if you would like to give a hand, you are very welcome
her is the task that I work in and I am gonna finish it in the next 2 weeks
1- Laws that protect against discrimination
2-reports Shows Number of hatred crimes and discrimination
on local county
on state range
Amnisty (UN Reports)
3- Some remarks and good responses from The White House and Congress
4(Efforts) Cancel Culture and (sort presecutions) How We can lok into this issue and make it work
Civil rights activists, known for their fight against social injustice and their lasting impact on the lives of all oppressed people, include Martin Luther King Jr., Harriet Tubman, Sojourner Truth, Rosa Parks, W.E.B. Du Bois and Malcolm X.
READ MORE: Martin Luther King Jr. and 8 Black Activists Who Led the Civil Rights Movement
this one of the best website I found for civil rights leaders
I hope you like it
The civil rights movement is remembered as a heroic struggle against injustice led by charismatic men. That is not the whole story.
King’s soaring rhetoric and Malcolm’s unflinching social critiques have supplanted recollection of the significant work performed by legions of local leaders, whose grassroots organizational style more closely resembled the efforts of Black Lives Matter activists and other contemporary social justice groups to build movements full of leaders.
The iconic images of 1950s and 1960s Black protesters marching, kneeling and being arrested while dressed in their “Sunday best” illustrated the respectability politics of the day.
[Get facts about coronavirus and the latest research. Sign up for The Conversation’s newsletter.]
These efforts, designed to cultivate white sympathy for civil rights activists, relied on conformity with patriarchal gender roles that elevated men to positions of visible leadership, confined women to the background and banished LGBTQ individuals to the closet.
Yet the movement could not have happened without the extraordinary leadership of Black women like veteran organizer Ella Baker. Baker’s model of grassroots activism and empowerment for young and marginalized people became the driving force of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, known as SNCC, and other nonviolent protest organizations, past and present.
The decentralized structure of the current movement builds on this history of grassroots activism while working to avoid replicating the entrenched sexism and homophobia of an earlier era.
SNCC transformed lives by recognizing talent and empowering marginalized people. As Joe Martin, one of the organizers of a student walkout in McComb, Mississippi, recalled, “If you had a good idea it was accepted regardless of what your social status was.”
Endesha Ida Mae Holland, a teenage prostitute, found purpose as a SNCC field secretary, organizing and leading marches in Greenwood, Mississippi. Facing down Police Chief Curtis Lary “made me feel so proud,” she recalled, and “people start looking up into my face, into my eyes” with respect. Holland went on to become an award-winning playwright and distinguished university professor.
Black Lives Matter co-founders Alicia Garza and Patrisse Cullors also encourage strategies that place marginalized voices at the center.
Elevating “Black trans people, Black queer people, Black immigrants, Black incarcerated people and formerly incarcerated people, Black millennials, Black women, low income Black people, and Black people with disabilities” to leadership roles, they wrote, “allows for leadership to emerge from our intersecting identities, rather than to be organized around one notion of Blackness.”
Black women and teens have played a critical role in organizing, leading and maintaining the momentum of recent protests.
Kimberly Jones captured the nation’s attention with an impassioned takedown of institutional racism and debates over appropriate forms of protest. After repeatedly breaking the social contract to keep wealth and opportunity out of reach for black communities, Jones concludes, white Americans “are lucky that what black people are looking for is equality and not revenge.”
Women have organized family-friendly demonstrations, including the “Black Mamas March” in Charlotte, North Carolina, and a “Black Kids Matter” protest in Hartford, Connecticut.
Six young women, aged 14 to 16, organized a peaceful protest attracting more than 10,000 people in Nashville, Tennessee, while 17-year-old Tiana Day led a march on the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco.
The adaptive “low ego/high impact” leadership model, in which leaders serve as coaches helping groups build their own solutions, has become popular among current social justice organizations, but it is not new.
Baker encouraged civil rights organizations to “develop individuals” and provide “an opportunity for them to grow.” She praised SNCC for “working with indigenous people, not working for them.”
“You don’t have to worry about where your leaders are,” former SNCC organizer Robert Moses reflected. “If you go out and work with your people, then the leadership will emerge.”
Campaigns are exhausting and external recognition as a “leader” can take a heavy toll. Spreading leadership around helps to protect any one person from becoming a target for retaliation while advancing a stream of talent to rise as individual energy wanes.
Returning from a citizenship training program in Charleston, South Carolina, in 1963, Fannie Lou Hamer was arrested and severely beaten, leaving her with permanent injuries. Holland’s mother died when their house in Greenwood, Mississippi, was bombed in 1965 in retaliation for her activism.
Civil rights worker Anne Moody recounted how the physical and psychological toll of constant harassment by white supremacists in 1963 forced her to leave a voter registration drive in Canton, Mississippi, saying “I was on the verge of a breakdown” and “would have died from lack of sleep and nervousness” had she stayed “another week.”
In a 2017 interview, Erica Garner, who became a tireless campaigner against police brutality after her father, Eric Garner, died from a New York police officer’s chokehold in 2014, echoed Moody’s comments.
“I’m struggling right now with the stress and everything. … The system beats you down to where you can’t win,” she said. Just three weeks after that interview, Erica Garner died of a heart attack at the age of 27.
Comparisons to the romanticized cultural memory of charismatic leadership in the Civil Rights Movement devalues the hard work of today’s activists – as well as those who worked hard outside of the limelight in the earlier movement. Social change – then and now – derives from a critical mass of local work throughout the nation. Those who cannot find leaders in this movement are not looking hard enough.
by Alan Jenkins
What is the state of civil and human rights today? We’ve made a huge amount of progress but we still have a long way to go. There’s very little of the kind of formal bigotry and segregation that we saw in Eyes on the Prize, but there’s still a lot of discrimination in our society, unfortunately.
Addressing Inequities Today
The modern civil rights movement is working to address the less visible but very important inequities in our society. Opportunity in America should mean everyone has a fair chance to achieve his or her full potential. Our country hasn’t yet fulfilled that promise.
Hurricane Katrina provides a good example. What it revealed is that there’s still significant racial inequality and desperate poverty in America. A lot of that springs from discrimination from long ago that concentrated black people in the poorest neighborhoods — the neighborhoods that were most vulnerable to flooding, that are farthest from good jobs, schools and hospitals, and the hardest to get out of with transportation in an emergency. So those were the people who were hardest hit when Katrina struck. African American communities were not thought of by our government in the same way as more affluent or white communities.
The modern civil rights movement focuses on expanding opportunity so that kind of thing doesn’t happen again. It’s important to determine what’s different now compared to the Eyes era. We’ve got to eradicate the more subtle manifestations of racial bias in our society that go back to those earlier times.
The Movement’s Impact
The African American civil rights movement has inspired a lot of other groups that have suffered injustices. One example that we saw recently was the immigrant rights demonstrations around the country. Immigrants’ assertion that “we too are America” was inspiring, and very much in the spirit of the civil rights movement. In addition, there’s been, since the late Sixties, a powerful Latino civil rights movement, that included the farm workers’ movement, and includes organizations like the Mexican American Legal Defense Fund, patterned on the NAACP’s Legal Defense Fund. The women’s rights movement was inspired in part by the African American civil rights movement. Certainly the immigrant rights movement, and the gay rights movement as well. Those are just a few examples. Dynamic people in those communities have led the movements, but the African American civil rights movement provides a powerful template for activism.
The impact of the civil rights movement has spread throughout the world. I’ve met with people in India — Dalits, who are the former “untouchable” caste. What’s exciting is that Martin Luther Kinglearned nonviolent strategies from Indian leader Mahatma Gandhi, so it’s kind of a full circle. When I traveled to India I met activists who were singing “We Shall Overcome” — the touchstone song of the American civil rights movement — in Hindi, and talked about how they had gotten inspiration from the American civil rights movement for their own struggle to achieve rights in Indian society. And there are many more examples worldwide.
Improving Our Own Communities
The first thing that people can do to improve things around them is to make sure that we live up to the promise of opportunity in our own lives. That means treating each other fairly and trying to examine our own biases. We all carry around biases and stereotypes in our heads, and that’s a part of being human. But we all have an opportunity to step outside of them and make sure we’re treating people the way we want to be treated.
The second thing is to be part of making our society more equal. That could mean calling up your local TV station and either complementing reporting they’re doing, or asking them why they aren’t doing more to expose inequality and highlight solutions. Write letters to the editor — including writing to your school newspaper — about how issues of opportunity are playing out in your community and what you can do about it.
The Implicit Association Test on race is an online test that you can take on Harvard University’s Web site. It’s a fascinating way to see biases you might unknowingly have. The test flashes up images of people from a variety of racial groups, and pairs them with negative and positive words. It’s designed to demonstrate that everyone carries around implicit biases to some degree. It’s a very interesting test. Of course, there is a difference between the Bull Connors — the hateful racists — and the rest of us, who are people of good will, but we don’t always recognize the stereotypes we carry around with us.
What does implicit or subconscious bias mean for police officers who have a split second to make a decision? What does it mean for school admissions officers or others making a decision that affects someone’s direction in life? The question for people to ask themselves is, if this person looked different, would I make the same decision?
Civil Rights Today
I think we’re at a crossroads now for opportunity. There are some areas where we’ve made great progress. For example, African American women have made the most progress of any group in college attendance — a remarkable success story. But in many other areas America is in real trouble. Great inequality and discrimination still exist in our school systems, our criminal justice system, and other aspects of our lives. Research shows, for example, the need to address the employment and housing discrimination that still exist. Nearly one out of every four African Americans seeking housing experience discrimination. That’s happening today. And yet there’s very little written about it — people are really unaware that that’s the case. We find similar levels of discrimination in employment statistics.
People interested in finding out more can read a report on our web site called The State of Opportunity in America. It explores how we’re doing as a nation in achieving opportunity for all, in terms of equality, economic security, and more.
It’s a very important time now for America to reinvest in that struggle for overcoming inequality and discrimination. They are really contrary to our values as a country.
Source: Jenkins, Alan. Interview by Maria Daniels, WGBH Boston, July 2006.
is the executive director and co-founder of The Opportunity Agenda, an organization that works to expand opportunity in America through research, communications, and advocacy. His career has taken him to the Ford Foundation as Director of Human Rights; to the U.S. Department of Justice as Assistant to the Solicitor General; and to the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund as Associate Counsel. In his current role he works with a range of social justice groups to expand opportunity in America.
ew issues in American life have been as intransigent as race. In every century, race has presented the nation its greatest paradoxes, challenges, and opportunities, calling into question time and again the principle of equality on which it was founded.
During the 1950s and 1960s, the golden era of civil rights activism, the civil rights movement mobilized the nation’s collective consciousness around issues of racial equity. The U.S. Supreme Court officially ended legal school segregation in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas in 1954. Congress passed the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Black political participation increased dramatically. In 1964, only 5 blacks served in the U.S. Congress. By 1998, the number had grown to 39.
But the victories of the movement, however decisive they seemed at the time, did not bring the long-term parity that activists and policymakers hoped for. Bread-and-butter issues such as unemployment, substandard housing, inferior education, unsafe streets, escalating child poverty, and homelessness supplanted the right to vote, eat at a lunch counter, and attend desegregated schools. As new issues arose, appearing and intensifying in ways that fell beyond the scope of the legislation and social reforms, the old civil rights model—one that relied mostly on judicial and protest remedies—seemed less and less effective in dealing with them.
Contributions of the Movement
The civil rights movement made lasting contributions to the nation. Above all, it helped eliminate the legal apartheid that had dogged the United States since its earliest days. It also created a national expectation that individuals and groups had the right to petition their government to right legal wrongs affecting them. In its wake there developed a broad base of constituent interest groups—women, the elderly, children’s rights advocates, the handicapped, homosexuals, environmentalists—that emphasize the rights of affected parties to be a critical part of the decisions affecting their interests.
Ironically, the emergence of those constituent groups, each with its own divergent interests, made it much more difficult to sustain the old civil rights coalition of members of labor, the faith communities, and sympathetic whites and blacks to advance the new issues of post-civil rights America. Indeed, the dominant ethos of the sixties, racial integration and equality, has given way to an implicit but insidious assumption by many whites and blacks today that voluntary racial isolation and segregation are acceptable even among those whose fundamental interests are similar.
The American citizenry is also divided over whether the unfinished civil rights agenda has its origins in race or social class, and even whether government reforms such as affirmative action should address the lingering problems. The compelling evidence of African-American progress found in the burgeoning middle class helps explain why opponents of a race-based agenda feel the way they do. Meanwhile poverty in a large and intractable black underclass reaches deep into inner cities and rural communities nationwide and decisively constricts the life chances for affected parties, particularly children.
The Unfinished Civil Rights Agenda
Two issues remain on the civil rights agenda. The first is addressing the persistence of racial disparities. The second is redefining the agenda to fit a vastly changing American demographic profile.
Black-white inequality persists in income, education, health, housing, technology access, and safe communities. The national media increasingly report on racial profiling in what has come to be euphemistically referred to as “driving while black,” in the denial of equal access to rent or purchase housing, and in disparities in arrests and sentencing in the criminal justice system.
Many still view government intervention as the most effective means to provide the leadership to eliminate the disparities. But others argue that the responsibility for solving these problems rests neither entirely with government, nor with the voluntary, private, sector, but with a coalition of government, civil society, business, and individual initiatives. They see an invigorated role for faith-based groups, particularly those serving African Americans, and also a stronger role for industry in hiring and training the most indigent and least prepared.
The second issue on the civil rights agenda involves the rapid growth in the immigrant population since 1965. Individuals of Hispanic origin now outnumber African Americans. By 2050, the majority-minority population paradigm on which race and ethnic relations have traditionally rested in this society may be a thing of the past. As a nation, we have already moved away from the traditional white-black model of race relations to one that reflects the nation’s broad diversity—in race, ethnicity, gender, and lifestyle.
The increase in interracial and interethnic marriages is already changing the historical perceptions of what it is to be a member of the “white” or “black” race. High-profile individuals like golf professional Tiger Woods represent a generation of Americans who are redefining race by embracing their ethnic and racial diversity and its broader societal implications.
It is conceivable that at mid-century, Americans will view race in fluid rather than fixed and precise terms, not unlike the way Brazilians see their multiracial population.
The Need for New Models
One of the shortcomings of the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s was its failure to envision the need for a fluid model of action to address new civil rights issues in the years ahead. And still the search goes on. Indeed, the issue today is how to develop flexible remedies to black-white disparity, the nation’s changing racial and ethnic diversity, and white poverty. One way is to rebuild the black voluntary sector that was for a time supplanted by the black electorate. Jesse Jackson’s Rainbow Coalition was a step in the direction of pitching a huge tent under whose shelter new and old minorities and the poor could find common issues and agendas. Martin Luther King’s proposed Poor People’s campaign in 1967 also recognized that a civil rights coalition based entirely on race would not be sufficient to address the problem of white poverty.
A new generation of civil rights leaders now focuses its work on eliminating social and economic disparities, particularly for the indigent. Using some of the sixties strategies for community organizing around advocacy and service delivery, these leaders are bringing technical proficiency to such complex problems as economic development, improvement of schools, and the organization of community development corporations whose missions range from building housing to creating mini-industries.
The most effective of these leaders are people like Bob Moses, a key voting rights activist in the South in the sixties, who now teaches math literacy to prepare poor children for the technology-driven job market; Eugene Rivers, a founder of Boston’s 10-Point Coalition to disarm gangs and rehabilitate young lives; Hattie Dorsey, whose Atlanta Neighborhood Development Partnership helps rebuild decaying neighborhoods; and Robert Woodson, head of the National Neighborhood Enterprise Center, who brokered a truce among the District of Columbia’s most violent gangs and placed its members in paying jobs.
Most of the successful leaders in the post-civil rights movement operate in the nonprofit sector, primarily in community-based groups. They know how to reinvent themselves and their strategies by developing cross-cultural alliances and partnerships based on technical competence as much as on common goals; build public and private resource bases; and navigate the bureaucratic governmental maze for funding. And they are actively training a new generation of young leaders to succeed them. The skills they bring to the job include expertise in planning, finance, technology, and government. They know how to design programs that are appropriate for the complex, multi-layered issues inherent in their work and how to garner the resources to rebuild decaying infrastructures and overhaul human services to make them more efficient and less costly, even while pushing constituents to practice self-sufficiency.
In conclusion, two questions stand out. First, can diverse cultural communities (such as Puerto Ricans in New York City, Central Americans or Ethiopians in Washington, D.C., Asians and Latinos in Los Angeles) and nonprofit groups in civil society coalesce with elected officials and with one another to address the post-civil rights agenda? Second, as they face increased costs along with demands for both enhanced services and fiscal accountability, how can cities (including economically and institutionally recovering venues of reinvention like Washington, D.C., and Philadelphia) support all their citizens?
the topics above will be about Civil rights and civil rights movement
I hope you like them
it is more history than news for civil right movements
On Tuesday, two travelers filed a law-suit against United Airlines in a California court, asking $5 million in damages. The reason? They felt discriminated against for not being able to participate in United’s “Young Flyer” discount campaign.A class-act lawsuit was filed on Tuesday against United Airlines for age discrimination. Photo: Getty Images
We have heard of many strange and farfetched lawsuits in our days. However, the two United Airlines customers that are now asking for $5 million in damages for not being eligible for the carrier’s “Young Flyer” promotional discount might take the disproportionality cake.
Stay informed: Sign up for our daily aviation news digest.
The class-action suit claims the two travelers were discriminated against because of their age, which is illegal according to Californian law. The suit was filed on Tuesday in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California. The passengers are both residents of California.
United’s “Young Flyer” campaign ran from September 10th, 2019, to June 30th, 2020. It allowed travelers between the ages of 18 and 22 to book flights before December 31st this year within the US, Canada, and Mexico with a discount of 10%. The promotion was to make travel more accessible for young people still in college or at the start of their careers.
The conditions stipulated that the booking had to be made via the airline’s app and that the customer had to be a MileagePlus member. Conditions that the lawsuit says both travelers fulfilled. The only thing not applicable was their age, as they were 23 and 67 at the time.United’s “Young Flyer” campaign for the US, Canada, and Mexico ran from September 2019 to June this year. Photo: Getty Images
Apparently, the two plaintiffs felt so discriminated against for missing out on their 10% discount by one and 45 years, respectively, that they decided to take United to court over it. The suit asks for $5 million in damages and an injunction against United not to engage in any further “age discrimination.”
A spokesperson for United Airlines told the Chigaco Tribune that,
“It is a shame that a few individuals take issue with an offer that is intended to make travel more accessible to more people. We believe this lawsuit is completely baseless and will defend ourselves vigorously.”
While there may technically be a case under California’s anti-discrimination laws, the sheer disproportionality of the damages the plaintiffs’ lawyer is requesting on their behalf should be enough to label this as the opportunistic stunt it seems to be.
Simple Flying has reached out to United for a comment but was yet to receive a reply at publication.A spokesperson for United says the airline will defend itself vigorously. Photo: Getty Images
This is not the first, and most likely will not be the last, of odd law-suits brought against an airline. Business Traveller mentions, among others, a nervous flier who was appalled when a carrier played “Killing Me Softly” with The Fugees as she was boarding the plane. The woman, who claimed psychological suffering, lost her case in court.
Apparently, some of the most common claims stem from insect bites, including bed bugs from sleeper-style premium cabins, and injuries suffered due to turbulence. In the US, the airline is actually liable for the latter, with about $170,000 payable without any particular proof that the carrier itself was somehow at fault.
Now and then, the lawsuit comes from somewhere more unexpected. As NBC News tells it, an undisclosed airline’s CEO filed a lawsuit against his own airline from which he had received millions and full health insurance for life. The reason being that he had not been granted “full compensation” in the form of his free life-time first class flights.
What do you make of the class action against United? Let us know your thoughts in the comments.
I hope you like it’
I received a press release this afternoon from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission trumpeting a settlement they secured from United Airlines.
Apparently the airline should have given preference to disabled employees wanting to transfer jobs, rather than to the most qualified candidates for those open positions
Apparently the airline should have given preference to disabled employees wanting to transfer jobs, rather than to the most qualified candidates for those open positions.
By requiring workers with disabilities to compete for vacant positions for which they were qualified and which they needed in order to continue working, the company’s practice frequently prevented employees with disabilities from continuing employment with United, the EEOC said.
If a disability prevents an employee from returning to work in his or her current position, an employer must consider reassignment. As the Seventh Circuit’s decision highlights, requiring the employee to compete for positions falls short of the ADA’s requirements. Employers should take note: When all other accommodations fail, consider whether your employee can fill a vacant position for which he or she is qualified.
I have several observations on this, none of which are on the merits of the application of the Americans With Disabilities Act. While I have some familiarity with it as an employer, I am not a specialist on the requirements of the ADA.
In Blakey v. Continental Airlines, Inc. , 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2532 (D.N.J. 1998), the jury sitting in United States District Court in Newark, New Jersey, a federal court returned a verdict in favor of a former female pilot who sued her employer for sexual harassment, awarding the employee $480,000 in back pay, $15,000 in front pay and $500,000 for emotional distress, pain and suffering. However, the jury found that the employee had failed to mitigate her damages and subtracted $120,000 from her back pay award of $480,000.
Following the trial, the employer moved to have the entire verdict vacated including the jury’s award of back pay claiming that the jury’s reduction of the back pay by only $120,000 was inexplicable and inadequate. The court rejected the employer’s argument holding that the employer has the burden of proving that the employee failed to mitigate her damages.
The court held that an employee who fails to mitigate damages is not barred from recovering back pay. Rather, the employee’s back pay award may be reduced by the amount she could have earned with reasonable diligence.
The court noted that the employee was in an unusual position because she had not been terminated but rather was on an administrative leave by mutual consent. Therefore, the employee was not entirely free to obtain another job, nor was she able to return to work in what she perceived as an un-remedied hostile environment. The court found that the employer failed to introduce any evidence that it was reasonable for the employee to return to work and that the employer had the burden of proof on the issue of mitigation of damages and failed to meet it.
The court noted that although the employer eventually eliminated the problem, it did nothing to assure the employee that it had done so. Rather, the court noted that the employer allowed the employee to remain on administrative leave and did nothing to allay her fears and could not now avoid the consequences.
The court held that given evidence of the employee’s previous unpleasant experiences with her employer’s management, the jury was entitled to conclude that it was not reasonable for her to return to work.
