{"id":9,"date":"2019-11-18T16:18:44","date_gmt":"2019-11-18T16:18:44","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/sites.berry.edu\/civilrights\/?page_id=9"},"modified":"2020-01-27T09:30:09","modified_gmt":"2020-01-27T14:30:09","slug":"1971-protests","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/sites.berry.edu\/civilrights\/1971-protests\/","title":{"rendered":"1971 Protests"},"content":{"rendered":"

***STILL UNDER CONSTRUCTION***<\/strong><\/p>\n

In August 1971, in an extremely uncharacteristic decision for a paper that so often gave into the biases and beliefs of its white editors, the <\/span>Rome News-Tribune <\/span><\/i>attempted to reach out to leaders of the disgruntled black population of the Northwest Georgia City. [INSERT DOCS: Rome News Tribune – August 29, 1971, “More opportunities goal of Rome Blacks” – Split piecemeal into three screenshots] <\/em><\/strong>The paper ran a full-length, two-page interview with Jimmy Hardy and Jeffrey Jackson, two twenty-year-old activists representing the Rome Black Coordinating Committee. The city\u2019s black community had elected Hardy and Jackson to the committee to represent them in the presentation of grievances to city leaders, and the two also discussed these grievances with a reporter from the <\/span>News-Tribune. <\/span><\/i>The interview was a remarkable publication for the paper, as it did not redact Hardy and Jackson\u2019s critiques of the city\u2019s businesses, police, schools, and even the paper itself.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Neither did the paper redact the two activists\u2019s response when asked a question about the use of violent protest. \u201cPersonally, I don\u2019t really like violence,\u201d said Jackson\u201cIf you\u2019re speaking of this all-out violence, just going out and shooting and looting and raising hell, I don\u2019t think that\u2019s a good solution.\u201d Both men agreed that they did not support the open use of violence, believing that listening to grievances and testimony from both sides could resolve the deep, structural problems still plaguing the city\u2019s black population. That said, they also issued a warning. The Committee wanted to be heard, but feared that if the city continued to ignore their demands, violence was inevitable. \u201cWe would accomplish something if we ran down Broad Street, throwing bombs in windows and looting,\u201d Jackson said, \u201cbecause that would wake the people up to what\u2019s happening.\u201d It wasn\u2019t an open threat, but rather an acknowledgement of what could happen if the city leaders continued to ignore the black population. The Black Coordinating Committee had submitted grievances, but feared continued suppression could trigger an outbreak of violence. As Hardy presciently concluded, \u201cBack a person against the wall, and he\u2019ll come out fighting.\u201d (<\/span>\u201cYoung Spokemen Say: More Opportunities Goal of Rome Blacks.\u201d Rome News Tribune, August 29, 1971.)<\/p>\n

Less than a month later, as negotiations between the Black Coordinating Committee and the Board of Education faltered, the city of Rome, Georgia erupted into violence. The outbreak proved to the city\u2019s white population, and stands as an example to modern historians, that the issues of racial injustice were not solved in the 1960s. Most city leaders assumed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 removed any structural barriers and policies limiting Rome\u2019s black population. In reality, economic opportunity in 1971 was mostly available only to the city\u2019s white population Integration of businesses, schools, and many civic facilities had stalled, or never even started in the first place. Nevertheless, the grievances of the black population still surprised some white citizens in Rome, who assumed that the country had achieved racial justice in the previous decade.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Too often, modern observers can fall into the same pattern of thinking, ending the historiography of civil rights at the assassination of MLK or the end of the 1960s, and assuming race relations were significantly improved if not resolved completely. Such thinking follows the same logic as analyses of the integration of white and black schools following <\/span>Brown v. Board, <\/span><\/i>and take the perspective of white students, ignoring the social strain and interpersonal biases black students encountered every day after implementation of the landmark decision. Such thinking, when applied to economic justice, can likewise ignore the realities of continued bias, both structural and interpersonal, that held back African Americans even after the Civil Rights Act of 1964.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Through an analysis of the race riots that occurred in the fall of 1971, this work attempts to better understand the daily lives and realities of African Americans in Rome following the Civil Rights Act. An analysis of the oppressive realities of school and work in Rome for many black students can place the 1971 riots into perspective, while also understanding the significant changes and dialogues that ensued between the black community and city leaders afterwards. <\/span><\/p>\n

Information about the riots can be found using the following primary sources:<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

INSERT DOCS: BROWN MEDIA ARCHIVE VIDEO CLIPS OF STUFF ON FIRE AND PEOPLE MARCHING<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

http:\/\/dbsmaint.galib.uga.edu\/cgi\/news?userid=public&dbs=news&ini=news.ini&rset=001&action=retrieve&recno=9<\/p>\n

http:\/\/dbsmaint.galib.uga.edu\/cgi\/news?userid=public&dbs=news&ini=news.ini&rset=001&action=retrieve&recno=10<\/p>\n

INSERT DOCS: THE FOLDER ON GOOGLE DOCS<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

***STILL UNDER CONSTRUCTION*** In August 1971, in an extremely uncharacteristic decision for a paper that so often gave into the biases and beliefs of its white editors, the Rome News-Tribune […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":27,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-9","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.berry.edu\/civilrights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/9","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.berry.edu\/civilrights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.berry.edu\/civilrights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.berry.edu\/civilrights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/27"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.berry.edu\/civilrights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=9"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/sites.berry.edu\/civilrights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/9\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":328,"href":"https:\/\/sites.berry.edu\/civilrights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/9\/revisions\/328"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.berry.edu\/civilrights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=9"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}