Register to read the introduction…
Rosa Parks is a prime example of one who chose neither to conform to the rules nor live up to the “status quo” that was expected to be maintained. Parks was a woman of gallantry whose years of formidability led to the eradication of segregation on public buses. Her notorious, but unselfish ways, contributed to the revival of racial equality. Libby Morris wrote an editorial about Rosa Parks recapping her heroic ways dating all the way back in 1955. Parks was an exhausted seamstress returning home from work one afternoon, when she refused to give up her seat in the front of the bus. In 1955, it was considered unacceptable for a black person to sit in the front of the bus. They were even supposed to get up for a white person if there were no seats available. When the bus driver threatened to call the cops on Rosa Parks, she calmly refused to give up her seat and told the driver to call the cops. This extreme act of bravery made national headlines and sparked controversial debates. After hearing previous cases about segregation, three attorneys by the names of Clifford Durr, Fred Gray, and Nixon decided to refute an impracticality associated with
…show more content…
However, there were also many negative deviants in society, who although contributed to mixed emotions such as uneasiness, sadness, and anger, nonetheless brought about change for the better. While Rosa Parks and Harriet Tubman fought in non-violent positive ways towards the civil rights movement, notorious Malcom X violently fought back in a way that made him reputably controversial. Malcolm X had grown upset with the non-violent methods carried out by some of the previously conducted civil rights activists, not for his belief that they were bad people, but possibly ineffective. By 1960, Malcolm X worried that blacks would lose control of their own movement, so he sought to instill pride in African Americans, even if it meant using violence against whites. His non-passive approach advocated “black pride,” self- reliance, and identity for all African Americans who sought it. In writing a peer-article, Veronica Burchard, in 2008, asked readers what the difference is between the patriots who demanded independence from England and the leaders of the Black Power Movement of the 1960’s. At the Organization of Afro-American Unity, Malcom X said “We the members of the Organization of Afro-American Unity…Convinced that is the inalienable right of all our people to control our own destiny.” Vernonica Burchard said that “the leaders of
However, there were also many negative deviants in society, who although contributed to mixed emotions such as uneasiness, sadness, and anger, nonetheless brought about change for the better. While Rosa Parks and Harriet Tubman fought in non-violent positive ways towards the civil rights movement, notorious Malcom X violently fought back in a way that made him reputably controversial. Malcolm X had grown upset with the non-violent methods carried out by some of the previously conducted civil rights activists, not for his belief that they were bad people, but possibly ineffective. By 1960, Malcolm X worried that blacks would lose control of their own movement, so he sought to instill pride in African Americans, even if it meant using violence against whites. His non-passive approach advocated “black pride,” self- reliance, and identity for all African Americans who sought it. In writing a peer-article, Veronica Burchard, in 2008, asked readers what the difference is between the patriots who demanded independence from England and the leaders of the Black Power Movement of the 1960’s. At the Organization of Afro-American Unity, Malcom X said “We the members of the Organization of Afro-American Unity…Convinced that is the inalienable right of all our people to control our own destiny.” Vernonica Burchard said that “the leaders of