EOTO: “The Four Little Girls”

The bombing of the 16th Street Baptist Church in Birmingham, Alabama, on September 15, 1963, took the lives of four innocent African American girls. Addie Mae Collins, Denise McNair, Carole Robertson, and Cynthia Wesley lost their lives due to white supremacists.

This created a pivotal moment in the civil rights movement. Before the bombing in Birmingham Alabama, the 16th Street Baptist Church was a gathering place for people to focus on gaining more civil rights. White supremacists saw how the church was becoming a symbol of civil rights and wanted to put an end to it in hopes of creating more segregation. 

The Bombers decided this was how they were going to have to do things to get what they wanted but, in the end, it took away innocent lives and proved too many that needed to be put to an end. The bombing of the 16th Street Baptist Church had many consequences adding to the existing problems related to racial divisions and discrimination within the United States. 

For one thing, it highlighted the tensions with race. Since the bombing happened it created more protests which had a lot of violence. Another thing that happened from the bombing of “The Four Little Girls” was how it caused the news on the case to go international. People were appalled by the bombing which created a lot of media coverage around the world. This ended up causing the United States reputation to become damaged by the racial discrimination taking place. 

The bombing inspired many activists to fight during the civil rights movement. The tragic event served as a powerful reminder of the injustices that African Americans faced. After all that had happened with the four little girls, they became symbols for the civil rights struggle. 

There are even statues of the girls in Kelly Ingram Park located in Birmingham, Alabama showing just how impactful this event has been on the world. Their deaths were mourned by many in their family and community. Since the girls were so young no one would have thought that they would have been targeted. 

Going after these kids showed how far white supremacists were willing to go. The girls will also forever be remembered for the tragedy that happened to them. The bombing of the 16th Street Baptist Church and the loss of the four little girls were painful reminders of the racial hatred and violence that characterized the civil rights era. 

While it got rid of existing divisions in the United States, it also played a key role in creating greater awareness, more support for the civil rights movement, and inspiring many generations. People were committed to creating racial equality and justice for the community. 

The memory of the four little girls continues to serve as a powerful symbol of the struggles America has faced having to do with the civil rights movement. In conclusion, the bombing of the 16th Street Baptist Church and the loss of the four little girls caused the United States toward greater social and legal change in the pursuit of racial equality and justice. 

Sources: 

https://www.wunc.org/race-demographics/2023-09-15/birmingham-bombing-1963-four-little-girls-civil-rights

https://calendar.eji.org/racial-injustice/sep/15

https://jimcrowmuseum.ferris.edu/witnesses/sixteenthstreetbaptist.htm

https://www.fbi.gov/history/famous-cases/baptist-street-church-bombing

EOTO Reax Post

After listening to everyone present today in class, I was able to find one specific part of the reconstruction era for EOTO that was most interesting to me. I listened to both sides of the argument, the positive and the negative. The negative side stood out to me for many reasons. The main reason for this was the topic of the Ku Klux Klan. 

To give a little back story on the Ku Klux Klan it was founded in 1866 in Tennessee. The Klan’s main goal was to try and restore White supremacy. One of their main targets was the Freedman Bureaus. The Freedman Bureau’s goal was to help former slaves in the South get on track with starting their new lives. 

This stood out to me because of how the Klan went after these innocent people who just wanted reconstruction. These former slaves had just come from winning a war and now had to deal with the retaliation from this group. The Ku Klux Klan would often do many things in retaliation, but they never fully succeeded. 

The reconstruction after the Civil War did happen slowly and, in the end, they had to accept defeat. Although there are some people who still try to keep white supremacy going there is little to no success due to the understanding that there is no difference between White and Black people.

The thoughts of the Klan did much damage, and it is important to use what happened back in this time to show how much more damage they did. Treating people as separate is never something good in the world. Therefore, when looking into these actions that had happened it is important to learn how we have grown and have come together that these beliefs of White supremacy are something that should never make people side with them today. 

Reconstruction America After the Civil War: Reflection

After watching Reconstruction America After the Civil War, I found it interesting how after slavery ended, Black children would go into apprenticeship arrangements. This was because many people had hard transitions after slavery ended.  

The parents of the children did not want their kids to go into these apprenticeship arrangements. The children had no choice because they would not be able to protect their kids when they were not with them. The parents knew that there was a chance of their child being beaten or even sexually assaulted. This was an extreme form of exploitation which was being used during this time.  

After doing some more research on the topic, I was also able to learn about another thing that was big during this time Convict Leasing. Something that often led to Convict Leasing was Black people would get arrested for minor offenses and then would be leased to private companies. This practice was used to continue the economic exploitation of Black labor.  

One other thing I would like to mention is sharecropping, which was when a Black farmer would work on a portion of a landowner's land in exchange for a piece of the crops. Sharecropping ended up doing a lot more harm than good due to putting the Black farmers in debt and making them depend on these crops where if they lost their access could make them lose their income and way of getting food. This made it difficult for Black farmers to break free from economic hardship.  

Although not all labor agreements were taking advantage of Black people, there were many people affected by these situations making it a noteworthy moment in history. This transition from slavery to freedom created many complex issues in this challenging time in history. The exploitation of labor continued after the abolition of slavery, making it a dark chapter for America. 

Sources: 

https://blogs.loc.gov/inside_adams/2021/06/convict-leasing-system/  

https://eji.org/news/history-racial-injustice-sharecropping/  

https://eji.org/news/history-racial-injustice-convict-leasing/  

https://www.pbs.org/video/reconstruction-part-1-hour-1-n0g1em/

https://www.history.com/news/black-codes-reconstruction-slavery

Trial 2: Plessy v. Ferguson

Today, I stand before you not only as the attorney representing Homer Plessy, but as an advocate for the ethical principles that underlie this case. The Plessy v. Ferguson case has made many people have questions about society and today I will speak on Plessy's behalf to answer them.

I would first like to bring up the fact of equality. My client is suing today because there is a lack of justice and equality in our legal system. The color of your skin should simply not matter when you are going about life. One should not have to think about the effects of drinking out of the wrong water fountain, using the wrong bathroom, or even going on the wrong railroad. 

There should not be a matter of segregating people from each other. This system we have in place for our country is doing more harm than good, and I beg you to look deeper into this to understand why we are here today. My client who is an eighth black, not even a quarter was still ridiculed for going on a white railroad. 

My client would not even have been shunned away if there were not people who knew of him on this train. Classifying people based on their race is unconstitutional since it subjects individuals to different treatment based solely on their racial heritage. I ask the court to think about how if Plessy did not say no to anyone on that train would there ever have been a question of him being anything other than white? 

Plessy would have gone on with his day like all the others on the train. It would not have affected anyone's life proving that it is just the reaction of white people towards black people. Black people are no less than white people therefore there is no reason for separating them based on the color of their skin. All that I have just said shows how Plessy’s equal protection rights were violated. 

My client does not deserve to be treated as separate but equal and so do no others deserve this treatment. There is a lot of importance to this case due to the hopes of overturning segregation. This case established the "separate but equal" doctrine, which allowed racial segregation in public facilities and services if they were deemed to be of equal quality. It shows an example of how legal precedents can have significant societal consequences. 

The case also shows the limitations that the legal system had in addressing such complex issues. The courage of the people who were involved in this case like Plessy shows their crucial role in looking for the change that was needed. 

Although they were unsuccessful it highlights the importance of a case like this. This case will set the ethical precedent for future civil rights activism. The effects of this case will set the tone for the later legal challenges that this country will have to face, and it is important to use this case to show the justice that is needed in this country. 

Sources: 

https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/plessy-v-ferguson

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/separate_but_equal

https://muse.jhu.edu/article/783894

Gone With The Wind Post

"Gone with the Wind" is a film about a woman named Scarlett O'Hara. In the film, she is a strong woman who does not follow the regular rules that other women in society follow during the time. The film takes place in the South during and after the Civil War.

At the beginning of the film, it is seen that Scarlett has feelings for Ashley Wilkes who will be marrying her cousin Melanie. As the film goes on the civil war begins, and Scarlett’s life is completely affected. People in her life pass away, the southern economy dies, And the destruction of Tara which is the family home.

Scarlett also meets a man named Rhett Butler who is attracted to her. In the film, women are depicted as helpless people who shouldn't have opinions, but Scarlett seems to be the complete opposite. While watching the film I thought Scarlett came off as a bratty daughter but when I finished the film it was clear to me that Scarlett O’Hara is much more than that she is an independent woman who does her own thing and follows through with it. 

She also adapts to the challenges that come from the civil war. Within the film, African Americans are depicted using the racial attitudes and stereotypes of the time. The African Americans were slaves who worked on plantations and were loyal to the plantation owners.

Overall, the film Highlights the times in the South both during and before the Civil War. “Gone with the Wind” helps to educate people on the time but also shows how much goes on within the war through the perspective of Scarlett. This film has helped me find an understanding of life in the South during this time and how much actually happened through the eyes of the South. 

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNcs-rMjvw4

EOTO 1: Dred Scott v. Sandford

The Dred Scott v. Sandford case is a well-remembered case because of the controversy it caused within the country. The opinions of the court of the case have still continued to be thought about to this day. The case did a multitude of harm to slavery and the rights of black people during that time. 

Dred Scott v. Sandford was about a black person named Dred Scott who was a slave. In 1852 he sued to become a free man. Scott argued with the court to say that since he had lived in both free and slave states throughout his life there was reason for him to justify the idea of him becoming free. Since Dred Scott lived for a long period of time in Illinois and the Wisconsin Territory, he believed legally he should be a free man. 

The case ended up reaching the Supreme Court, where Chief Justice Roger B. Taney delivered the majority opinion. It was ruled that since Scott was a person of African descent, he was not considered a citizen and therefore did not have the right to bring a lawsuit in federal court. The decision made by the court did not just affect Dred Scott, but it also affected all African Americans who sought hope of becoming free. 

This case advanced slavery in a multitude of ways. One of the biggest advancements from this case is that the decision effectively denied African Americans legal standing in the United States. By denying African Americans the legal rights they needed to have any humane life it ended up invalidating the Missouri Compromise of 1820. Witch had restricted the expansion of slavery into certain territories. 

When this case was overruled, it had been declared that slavery could potentially exist in any federal territory allowed. This decision ultimately opened the door for the expansion of slavery and by doing so it created more of a divide between the Northern and Southern states. While people in the south celebrated this victory, people in the north thought because of this ruling there was a pro-slavery bias in the federal government. 

This case contributed to the overall tensions and division in the United States over the issue of slavery in the years leading up to the Civil War. Overall, the case of Dredd Scott v. Sandford showed how important the case actually was. The case also confirmed thoughts about how slaves were property under the U.S. Constitution. 

It is important to look at the overall picture of this case to fully understand its importance in the United States. The Dred Scott v. Sandford case will always be remembered in history as the case that urgently affected the thoughts and views of slavery back in 1857. Although this case took away slave's rights and did a lot of harm if this case never got to the supreme court, there would be a chance of not having a Civil War meaning there would be a chance of the North and South staying divided.  

Sources: 

https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/dred-scott-v-sandford

https://www.britannica.com/biography/Roger-B-Taney

https://supreme.findlaw.com/supreme-court-insights/dred-scott-v--sandford--history--decision--and-impact.html#:~:text=The%20Dred%20Scott%20Decision,-The%20Supreme%20Court's&text=Sandford%20did%20three%20important%20things,slavery%20in%20the%20Wisconsin%20Territory

Trial 1: Reax Post

After listening to both sides of the State v. Mann I would like to talk about the side of the state. I found this site interesting when listening to both sides. 

Some background on this case would be that there was a man named John Mann and he had gotten a fine for beating his slave Lydia for attempting to escape. He argued that she was his property meaning that it did not matter that he had been beating her. He went to court about this to waive the fine since he believed that since a slave is a property, she is not considered a human being. 

The trial showed whether it was assault and battery as well as attempted murder. The state argued that even though slaves were considered property it should still be considered assault and because of this it created the chain of events of what would happen to other slaves. Since he believed that it was self-defense there was no wrongdoing according to him. 

I found it interesting how they believed that since the slave was property, the slave did not deserve the right to be considered human. Another big thing within this case was the economic reasoning behind their argument if all the slaves had run away then there would have been no free labor, taking away their access to making cotton and growing crops in an easy way. 

I believe if it had been ruled differently there would be a chance of slavery having to end because of the ability for these slaves to walk out on the idea of doing free labor. This would economically ruin the South's system and ultimately create a course of change with action. 

In conclusion, State v. Man allowed slave owners to always have control and power over their slaves. This decision created an extremely difficult environment for slaves to have rights from not being abused and killed. Something that can be learned from this case is that slavery was a big dilemma back in 1830 and there were many ethical dilemmas that took place in this debate showing the difficulty of the case.