Jim Crow Racism In Southern United States In The 1930's
The Southeastern United States in the 1930s were a time of racism and injustice. African Americans were harshly discriminated because of their darker skin in a way known as Jim Crow Racism. During this unjust era, African Americans, though legally given rights by the government, had little to none in these areas. Because of this, they were often subjected to unfair treatment ranging from racial slangs to outright lynchings. Starting in the 1870s, Jim Crow Racism would eventually be brought down in the 1950s through a combination of courageous individuals, activist groups, and the eventual acceptance of equality among all. However, some of these equality causing factors have, over time, been exaggerated as to just how powerful they are. Courage’s
…show more content…
role in ending this infamous era in particular has been overemphasized. As time has passed, so too has a misconception about this factor. From a tool realistically used sparingly back in the 1930s to occasionally counter the effects of Jim Crow Racism, it has now evolved into something new altogether, a super-weapon used to inflict devastating amounts of damage to all that was evil, most prevalently racism. Unfortunately, as history has shown, this was not the case, far from it. Courage, regardless of what angle it is examined at, could not by itself be used to stop Jim Crow Racism.
One real-life example of just how ineffective courage was at fighting Jim Crow Racism was the Scottsboro Trial of 1931.
In this trial, nine African American teenagers were unjustly accused of raping two white women on a train. Even though the evidence clearly showed otherwise, they were still convicted again and again by the many juries that they faced because of their skin color, showing once more the power of Jim Crow Racism. During the multiple trials that this case spanned, there were many individuals who showed courage. One such person was, ironically enough, Ruby Bates, one of the women that had accused the boys of raping her. Aside from adding to the fact that the teenagers were innocent, Ruby’s recantation of her story was also, on her part, a courageous one. This was primarily due to the fact that African Americans during this time were discriminated to such a degree that it was considered improper for a white person, especially a white woman, to help them out in any way. Thus, by acting on the behalf of the Scottsboro Boys, Bates showed her courage. However, as stated in the Randsdall Report, this courage amounted to nothing. Jim Crow Racism was ingrained so deeply into the political system of the South at the time that the court deemed Ruby a “weak witness” due to her inability to make her testimony fit in with that of Victoria Price’s, the other woman who had accused the teenagers of rape. In short, the jury considered Bate’s testimony invalid because of her refusal to take part in the unjust conviction of the teenagers. Another individual who showed courage during the Scottsboro Trial was the presiding judge of Haywood Patterson, one of the accused teenagers. This judge’s name was James E. Horton. With the possible risk of ending his career as an elected circuit judge and bearing the scorn of his fellow townspeople, Horton acted on his conscience and try to give the accused a fair trial. Despite this act of courage, Patterson was not freed, but instead
had to suffer through two more re-trials. Pertaining to the idea of courage’s effectiveness at opposing Jim Crow Racism, these two examples serve not only to show the strength of Jim Crow Racism, but also show the indisputable fact that courage alone cannot be used against Jim Crow Racism. Had it been otherwise, it would have been seen the earlier releasing of the teenagers and ending of this racist era; however, provided that this is not the case, the former can be concluded.
Another example providing context as to just how powerful and unsuppressable Jim Crow Racism was compared to an individual’s courage would be the fictional but historically accurate trial in the novel To Kill A Mockingbird. Like the Scottsboro Trial, this trial deals with the unjustified accusation of an African American raping a white woman. Similarly, although supported by strong evidence, the African American, Tom Robinson, is also convicted of the supposed rape. It was a lawyer in this case that was courageous, a white man by the name of Atticus Finch. Finch, against the social norms of Jim Crow Racism at the time, took the responsibility of defending Tom Robinson. In doing this, he created many problems for both him and his family, problems such as the town’s disapproval, family dishonor, death threats, and dangerous mobs. Such was the extent of Jim Crow Racism and its influence that even a well-respected lawyer showing courage could not, in his or her own hometown, disapprove of it safely, let alone stop it. If courage could have truly stopped something as powerful as Jim Crow Racism, then Tom should have, because of Atticus’ courage, remained unconvicted. Yet he was not, and because of this, it can be reasonably said that Jim Crow Racism could not be stopped by something as weak as a single individual, even an individual with courage. Through the approximately 80 year span (1870s - 1950s) in which Jim Crow Racism flourished, there were, of course, many other individuals that stood up against the discrimination and injustice, some even before slavery’s abolishment. However, in the present era, there are only a few of these individuals who are still remembered, most notably Martin Luther King Jr., Rosa Parks, and Malcolm X. Many others, with names ranging from John Brown to Denmark Vesey, have long been forgotten, but not because of their lack of courage or lesser contributions. Indeed, Vesey paid with his life, along with 34 others, when he attempted to liberate four million other slaves through the use of a large-scale riot. Instead, it is because that, despite their courage and dedication, they did nothing to change society. People today only remember Martin Luther King Jr. because his actions, through his speeches, actually influenced people to change. His speeches changed something, unlike the thousands of other individuals whose courage have now been forgotten. In reality, that is the reason why he, along with Rosa Parks and other stereotypical civil rights leaders, are still around today in people’s minds. It is this, not the courage of an individual, that determines who remains in history. Only those that effect a great change in history will remain in history. This being said, one can only wonder why so many individuals - Angelo Hedon, Octavius Catto, and Daisy Bates, to name a few - have not made it into the average 4th grade student’s history textbook despite the courage obviously shown by them through their willingness to actively oppose something as strong as Jim Crow Racism. But the reason for this neglect becomes clear when it is finally seen that courage is not everything, for had that been the case, they would have already made it into history, their courage alone changing the views of Jim Crow Racism. Although it is abundantly clear that courage alone was not enough to effectively halt Jim Crow Racism, there are still those that would disagree. Foremost among these believers would be the extreme liberals and optimists of today’s society. One main argument presented by the opposing side is the rare unaccounted effects of an individual’s courage; put, the influence that an individual’s courage may bring to others. While such may be the case, most prominently noticeable in influential civil rights leaders such as the aforementioned and acclaimed Martin Luther King Jr., it is not what is being examined. Though it may seem otherwise, this essay has attempted to answer the question of whether or not an individual’s courage can, by itself unsupported, effectively fight against Jim Crow Racism in the South. However, this is not including the effects of an individual’s courage; rather, it contains only the actual courage. It is only when examined from this new perspective does the idea of courage alone effectively fighting against Jim Crow Racism become foolish. The power of courage can simply not be utilized when facing something as powerful and influential as Jim Crow Racism. Examples clearly demonstrating the power of Jim Crow Racism and its strength against courage include the Scottsboro Trial, the historically accurate but fictional trial in the novel To Kill a Mockingbird, and the thousands of forgotten, but equally courageous individuals that also fought against Jim Crow Racism and suffered the consequences with their lives; because of these examples, it can be said with the utmost certainty that courage cannot be used to combat Jim Crow Racism. From this period in time and the lessons it holds, of which the truth about courage is one of them, people nowadays and in the future can perhaps, armed with this knowledge, make wiser, more reasonable decisions about matters such as protesting and complaining. It was not the intent of this essay to disprove courage’s potential, for potential it does hold, but rather to shed light on the fact that courage only has such effectiveness in the right circumstances. More importantly, it also brings to attention the thought of self-repression, the idea that one needs not always be complaining or protesting, for such displays of unrestrained behavior should be reserved for only the worst of situations, as in the case of Jim Crow Racism in the South.
role in ending this infamous era in particular has been overemphasized. As time has passed, so too has a misconception about this factor. From a tool realistically used sparingly back in the 1930s to occasionally counter the effects of Jim Crow Racism, it has now evolved into something new altogether, a super-weapon used to inflict devastating amounts of damage to all that was evil, most prevalently racism. Unfortunately, as history has shown, this was not the case, far from it. Courage, regardless of what angle it is examined at, could not by itself be used to stop Jim Crow Racism.
One real-life example of just how ineffective courage was at fighting Jim Crow Racism was the Scottsboro Trial of 1931.
In this trial, nine African American teenagers were unjustly accused of raping two white women on a train. Even though the evidence clearly showed otherwise, they were still convicted again and again by the many juries that they faced because of their skin color, showing once more the power of Jim Crow Racism. During the multiple trials that this case spanned, there were many individuals who showed courage. One such person was, ironically enough, Ruby Bates, one of the women that had accused the boys of raping her. Aside from adding to the fact that the teenagers were innocent, Ruby’s recantation of her story was also, on her part, a courageous one. This was primarily due to the fact that African Americans during this time were discriminated to such a degree that it was considered improper for a white person, especially a white woman, to help them out in any way. Thus, by acting on the behalf of the Scottsboro Boys, Bates showed her courage. However, as stated in the Randsdall Report, this courage amounted to nothing. Jim Crow Racism was ingrained so deeply into the political system of the South at the time that the court deemed Ruby a “weak witness” due to her inability to make her testimony fit in with that of Victoria Price’s, the other woman who had accused the teenagers of rape. In short, the jury considered Bate’s testimony invalid because of her refusal to take part in the unjust conviction of the teenagers. Another individual who showed courage during the Scottsboro Trial was the presiding judge of Haywood Patterson, one of the accused teenagers. This judge’s name was James E. Horton. With the possible risk of ending his career as an elected circuit judge and bearing the scorn of his fellow townspeople, Horton acted on his conscience and try to give the accused a fair trial. Despite this act of courage, Patterson was not freed, but instead
had to suffer through two more re-trials. Pertaining to the idea of courage’s effectiveness at opposing Jim Crow Racism, these two examples serve not only to show the strength of Jim Crow Racism, but also show the indisputable fact that courage alone cannot be used against Jim Crow Racism. Had it been otherwise, it would have been seen the earlier releasing of the teenagers and ending of this racist era; however, provided that this is not the case, the former can be concluded.
Another example providing context as to just how powerful and unsuppressable Jim Crow Racism was compared to an individual’s courage would be the fictional but historically accurate trial in the novel To Kill A Mockingbird. Like the Scottsboro Trial, this trial deals with the unjustified accusation of an African American raping a white woman. Similarly, although supported by strong evidence, the African American, Tom Robinson, is also convicted of the supposed rape. It was a lawyer in this case that was courageous, a white man by the name of Atticus Finch. Finch, against the social norms of Jim Crow Racism at the time, took the responsibility of defending Tom Robinson. In doing this, he created many problems for both him and his family, problems such as the town’s disapproval, family dishonor, death threats, and dangerous mobs. Such was the extent of Jim Crow Racism and its influence that even a well-respected lawyer showing courage could not, in his or her own hometown, disapprove of it safely, let alone stop it. If courage could have truly stopped something as powerful as Jim Crow Racism, then Tom should have, because of Atticus’ courage, remained unconvicted. Yet he was not, and because of this, it can be reasonably said that Jim Crow Racism could not be stopped by something as weak as a single individual, even an individual with courage. Through the approximately 80 year span (1870s - 1950s) in which Jim Crow Racism flourished, there were, of course, many other individuals that stood up against the discrimination and injustice, some even before slavery’s abolishment. However, in the present era, there are only a few of these individuals who are still remembered, most notably Martin Luther King Jr., Rosa Parks, and Malcolm X. Many others, with names ranging from John Brown to Denmark Vesey, have long been forgotten, but not because of their lack of courage or lesser contributions. Indeed, Vesey paid with his life, along with 34 others, when he attempted to liberate four million other slaves through the use of a large-scale riot. Instead, it is because that, despite their courage and dedication, they did nothing to change society. People today only remember Martin Luther King Jr. because his actions, through his speeches, actually influenced people to change. His speeches changed something, unlike the thousands of other individuals whose courage have now been forgotten. In reality, that is the reason why he, along with Rosa Parks and other stereotypical civil rights leaders, are still around today in people’s minds. It is this, not the courage of an individual, that determines who remains in history. Only those that effect a great change in history will remain in history. This being said, one can only wonder why so many individuals - Angelo Hedon, Octavius Catto, and Daisy Bates, to name a few - have not made it into the average 4th grade student’s history textbook despite the courage obviously shown by them through their willingness to actively oppose something as strong as Jim Crow Racism. But the reason for this neglect becomes clear when it is finally seen that courage is not everything, for had that been the case, they would have already made it into history, their courage alone changing the views of Jim Crow Racism. Although it is abundantly clear that courage alone was not enough to effectively halt Jim Crow Racism, there are still those that would disagree. Foremost among these believers would be the extreme liberals and optimists of today’s society. One main argument presented by the opposing side is the rare unaccounted effects of an individual’s courage; put, the influence that an individual’s courage may bring to others. While such may be the case, most prominently noticeable in influential civil rights leaders such as the aforementioned and acclaimed Martin Luther King Jr., it is not what is being examined. Though it may seem otherwise, this essay has attempted to answer the question of whether or not an individual’s courage can, by itself unsupported, effectively fight against Jim Crow Racism in the South. However, this is not including the effects of an individual’s courage; rather, it contains only the actual courage. It is only when examined from this new perspective does the idea of courage alone effectively fighting against Jim Crow Racism become foolish. The power of courage can simply not be utilized when facing something as powerful and influential as Jim Crow Racism. Examples clearly demonstrating the power of Jim Crow Racism and its strength against courage include the Scottsboro Trial, the historically accurate but fictional trial in the novel To Kill a Mockingbird, and the thousands of forgotten, but equally courageous individuals that also fought against Jim Crow Racism and suffered the consequences with their lives; because of these examples, it can be said with the utmost certainty that courage cannot be used to combat Jim Crow Racism. From this period in time and the lessons it holds, of which the truth about courage is one of them, people nowadays and in the future can perhaps, armed with this knowledge, make wiser, more reasonable decisions about matters such as protesting and complaining. It was not the intent of this essay to disprove courage’s potential, for potential it does hold, but rather to shed light on the fact that courage only has such effectiveness in the right circumstances. More importantly, it also brings to attention the thought of self-repression, the idea that one needs not always be complaining or protesting, for such displays of unrestrained behavior should be reserved for only the worst of situations, as in the case of Jim Crow Racism in the South.