on strength in numbers as well as the instrumental role of the media in shaping a narrative of the struggle.

Sascha Cohen is a PhD candidate in the history department at Brandeis University. Her dissertation explores American humor in the 1970s and 1980s. Her own satirical writing can be found in McSweeneys.


Why the Woolworth’s Sit-In Worked

I t was Feb. 1, 1960, when four black students sat down at Woolworth&rsquos lunch counter in Greensboro, N.C., and ordered coffee. As TIME reported, &ldquothe white patrons eyed them warily, and the white waitresses ignored their studiously polite requests for service.&rdquo

Six years had passed since the landmark Supreme Court decision Brown vs. The Board of Education declared segregation in public schools unconstitutional &mdash separate facilities were inherently unequal, argued Chief Justice Earl Warren &mdash but Southern states (and even some cities in the North) clung desperately to their traditions of racial exclusion. Challenging Jim Crow through the legal system was a gradual, piecemeal process, and large numbers of Americans were growing impatient.

The four young men, freshmen at North Carolina Agricultural and Technical College, remained seated until closing time, and returned with 300 more students a few days later, determined to integrate the whites-only five-and-dime.

This form of grassroots activism, known as a &ldquosit-in,&rdquo spread to cities in nearly every Southern state over the next several weeks. TIME credited the &ldquounique protest against Jim Crow&rdquo with initiating a wave of demonstrations that &ldquoraced from North Carolina to South Carolina to Virginia to Florida to Tennessee and into Deep South Alabama.&rdquo Although the sit-ins &ldquowashed up some familiar flotsam: the duck-tailed swaggerers, rednecked hatemongers, [and] the Ku Klux Klan,&rdquo they also attracted sympathy from white college students, as well as those in Northern cities picketers marched outside of Woolworth&rsquos and similar variety stores in New York, Madison, and Boston.

Woolworth&rsquos desegregated in July of 1960, with other stores and restaurants following suit.

The lunch-counter sit-ins spawned wade-ins at pools and beaches, kneel-ins at churches, read-ins at libraries, and walk-ins at theaters and amusement parks. Those who participated in these direct actions had to maintain stoic composure in the midst of white harassment, both verbal and physical. Many were careful to adhere to white standards of &ldquorespectable&rdquo grooming, dress, and manners, even as they disrupted deep-rooted racial etiquette. In some cities, stubborn officials simply shut down public parks and pools rather than integrating them, but the strategy worked in many others.

Sit-ins were not new &mdash the NAACP as well as the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE) organized them in both the North and the South following World War II &mdash but in the late 1950s and early 1960s, a national movement emerged. The sit-ins mattered not only because they worked, but also because they mobilized tens of thousands of people to participate in an assortment of confrontational acts that made up the civil rights movement.

The same went for boycotts, which had been used as a strategy for addressing racial inequality since the &ldquoDon&rsquot Buy Where You Can&rsquot Work&rdquo actions of the Depression-Era North, in which blacks refused to shop at stores that would not hire them as employees. Their efforts were often stymied by court injunctions against picket lines, and their success was heavily dependent on local press coverage, but the boycotts ultimately yielded hundreds of jobs for blacks in cities like Chicago and Cleveland. Activists revived this strategy during 1950s and 1960s, stressing the importance of economic opportunities in black communities. The most well-known boycott in American history took place in Montgomery, Ala., in 1955. After several black women, including Rosa Parks, were arrested for refusing to give up their bus seats to white passengers, African Americans organized a boycott of the city&rsquos bus system. It lasted 381 days, with an estimated 40,000 participants. TIME described the boycott as a &ldquopowerful economic weapon,&rdquo and indeed, African Americans accounted for 75% of Montgomery&rsquos bus ridership. In 1956, the Supreme Court ruled that segregated seating on public transit violated the 14th Amendment.

Likewise, the 1963 March on Washington, where Dr. King delivered his &ldquoI Have a Dream&rdquo speech, had roots in 1940s civil rights activism. In 1941, A. Philip Randolph and Bayard Rustin mobilized 100,000 people to march on the nation&rsquos capital in order to protest racial discrimination in the U.S. military. No march actually took place that year the planning alone effectively pressured President Roosevelt to issue an executive order desegregating the war industries. But the idea for a Washington march never fully disappeared, and the climate of protest in the 1960s gave it new life. In 1963, Randolph and Rustin, with help from an assortment of civil rights leaders and groups, organized what was then the largest political rally in American history.

What all of these social-movement strategies had in common was that they disrupted business-as-usual and used public space to make a spectacle that commanded attention. Even when they failed to provoke the type of literal confrontation that occurred in 1965 on the Edmund Pettus Bridge, they had symbolic power. Although the news coverage that these events received was not universally supportive, an enormous amount of media focus both on television and in the papers ultimately bolstered the cause of civil rights. By 1960, almost every American had a television set, and could watch the movement unfold on the evening news. Images of nonviolent protesters enduring brutal beatings swayed public opinion in favor of the movement.

Subsequent American social movements recognized the power of the sit-in, and modified it to address their own struggles. In the 1970s, for instance, gay liberation activists organized &ldquokiss-ins&rdquo at anti-gay businesses as a way of promoting visibility and awareness, and during the 1980s, AIDS advocacy group ACT-UP staged &ldquodie-ins&rdquo in Manhattan, to represent the magnitude of a health crisis that had been neglected by the government. Recently, die-ins have been used to protest police brutality.

The protest tactics of the civil rights movement, from the Woolworth&rsquos sit-ins to the Selma marches, demonstrate the power of ordinary people taking collective action. These strategies ultimately paved the way for the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Just as importantly, they allowed black Americans to express a sense of dignity and self-worth that had been consistently, violently denied to them. In this way, they were precursors to today&rsquos social justice activism, particularly the #blacklivesmatter call to action against police brutality. We can see such current protests as the continuation of a long and unfinished grassroots movement. Now as in the 1960s, victories depend on strength in numbers as well as the instrumental role of the media in shaping a narrative of the struggle.

Sascha Cohen is a PhD candidate in the history department at Brandeis University. Her dissertation explores American humor in the 1970s and 1980s. Her own satirical writing can be found in McSweeneys.


Why the Woolworth’s Sit-In Worked

I t was Feb. 1, 1960, when four black students sat down at Woolworth&rsquos lunch counter in Greensboro, N.C., and ordered coffee. As TIME reported, &ldquothe white patrons eyed them warily, and the white waitresses ignored their studiously polite requests for service.&rdquo

Six years had passed since the landmark Supreme Court decision Brown vs. The Board of Education declared segregation in public schools unconstitutional &mdash separate facilities were inherently unequal, argued Chief Justice Earl Warren &mdash but Southern states (and even some cities in the North) clung desperately to their traditions of racial exclusion. Challenging Jim Crow through the legal system was a gradual, piecemeal process, and large numbers of Americans were growing impatient.

The four young men, freshmen at North Carolina Agricultural and Technical College, remained seated until closing time, and returned with 300 more students a few days later, determined to integrate the whites-only five-and-dime.

This form of grassroots activism, known as a &ldquosit-in,&rdquo spread to cities in nearly every Southern state over the next several weeks. TIME credited the &ldquounique protest against Jim Crow&rdquo with initiating a wave of demonstrations that &ldquoraced from North Carolina to South Carolina to Virginia to Florida to Tennessee and into Deep South Alabama.&rdquo Although the sit-ins &ldquowashed up some familiar flotsam: the duck-tailed swaggerers, rednecked hatemongers, [and] the Ku Klux Klan,&rdquo they also attracted sympathy from white college students, as well as those in Northern cities picketers marched outside of Woolworth&rsquos and similar variety stores in New York, Madison, and Boston.

Woolworth&rsquos desegregated in July of 1960, with other stores and restaurants following suit.

The lunch-counter sit-ins spawned wade-ins at pools and beaches, kneel-ins at churches, read-ins at libraries, and walk-ins at theaters and amusement parks. Those who participated in these direct actions had to maintain stoic composure in the midst of white harassment, both verbal and physical. Many were careful to adhere to white standards of &ldquorespectable&rdquo grooming, dress, and manners, even as they disrupted deep-rooted racial etiquette. In some cities, stubborn officials simply shut down public parks and pools rather than integrating them, but the strategy worked in many others.

Sit-ins were not new &mdash the NAACP as well as the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE) organized them in both the North and the South following World War II &mdash but in the late 1950s and early 1960s, a national movement emerged. The sit-ins mattered not only because they worked, but also because they mobilized tens of thousands of people to participate in an assortment of confrontational acts that made up the civil rights movement.

The same went for boycotts, which had been used as a strategy for addressing racial inequality since the &ldquoDon&rsquot Buy Where You Can&rsquot Work&rdquo actions of the Depression-Era North, in which blacks refused to shop at stores that would not hire them as employees. Their efforts were often stymied by court injunctions against picket lines, and their success was heavily dependent on local press coverage, but the boycotts ultimately yielded hundreds of jobs for blacks in cities like Chicago and Cleveland. Activists revived this strategy during 1950s and 1960s, stressing the importance of economic opportunities in black communities. The most well-known boycott in American history took place in Montgomery, Ala., in 1955. After several black women, including Rosa Parks, were arrested for refusing to give up their bus seats to white passengers, African Americans organized a boycott of the city&rsquos bus system. It lasted 381 days, with an estimated 40,000 participants. TIME described the boycott as a &ldquopowerful economic weapon,&rdquo and indeed, African Americans accounted for 75% of Montgomery&rsquos bus ridership. In 1956, the Supreme Court ruled that segregated seating on public transit violated the 14th Amendment.

Likewise, the 1963 March on Washington, where Dr. King delivered his &ldquoI Have a Dream&rdquo speech, had roots in 1940s civil rights activism. In 1941, A. Philip Randolph and Bayard Rustin mobilized 100,000 people to march on the nation&rsquos capital in order to protest racial discrimination in the U.S. military. No march actually took place that year the planning alone effectively pressured President Roosevelt to issue an executive order desegregating the war industries. But the idea for a Washington march never fully disappeared, and the climate of protest in the 1960s gave it new life. In 1963, Randolph and Rustin, with help from an assortment of civil rights leaders and groups, organized what was then the largest political rally in American history.

What all of these social-movement strategies had in common was that they disrupted business-as-usual and used public space to make a spectacle that commanded attention. Even when they failed to provoke the type of literal confrontation that occurred in 1965 on the Edmund Pettus Bridge, they had symbolic power. Although the news coverage that these events received was not universally supportive, an enormous amount of media focus both on television and in the papers ultimately bolstered the cause of civil rights. By 1960, almost every American had a television set, and could watch the movement unfold on the evening news. Images of nonviolent protesters enduring brutal beatings swayed public opinion in favor of the movement.

Subsequent American social movements recognized the power of the sit-in, and modified it to address their own struggles. In the 1970s, for instance, gay liberation activists organized &ldquokiss-ins&rdquo at anti-gay businesses as a way of promoting visibility and awareness, and during the 1980s, AIDS advocacy group ACT-UP staged &ldquodie-ins&rdquo in Manhattan, to represent the magnitude of a health crisis that had been neglected by the government. Recently, die-ins have been used to protest police brutality.

The protest tactics of the civil rights movement, from the Woolworth&rsquos sit-ins to the Selma marches, demonstrate the power of ordinary people taking collective action. These strategies ultimately paved the way for the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Just as importantly, they allowed black Americans to express a sense of dignity and self-worth that had been consistently, violently denied to them. In this way, they were precursors to today&rsquos social justice activism, particularly the #blacklivesmatter call to action against police brutality. We can see such current protests as the continuation of a long and unfinished grassroots movement. Now as in the 1960s, victories depend on strength in numbers as well as the instrumental role of the media in shaping a narrative of the struggle.

Sascha Cohen is a PhD candidate in the history department at Brandeis University. Her dissertation explores American humor in the 1970s and 1980s. Her own satirical writing can be found in McSweeneys.


Kyk die video: TOP-11 HIGHEST PAYING JOBS IN THE USA 2017-2018


Kommentaar:

  1. Arashiran

    Soos altyd hou ek nie van iets nie, dit is eentonig en vervelig.

  2. Colyer

    Dikteer asseblief, waar kan ek hieroor lees?

  3. Harun Al Rachid

    Welgedaan, watter woorde nodig ..., die uitstekende idee

  4. Leary

    As u dit sê - 'n valse manier.

  5. Aescwine

    Dit stem absoluut saam met jou. Ek dink, wat is dit 'n goeie idee.

  6. Crosleah

    Ek is jammer, maar na my mening is jy verkeerd. Ek is seker. Ons moet bespreek. Skryf vir my in PM.



Skryf 'n boodskap