In this period, the traditional narrative suggests that the movement had its greatest victories due to its commitment to nonviolence, and thus the violence that rocked northern cities in the wake of this victory was seen as a break and constructed as an ungrateful reaction to civil rights progress. Yet, our unit this week suggests that the civil rights movement was constantly changing and never monolithically committed to nonviolence.
Why was nonviolence so effective as a strategy in the mass protests in Birmingham and Selma yet relatively powerless in Mississippi and northern cities? How did questions of tactics and leadership cause tensions within the civil rights movement and the student movement in this period? Why did northern African Americans take their grievances into the streets in the late 1960s, just as civil rights legislation seemed to promise change?
some links may help: https://youtu.be/aP2A6_2b6g8