Hello, and welcome to today's lesson on Earlier Opposition to the Civil Rights Movement.

This lesson is part of a broader inquiry looking at the development of the civil rights movement from 1954 to 1960.

In the course of this inquiry, we'll cover lots of different things from the context of segregation and discrimination in 1954, progress in education, and other key events leading up to 1960.

But for today's lesson, we're just going to be focusing on early opposition to the civil rights movement.

And for this lesson, you're going to need a piece of paper and a pen.

If you don't have one, absolutely fine.

Not to worry.

Just pause the video now, get everything you need, and then come back and press play when you're ready to go.

Great.

Now we're ready to get started.

You can see our lesson outcome for today on the slide.

By the end of today's lesson, you'll be able to describe the different forms of opposition to the civil rights movement.

But in order to do that, we're going to need some keywords.

And for today, we've got five keywords, lynching, federal, manifesto, Dixiecrat and filibuster.

You might not have heard of some of these words before, but that's absolutely fine because we're gonna have a look at some definitions now and then see them again in the context of the lesson.

So lynching is when someone is killed for an offence without a trial, usually by an armed group, there doesn't necessarily need to be any evidence at all.

This is a group of people taking the law in their own hands, not going through the justice system.

A federal government is a system of government where there is one central government that controls a collection of smaller state governments.

So this is a term used to describe the government in the United States of America where one government oversees the entire United States of America, and they control smaller governments that exist in each of the states.

A manifesto is a public declaration of policy and aims. So if a group has a particular aim or intention, they might sign a manifesto to make their intentions clearer.

A Dixiecrat was a Southern Democrat party politician known for their opposition to the civil rights movement.

And then finally, a filibuster is a prolonged action, for example, a speech that aims to prevent the passing of the law.

Now we've looked at our five keywords for today, we can get started on today's lesson.

And in the first part of today's lesson, we're going to be looking at the KKK.

Now, the Ku Klux Klan, also known as the KKK had existed since the abolition of slavery in the United States in 1865.

And although they had become less popular by 1900, by the 1950s, their membership was rapidly increasing as opposition to the civil rights movement developed.

Now, the KKK were made up of mostly White Protestant Americans who saw themselves as superior to other races, especially Black Americans.

But in addition to this, they were also strongly against communists, Catholics, Jewish people, or pretty much any other race or ethnic group.

So they were a group that believed they were superior to basically every other race, but also other forms of Christianity.

Now, before we go on to look at how they opposed the civil rights movement, we're just going to pause and check our understanding so far.

So I'd like you to answer this question for me.

Why did the membership of the KKK rapidly increased in the 1950s? Was it because A, it was as a result of the President openly supporting the KKK or B, after it was no longer illegal to be a member of the KKK, that was why the membership increased, or was it C in response to the developing civil rights movement? Pause the video now.

Give yourself a couple of seconds to make a decision, and when you think you have an answer, come back and press play.

Excellent work.

The answer is C.

Membership of the KKK rapidly increased in the 1950s in response to the developing civil rights movement.

Now, let's move on to have a look at how they opposed the civil rights movement.

So like I've already said, the KKK were a group of White Protestant Americans who believed they were superior to all other groups, especially Black Americans.

And these Klansmen, as their members were known, would hide their identities by dressing in White robes and hoods as we saw in that previous slide.

Many were politicians, policemen, and other people in positions of authority.

As a result, the violent acts they carried out towards their victims, who are predominantly Black American, often went unpunished.

These violent acts were often lynchings, which were sometimes public events attended by hundreds or even thousands of people.

So we can see here a photograph of a protest against the lynching of four Black Americans in 1946.

And remember, that's one of our keywords.

So in this example, what they were protesting against was the murder of four Black Americans by a mob, usually led by the KKK.

Although not all violence towards Black Americans was carried out by the KKK, it did lead to an increase in violent attacks from White Americans who also held the same beliefs.

So not every single lynching was carried out by a member of the KKK, but many were.

And because of this, like I've already said, it led to more White Americans committing violent acts against Black Americans, because of the support from the KKK because remember, lots of the Klansmen were policemen, politicians, and other people in positions of authority.

So these acts that were carried out often went unpunished.

Now, before we look at an example of one of these acts that went completely unpunished, we're just going to pause and check our understanding so far.

So I'd like you to tell me why did the violent acts carried out by the KKK often go unpunished? Was it because A, those who carried out the acts were masked, so it was impossible to find out who was responsible.

B, the KKK's acts of violence were not actually against the law in many states.

Or C, the people who should have punished those responsible were members of the KKK themselves.

So pause the video again, make a decision, and when you think you have answer, come back and press play Good work, it's because we know that the people who should have punished those responsible were often members of the KKK themselves.

Now let's move on to look at an example of some of the violent acts carried out by those who supported the KKK.

So on this slide here, we can see a photograph of a young boy called Emmett Till and his mother Mamie Till.

And unfortunately, his murder is an example of one of the violent attacks that was carried out by supporters of the KKK in August, 1955.

Emmett Till was a 14-year-old Black American boy from Chicago who was visiting family in Mississippi, where the enforcement of Jim Crow extended to the prohibition of relationships between Black and White Americans.

That meant that in Mississippi in August, 1955, it was against the law for Black and White Americans to be in any form of relationship.

But this specifically applied to romantic relationships.

Now, Emmett Till was falsely accused of saying, "Bye baby", and whistling at a White American woman when leaving the shop.

Following this, the White woman's husband and her half-brother abducted Emmett Till and brutally beat him, then murdered him and threw his body in a river.

When his body was found a few days later, he could only be identified by a ring he wore.

Despite his body being terrible to look at, his mother insisted that her son have an open casket funeral so that everyone could see how her son had died.

There was outrage across the USA and internationally.

However, in 1955, his murderers that we can see here on trial were declared not guilty by an all White jury.

So this is an example of where people committed a violent crime against Black Americans for no reason, more than the fact he was a Black American, and they went completely unpunished.

So this shows us how the KKK led to opposition to the civil rights movement, but in a very violent form that often resulted in the murder of Black Americans, including Black American children.

As remember Emmett Till was only 14 years old.

Now, before we go on to look at another example of opposition to the civil rights movement, we're just going to pause, check our understanding, and then put our learning from this part of the lesson into practise.

So I'd like you to list five details about the murder with Emmett Till.

Give yourself a few minutes to just jot down as much as you can remember and then come back and press play when you've got a list ready.

Excellent work, you might have included five details from one of the following.

Emmett Till was murdered when visiting family in Mississippi.

Emmett Till was falsely accused of saying, "Bye baby", and whistling at a White American woman, the woman's husband, and half-brother abducted, brutally beat and murdered Emmett Till.

Emmett Till's body was only recognisable because of a ring he wore.

His mother chose to hold an open casket funeral so everyone could see how her son had died.

There was national and international outrage at his murder.

And finally, you might have said his murders were declared not guilty by an all-White jury.

Good work if you manage to remember five of these details.

If there's a couple that you couldn't quite remember, you can pause the video now and get 'em down on your list.

Now we're going to use that last quick check for understanding to help us with our practise task because I'd now like you to write one paragraph to explain how the KKK contributed to increased opposition towards the civil rights movement from 1954 to 1960.

And I'd like you to make sure you include the following details, positions of authority, violent attacks, lynchings, but also details from the example of Emmett Till.

So pause the video now, give yourself five to 10 minutes to write this paragraph and then come back and press play when you're done.

Great work, let's have a look at what your response may have included.

So you might have said, the rapid increase in membership in the KKK came in response to the development of the civil rights movement and led to an increase in violent attacks on Black Americans.

As many members of the KKK were politicians, policemen, and other people in positions of authority, violent attacks carried out by the KKK often went unpunished, especially lynchings, which were often public events.

One example is the murder of Emmett Till, whose known murderers were declared not guilty in September, 1955.

This encouraged opposition to the civil rights movement because those who shared the same beliefs as the KKK saw how these views were supported by people in positions of authority and how even illegal violent acts against the civil rights movement went unpunished.

If you managed to get those key details in, including our keyword lynchings and some details about the case of Emmett Till, then well done.

I'm sure you've written a brilliant paragraph.

Now let's move on to look at another group.

And in this part of the lesson, we are going to be looking at a group that showed opposition to desegregation, specifically in the South.

So following the ruling in 1954, which ordered the desegregation of schools across the US, many groups formed to oppose the ruling and any further attempts at desegregation.

And one of these groups was the White Citizens' Council.

They were one of the major organisations formed to oppose desegregation.

Now, these councils used different methods, but there were some things that lots of the different councils had in common.

So one thing was that they would often work together to get civil rights activists fired from their jobs.

They would often work together to get these civil rights activists evicted from their homes, or they might work together to refuse services such as mortgages and loans to civil rights activists.

And it wasn't just that they'd use one, they might use several methods together.

Now, many councils criticise the KKK for their violence, particularly lynchings, but their aims were often very similar to the KKKs.

These organisations were born out of the belief that they were superior to Black Americans.

And although for the most part, White Citizens' Council didn't use violence to try and achieve their aim of maintaining segregation, they did use other methods to oppose the civil rights movement.

And before we go on to look at a specific example of their opposition to the civil rights movement, we're just going to pause and check our understanding so far.

So I'd like you to describe the methods used by the White Citizens' Councils against desegregation.

Pause the video now and give yourself a couple of minutes to write a few things down and then come back and press play when you've managed to remember at least two of the different methods used by the White Citizens' Council.

Great work, you might have said that they worked get civil activists fired from their jobs, evicted from their homes, or you might have said that they put pressure on businesses so that they refuse to approve services such as mortgages or loans to civil rights activists.

Now let's move on to look at a specific example of how the White Citizens' Council opposed the civil rights movement.

So you might have already learned about the Montgomery Bus Boycott when Rosa Parks was arrested for refusing to give up her seat to a White American man that sparked a year long boycott of the bus services in Montgomery and led to the desegregation of them in December, 1956.

And as you can imagine, we're talking about successful desegregation.

So you'd be right to assume the White Citizens' Council definitely had something to say about that.

And this is in fact very true.

One of the councils played a leading role in opposition to the boycott.

Now, the protestors had organised carpools, so boycotters could still access transportation by sharing car trips.

The councils harassed insurance companies to stop cars being used in this way.

The White Citizens' Councils were openly criticised by Martin Luther King, who believed that more needed to be done by the federal government to weaken their influence.

Now, while their opposition to the boycott was largely non-violent, some council members would later go on to commit violent acts.

One example of this was the murder of Medgar Evers in 1963.

An outcry from civil rights leaders like Martin Luther King only increased after this as Medgar Evers was the leader of the Mississippi branch of the NAACP, and he was killed in Jackson, Mississippi by one member of the White Citizens' Council.

So as we can see here, they used many non-violent methods to oppose the civil rights movement and try to stop things like the Montgomery Bus Boycott.

Later on, we know that we'd see examples of some council members using violence, but ultimately they were an example of organised opposition who looked to prevent desegregation by any means possible, but typically using non-violent methods.

Now, before we go on to look at the third and final example of opposition to the civil rights movement, we're is going to stop and check our understanding so far.

So firstly, I'd like you to tell me whether this statement is true or false.

The White Citizens' Council played a role in the opposition to the Montgomery Boss boycott.

Pause the video now make a decision.

When you have an answer, come back and press play.

Great, so we know that this statement is true, but we need to think about why.

Is this statement true because council members harassed insurance companies to stop the carpools for the boycotters or is it true because council members organise mobs to violently attack the boycotters working with the KKK? Pause the video again, and when you've justified your statement, come back and press play.

Excellent work, we know that this statement is true because council members harassed insurance companies to stop the carpools for the boycotters.

Let's have a look at one more question before we put this into practise.

Members of the White Citizens' Council never used violence.

Pause the video now and then decide whether this statement is true or false.

Good work, we know this statement is false, but again, we need to think about why.

Is it false because although many councils were against the violent tactics of the KKK, some members were known to commit violent acts or is it false because the council never officially condoned violence, but their members commonly worked with and supported the KKK in violent acts? Read those statements again through slowly if you need to.

Pause the video now, and when you think you know why this statement is false, come back and press play.

Excellent, we know this statement is false because although many councils were against the violent tactics of the KKK, some council members were known to commit violent acts.

It wasn't commonplace that their members would work with the KKK, but we know that it did happen.

So we cannot say that they never used violence.

Now let's put our learning into practise.

So now I'd like you to write another paragraph.

This will be our second paragraph of today's lesson.

In this paragraph, I'd like you to explain how the White Citizens' Councils contributed to increased opposition towards the civil rights movement from 1954 to 1960.

In this paragraph, I'd like you to include the following details fired from their jobs/evicted from their homes, insurance companies, Montgomery Bus Boycott, and federal government.

So pause the video now.

Give yourself five to 10 minutes to write this paragraph and then come back and press play when you're done.

Excellent work, let's look at what your paragraph could have looked like.

The White Citizens' Councils were formed to oppose desegregation in the South.

They provided a network of support for individuals who wanted to challenge desegregation and methods for people to use to make life difficult for civil rights activists.

Council members would work together to put pressure on businesses to get civil rights activists fired from their jobs or evicted from their homes.

During the Montgomery Bus Boycott, a White Citizens' Council harassed car insurance companies to withdraw insurance from those contributing to the carpools that enabled bus boycotters to travel.

As little was done by the federal government to weaken the influence of the councils their work led to increased opposition to the civil rights movement.

Really well done if you managed to get those key details in there, especially federal, one of our keywords.

Now we've finished our second paragraph we can move on to the third and final part of today's lesson.

And in the third and final part of the lesson, we're going to be looking at opposition from Congress and the Dixiecrats.

Now over the course of this lesson, we've looked at opposition from the KKK, opposition in the South, specifically the White Citizens' Council.

But it's important that we know that opposition to the civil rights movement, was not just from the public.

It was also organised within Congress.

In 1956, nearly a hundred members of the US government, or you might say the US Congress and Senate, signed the Southern Manifesto, a document outlining the outrage that they had towards the Brown versus Topeka ruling.

It also outlined their opposition to federal intervention in the desegregation of schools and their encouragement to schools to continue resisting desegregation.

So it wasn't just a few members of the US government, over a hundred were willing to speak out about their outrage and their opposition.

As well as this, the Dixiecrats were another form of organised resistance within the US government.

The Democrat Party had been divided on the issue of civil rights.

With those who opposed the Dixiecrats forming their own party in winning a million votes in 1948.

Although the Dixiecrats did not continue as their own independent party, there was still a lot of opposition from Southern Democrats as progress towards desegregation had been made.

And here we can see a photograph of Senator Thurman meeting with the Dixiecrats in 1948.

He'd actually run as the leader of the Dixiecrats in this time period, but he comes up again when we are looking at a specific example of the way Dixiecrats tried to oppose any progress towards desegregation.

And we can see a photograph of Senator Thurmond here capturing him on a break from his filibuster in 1957.

Now, this filibuster was run in 1957 because as you may already know, Eisenhower passed a Civil Rights Act in that year.

But prior to this act being passed, Senator Thurman was one of several Dixiecrats willing to go to extreme measures to prevent this act from being passed.

So he held a filibuster for 24 hours and 18 minutes.

This meant that he would partake in things like long speeches over long periods of time to prevent this act from being passed.

And in 1957, his 24 hour and 18 minute filibuster was the longest one to date.

He broke a record for how long somebody was willing to stand before the US government to prevent an act being passed.

Despite this opposition, as I've already said, the Civil Rights Act was passed in 1957, 2 hours after Thurman's filibuster ended.

And then another one again in 1960.

However, both were criticised for offering very little actual change for Black Americans.

And one of the reasons for this was that Eisenhower feared the backlash from Southern Democrats, specifically Dixiecrats if he was to pass a law that brought a change that they would feel was too radical.

Now, before we wrap up for today, we're going to check our understanding of this part of the lesson, and I've got one last practise task for you to do.

So first, I'd like you to tell me whether this statement is true or false.

Opposition to the civil rights movement came only from public groups, not from members of the US government.

So pause the video now, tell me whether this statement is true or false, and then come back and press play when you think you've got an idea.

Excellent, we know this statement is false, but with these statements, we always need to justify why.

It's not good enough to just say it was false.

So is this statement false because nearly a hundred members of the US Congress and Senate signed the Southern Manifesto in 1956 opposing the Brown versus Topeka ruling? Or is it false because only three members of the US Congress and Senate signed the Southern Manifesto in 1956 and the rest supported Brown versus Topeka? Pause the video now, make a decision.

And when you've done that, come back and press play.

Excellent, we know the statement is false because nearly a hundred members of the US Congress and Senate signed the Southern Manifesto in 1956 because they opposed the Brown versus Topeka ruling.

One last thing to check our understanding, I'd like you to describe one way in which the Dixiecrats opposed the civil rights movement.

So pause the video now.

Give yourself a couple of minutes to jot down some ideas and then come back and press play when you're done.

Excellent work, so you might have included one or both of these examples.

You might have mentioned that they form their own political party in 1948, winning a million votes, or you might have mentioned Senator Thurman's filibuster.

It was 24 hours and 18 minutes, which was in opposition to Eisenhower's attempt to pass the 1957 Civil Rights Act.

Great work, so for the final task, we're gonna write a third paragraph, and in this paragraph we're going to be explaining how opposition to desegregation within the US government contributed to increased opposition towards the Civil Rights Movement from 1954 to 1960.

In this paragraph, I'd like you to include these details, Southern Manifesto, federal intervention, Dixiecrats and filibuster.

So pause the video now.

Give yourself five to 10 minutes to complete this paragraph, and then come back and press play when you're done.

Excellent work, let's have a look at what your final paragraph could have looked like.

Following the Brown versus Topeka ruling, the Southern Manifesto was signed by nearly a hundred members of the US government in 1957, in an attempt to protest against the use of federal intervention to enforce desegregation in schools.

This show of opposition within the government encouraged increased opposition to the civil rights movement generally because it was based on a refusal to challenge racial injustice.

Although a Civil Rights Act was passed in 1957, opposition of the Democrats to more protection for civil rights, including Senator Thurman's filibuster, resulted in a watered down act that many felt did not go far enough to address civil rights issues.

So really well done if you managed to include all of these key details, which included most of our keywords.

Before we finish for today, let's look at a quick summary of what we've covered.

So in today's lesson, we've covered lots of things.

First, we looked at how the membership of the KKK rapidly increased in the 1950s as opposition to the civil rights movement developed.

Then we moved on to look at how the KKK used brutal and violent methods, for example, lynchings, in an attempt to maintain Jim Crow Laws, this led to an increase in violent attacks towards Black Americans, which often went unpunished.

We also looked at how other groups such as the White Citizens' Councils were formed to oppose desegregation.

These generally oppose violence and instead worked to get civil rights activists fired, evicted, or refused services.

And finally, we learned the opposition also existed within the US government.

This often came from the Dixiecrats, although they could not stop desegregation, they worked really hard to slow it down.

So again, well done for today's lesson.

We've covered a lot of content and you've done some brilliant work, well done.