Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee Position Paper the Basis of Black Power (1966)

Student Nonviolent
Coordinating Committee

Position Paper:
The Basis of Black Power
1966

of 6

Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee
Position Paper:
The Basis of Black Power
Source of text:
http://www2.iath.virginia.edu/sixties/HTML_docs/Resources/Primary/Manifestos/SNCC_black_power.html

The myth that the Negro is somehow incapable of liberating himself, is lazy, etc., came out of
the American experience. In the books that children read, whites are always "good" (good
symbols are white), blacks are "evil" or seen as savages in movies, their language is referred to
as a "dialect," and black people in this country are supposedly descended from savages.

Any white person who comes into the movement has the concepts in his mind about black
people, if only subconsciously. He cannot escape them because the whole society has geared his
subconscious in that direction.

Miss America coming from Mississippi has a chance to represent all of America, but a black
person from either Mississippi or New York will never represent America. Thus the white people
coming into the movement cannot relate to the black experience, cannot relate to the word
"black," cannot relate to the "nitty gritty," cannot relate to the experience that brought such a
word into existence, cannot relate to chitterlings, hog's head cheese, pig feet, ham hocks, and
cannot relate to slavery, because these things are not a part of their experience. They also cannot
relate to the black religious experience, nor to the black church, unless, of course, this church has
taken on white manifestations.

White Power
Negroes in this country have never been allowed to organize themselves because of white
interference. As a result of this, the stereotype has been reinforced that blacks cannot organize
themselves. The white psychology that blacks have to be watched, also reinforces this stereotype.
Blacks, in fact, feel intimidated by the presence of whites, because of their knowledge of the
power that whites have over their lives. One white person can come into a meeting of black
people and change the complexion of that meeting, where a meeting unless he was an obvious
Uncle Tom. People would immediately start talking about "brotherhood," "love," etc.; race
would not be discussed.

If people must express themselves freely, there has to be a climate in which they can do this. If
blacks feel intimidated by whites, then they are not liable to vent the rage that they feel about
whites in the presence of whites--especially not the black people whom we are trying to
organize, i.e., the broad masses of black people. A climate has to be created whereby blacks can

Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee Position Paper:
The Basis of Black Power (1966)

of 6

express themselves. The reasons that whites must be excluded is not that one is anti-white, but
because the effects that one is trying to achieve cannot succeed because whites have an
intimidating effect. Ofttimes, the intimidating effect is in direct proportion to the amount of
degradation that black people have suffered at the hands of white people.

Roles of Whites and Blacks
It must be offered that white people who desire change in this country should go where that
problem (racism) is most manifest. The problem is not in the black community. The white people
should go into white communities where the whites have created power for the express purpose
of denying blacks human dignity and self-determination. Whites who come into the black
community with ideas of change seem to want to absolve the power structure of its responsibility
for what it is doing, and saying that change can only come through black unity, which is the
worst kind of paternalism. This is not to say that whites have not had an important role in the
movement. In the case of Mississippi, their role was very key in that they helped give blacks the
right to organize, but that role is now over, and it should be.

People now have the right to picket, the right to give out leaflets, the right to vote, the right to
demonstrate, the right to print.

These things which revolve around the right to organize have been accomplished mainly because
of the entrance of white people into Mississippi, in the summer of 1964. Since these goals have
now been accomplished, whites' role in the movement has now ended. What does it mean if
black people, once having the right to organize, are not allowed to organize themselves? It means
that blacks' ideas about inferiority are being reinforced. Shouldn't people be able to organize
themselves? Blacks should be given this right. Further, white participation means in the eyes of
the black community that whites are the "brains" behind the movement, and that blacks cannot
function without whites. This only serves to perpetuate existing attitudes within the existing
society, i.e., blacks are "dumb," "unable to take care of business," etc. Whites are "smart," the
"brains" behind the whole thing.

How do blacks relate to other blacks as such? How do we react to Willie Mays as against Mickey
Mantle? What is our response to Mays hitting a home run against Mantel performing the same
deed? One has to come to the conclusion that it is because of black participation in baseball.
Negroes still identify with the Dodgers because of Jackie Robinson's efforts with the Dodgers.
Negroes would instinctively champion all-black teams if they opposed all white or
predominantly white teams. The same principle operates for the movement as it does for
baseball: a mystique must be created whereby Negroes can identify with the movement.

Thus an all-black project is needed in order for the people to free themselves. This has to exist
from the beginning. This relates to what can be called "coalition politics." There is no doubt in
our minds that some whites are just as disgusted with this system as we are. But it is meaningless
to talk about coalition if there is no one to align ourselves with, because of the lack of
organization in the white communities. There can be no talk of "hooking up" unless black people
organize blacks and white people organize whites. If these conditions are met, then perhaps at


of 6

some later date--and if we are going in the same direction--talks about exchange of personnel,
coalition, and other meaningful alliances can be discussed.

In the beginning of the movement, we had fallen into a trap whereby we thought that our
problems revolved around the right to eat at certain lunch counters or the right to vote, or to
organize our communities. We have seen, however, that the problem is much deeper. The
problem of this country, as we had seen it, concerned all blacks and all whites and therefore if
decisions were left to the young people, then solutions would be arrived at. But this negates the
history of black people and whites. We have dealt stringently with the problem of "Uncle Tom,"
but we have not yet gotten around to Simon Legree. We must ask ourselves, who is the real
villain--Uncle Tom or Simon Legree? Everybody knows Uncle Tom, but who knows Simon
Legree? So what we have now in SNCC is a closed society, a clique. Black people cannot relate
to SNCC because of its unrealistic, nonracial atmosphere; denying their experience of America
as a racist society. In contrast, the Southern Christian Leadership Conference of Martin Luther
King, Jr., has a staff that at least maintains a black facade. The front office is virtually all black,
but nobody accuses SCLC of being racist.

If we are to proceed toward true liberation, we must cut ourselves off from white people. We
must form our own institutions, credit unions, co-ops, political parties, write our own histories.

To proceed further, let us make some comparisons between the Black Movement of the early
1900s and the movement of the 1960s--i.e., compare the National Association for the
advancement of Colored People with SNCC. Whites subverted the Niagara movement (the
forerunner of the NAACP) which, at the outset, was an all-black movement. The name of the
new organization was also very revealing, in that it presupposed blacks have to advanced to the
level of whites. We are now aware that the NAACP has grown reactionary, is controlled by the
black power structure itself, and stands as one of the main roadblocks to black freedom. SNCC,
by allowing the whites to remain in the organization, can have its efforts subverted in much the
same manner, i.e., through having them play important roles such as community organizers, etc.
Indigenous leadership cannot be built with whites in the positions they now hold.

These facts do not mean that whites cannot help. They can participate on a voluntary basis. We
can contract work out to them, but in no way can they participate on a policy-making level.

Black Self-Determination
The charge may be made that we are "racists," but whites who are sensitive to our problems will
realize that we must determine our own destiny.

In an attempt to find a solution to our dilemma, we propose that our organization (SNCC) should
be black-staffed, black-controlled, and black-financed. We do not want to fall into a similar
dilemma that other civil rights organizations have fallen into. If we continue to rely upon white
financial support we will find ourselves entwined in the tentacles of the white power complex
that controls this country. It is also important that a black organization (devoid of cultism) be
projected to our people so that it can be demonstrated that such organizations are viable.


of 6

More and more we see black people in this country being used as a tool of the white liberal
establishment. Liberal whites have not begun to address themselves to the real problem of black
people in this country--witness their bewilderment, fear, and anxiety when nationalism is
mentioned concerning black people. An analysis of the white liberal's reaction to the word
"nationalism" alone reveals a very meaningful attitude of whites of an ideological persuasion
toward blacks in this country. It means previous solutions to black problems in this country have
been made in the interests of those whites dealing with these problems and not in the best
interests of black people in the country. Whites can only subvert our true search and struggles for
self-determination, self-identification, and liberation in this country. Reevaluation of the white
and black roles must now take place so that white no longer designate roles that black people
play but rather black people define white people's roles.

Too long have we allowed white people to interpret the importance and meaning of the cultural
aspects of our society. We have allowed them to tell us what was good about our Afro-American
music, art, and literature. How many black critics do we have on the "jazz" scene? How can a
white person who is not part of the black psyche (except in the oppressor's role) interpret the
meaning of the blues to us who are manifestations of the song themselves?

It must be pointed out that on whatever level of contact blacks and whites come together, that
meeting or confrontation is not on the level of the blacks but always on the level of the whites.
This only means that our everyday contact with whites is a reinforcement of the myth of white
supremacy. Whites are the ones who must try to raise themselves to our humanistic level. We are
not, after all, the ones who are responsible for a genocidal war in Vietnam; we are not the ones
who are responsible for neocolonialism in Africa and Latin America; we are not the ones who
held a people in animalistic bondage over 400 years. We reject the American dream as defined
by white people and must work to construct an American reality defined by Afro-Americans.

White Radicals
One of the criticisms of white militants and radicals is that when we view the masses of white
people we view the overall reality of America, we view the racism, the bigotry, and the distortion
of personality, we view man's inhumanity to man; we view in reality 180 million racists. The
sensitive white intellectual and radical who is fighting to bring about change is conscious of this
fact, but does not have the courage to admit this. When he admits this reality, then he must also
admit his involvement because he is a part of the collective white America. It is only to the
extent that he recognizes this that he will be able to change this reality.

Another common concern is, how does the white radical view the black community, and how
does he view the poor white community, in terms of organizing? So far, we have found that most
white radicals have sought to escape the horrible reality of America by going into the black
community and attempting to organize black people while neglecting the organization of their
own people's racist communities. How can one clean up someone else's yard when one's own
yard is untidy? Again we feel that SNCC and the civil rights movement in general is in many
aspects similar to the anticolonial situations in the African and Asian countries. We have the
whites in the movement corresponding to the white civil servants and missionaries in the colonial
countries who have worked with the colonial people for a long period of time and have


of 6

developed a paternalistic attitude toward them. The reality of the colonial people taking over
their own lives and controlling their own destiny must be faced. Having to move aside and
letting the natural process of growth and development take place must be faced.

These views should not be equated with outside influence or outside agitation but should be
viewed as the natural process of growth and development within a movement; so that the move
by the black militants and SNCC in this direction should be viewed as a turn toward self-
determination.

It is very ironic and curious that aware whites in the country can champion anticolonialism in
other countries in Africa, Asia, and Latin America, but when black people move toward similar
goals of self-determination in this country they are viewed as racists and anti-white by these
same progressive whites. In proceeding further, it can be said that this attitude derives from the
overall point of view of the white psyche as it concerns the black people. This attitude stems
from the era of the slave revolts when every white man was a potential deputy or sheriff or
guardian of the state. Because when black people get together among themselves to workout
their problems, it becomes a threat to white people, because such meetings were potential slave
revolts.

It can be maintained that this attitude or way of thinking has perpetuated itself to this current
period and that it is part of the psyche of white people in this country whatever their political
persuasion might be. It is part of the white fear-guilt complex resulting from the slave revolts.
There have been examples of whites who stated that they can deal with black fellows on an
individual basis but become threatened or menaced by the presence of groups of blacks. It can be
maintained that this attitude is held by the majority of progressive whites in this country.

Black Identity
A thorough re-examination must be made by black people concerning the contributions that we
have made in shaping this country. If this re-examination and re-evaluation is not made, and
black people are not given their proper due and respect, then the antagonisms and contradictions
are going to become more and more glaring, more and more intense, until a national explosion
may result.

When people attempt to move from these conclusions it would be faulty reasoning to say they
are ordered by racism, because, in this country and in the West, racism has functioned as a type
of white nationalism when dealing with black people. We all know the habit that this has created
throughout the world and particularly among nonwhite people in this country.

Therefore any re-evaluation that we must make will, for the most part, deal with identification.
Who are black people, what are black people, what is their relationship to America and the
world?

It must be repeated that the whole myth of "Negro citizenship," perpetuated by the white elite,
has confused the thinking of radical and progressive blacks and whites in this country. The broad
masses of black people react to American society in the same manner as colonial peoples react to


of 6

the West in Africa and Latin America, and had the same relationship--that of the colonized
toward the colonizer.


Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee 1

Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee
African American topics

Category · Portal

The Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) ( /ˈsnɪk/) was one of the organizations of the
American Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s. It emerged from a series of student meetings led by Ella Baker held
at Shaw University in Raleigh, North Carolina in April 1960. SNCC grew into a large organization with many
supporters in the North who helped raise funds to support SNCC's work in the South, allowing full-time SNCC
workers to have a $10 per week salary. Many unpaid volunteers also worked with SNCC on projects in Mississippi,
Alabama, Georgia, Arkansas, and Maryland.
SNCC played a major role in the sit-ins and freedom rides, a leading role in the 1963 March on Washington,
Mississippi Freedom Summer, and the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party over the next few years. SNCC's
major contribution was in its field work, organizing voter registration drives all over the South, especially in
Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi.
A final SNCC legacy is the destruction of the psychological shackles which had kept black southerners in
physical and mental peonage; SNCC helped break those chains forever. It demonstrated that ordinary women
and men, young and old, could perform extraordinary tasks.
—Julian Bond[1]
In the later 1960s, led by fiery leaders such as Stokely Carmichael, SNCC focused on "black power", and then
protesting against the Vietnam War. As early as 1965, James Forman said he didn’t know “how much longer we can
stay nonviolent” and in 1969, SNCC officially changed its name to the Student National Coordinating Committee
to reflect the broadening of its strategies. It passed out of existence in the 1970s.

Founding and early years
Inspired by the Greensboro sit-ins, independent student-led groups began direct-action protests against segregation in
dozens of southern communities. The most common action of these groups was organizing sit-ins at racially
segregated lunch counters to protest the pervasiveness of Jim Crow and other forms of racism. In addition to sitting
in at lunch counters, the groups also organized and carried out protests at segregated public libraries, public parks,
and public swimming pools. At that time, all those amish facilities financed by taxes were closed to blacks. The
white response was often to close the facility, rather than integrate it.
The Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, as an organization, began with an $800.00 grant from the
Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) for a conference where attended by 126 student delegates from
58 sit-in centers in 12 states, along with delegates from 19 northern colleges, the SCLC, Congress of Racial Equality
(CORE), Fellowship of Reconciliation (FOR), National Student Association (NSA), and Students for a Democratic
Society (SDS). Out of this conference the SNCC (SNCC) was formed.[2][3]
Ella Baker, who organized the Shaw conference, had been the SCLC director before helping to form SNCC, but
SNCC was not a branch of SCLC. Instead of being closely tied to SCLC or the NAACP as a "youth division", SNCC
sought to stand on its own. Among important SNCC leaders attending the conference were Stokely Carmichael from
Howard University; Charles F. McDew, who led student protests at South Carolina State University; J. Charles
Jones, who organized 200 students to participate in sit-ins at department stores throughout Charlotte, North Carolina;


Julian Bond from Atlanta, Diane Nash; James Lawson; John Lewis; Bernard Lafayette; James Bevel; and Marion
Barry from the Nashville Student Movement.
SNCC's first chairman was Marion Barry, who later became the mayor of Washington DC. Barry served as chairman
for one year. The second chairman was Charles F. McDew, who served as the chairman from 1961 to 1963, when he
was succeeded by John Lewis.[4] SNCC's executive secretary, James Forman, played a major role in running the
organization.
In the years that followed, SNCC members were referred to as “shock troops of the revolution."[5] SNCC took on
greater risks in 1961, after a mob of Ku Klux Klan members and other whites attacked integrated groups of bus
passengers who defied local segregation laws as part of the Freedom Rides organized by the Congress of Racial
Equality (CORE). Rather than allowing mob violence to stop them, CORE and SNCC "Freedom Riders," including
Diane Nash, James Bevel, Marion Barry, Angeline Butler, and John Lewis, put themselves at great personal risk by
traveling in racially-integrated groups through the deep South. At least 436 people took part in these Freedom Rides
during the spring and summer of 1961.[6]
Robert Parris Moses (also known as Robert Parris or Bob Moses) played a central role in transforming SNCC from a
coordinating committee of student protest groups to an organization of organizers dedicated to building
community-based political organizations of the rural poor. The voter registration project he initiated in McComb,
Mississippi in 1961 became the seed for most of SNCC's activities from 1962-1966.
After the Freedom Rides, SNCC worked primarily on voter registration, along with local protests about segregated
public facilities. Registering to vote was extremely difficult and dangerous, as blacks who attempted to register often
lost their jobs and their homes. SNCC workers lived with local families and often the homes providing such
hospitality were firebombed.
The actions of SNCC, CORE, and SCLC forced the Kennedy Administration to briefly provide federal protection to
temporarily abate mob violence. Local FBI offices were usually staffed by Southern whites (there were no black FBI
agents at that time) who refused to intervene to protect civil rights workers or local blacks who were attempting to
register to vote.
One of the ways in which SNCC was unusual among civil rights groups was the way in which decisions were made.
Instead of "top down" control, as was the case with most organizations at that time, decisions in SNCC were made
by consensus. Group meetings would be convened in which every participant could speak for as long as they wanted
and the meeting would continue until everyone was in agreement with the decision. Because activities were often
very dangerous and could lead to prison or death, SNCC wanted all participants to support each activity.
By 1965, SNCC fielded the largest staff of any civil rights organization in the South. It had organized
nonviolent direct action against segregated facilities, as well as voter-registration projects, in Alabama,
Arkansas, Maryland, Missouri, Louisiana, Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, Illinois, North and South Carolina,
Georgia, and Mississippi; built two independent political parties and organized labor unions and agricultural
cooperatives; and given the movement for women's liberation new energy. It inspired and trained the activists
who began the "New Left." It helped expand the limits of political debate within black America, and
broadened the focus of the civil rights movement. Unlike mainstream civil rights groups, which merely sought
integration of blacks into the existing order, SNCC sought structural changes in American society itself.
—Julian Bond[1]


March on Washington
SNCC played a signal role in the 1963 March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom. While many speakers
applauded the Kennedy Administration for the efforts it had made toward obtaining new, more effective civil rights
legislation protecting the right to vote and outlawing segregation, John Lewis took the administration to task for how
little it had done to protect Southern blacks and civil rights workers under attack in the Deep South. Although he was
forced to tone down his speech under pressure from the representatives of other civil rights organizations on the
march organization committee, his words still stung. The version of the speech leaked to the press went as follows:
"We march today for jobs and freedom, but we have nothing to be proud of, for hundreds and thousands of our
brothers are not here — for they have no money for their transportation, for they are receiving starvation
wages...or no wages at all. In good conscience, we cannot support the administration's civil rights bill.
This bill will not protect young children and old women from police dogs and fire hoses when engaging in
peaceful demonstrations. This bill will not protect the citizens of Danville, Virginia who must live in constant
fear in a police state. This bill will not protect the hundreds of people who have been arrested on trumped-up
charges like those in Americus, Georgia, where four young men are in jail, facing a death penalty, for
engaging in peaceful protest.
I want to know, which side is the federal government on? The revolution is a serious one. Mr. Kennedy is
trying to take the revolution out of the streets and put it in the courts. Listen Mr. Kennedy, the black masses
are on the march for jobs and for freedom, and we must say to the politicians that there won't be a 'cooling-off
period.'"[7]
However, under pressure from the representatives of other groups many changes were made to the speech as it was
delivered that day.[8] According to James Forman, the most important of these was the change of "we cannot
support" the Kennedy Civil Rights Bill to "we support with reservations". Forman wrote of the following explanation
of this:
"Somewhere along the line, the church and labor people had been told that this was a march to support the
administration's Civil Rights Bill, which was passed in 1964, after Kennedy's death. Who did this and how it
happened, I do not know. But people all over the country thought they were marching for jobs and freedom
when in actuality the sellout leadership of the March on Washington was playing patsy with the Kennedy
administration as part of the whole liberal-labor politics of Rustin, Wilkins, Randolph, Reuther, King, the
Catholic and Protestant hierarchy. If people had known they had come to Washington to aid the Kennedy
administration, they would not have come in the numbers they did."[9]
Forman's and SNCC's anger came in part from the failure of the federal government, FBI and Justice Department to
protect SNCC civil rights workers in the South at this time. Indeed, the federal government at that time was
instrumental in indicting SNCC workers and other civil rights activists.[10]

Voting rights
In 1961 SNCC began expanding its activities from direct-action protests against segregation into other forms of
organizing, most notably voter registration. Under the leadership of Bob Moses, SNCC's first voter-registration
project was in McComb, Mississippi, an effort suppressed with arrests and savage white violence, resulting in the
murder of local activist Herbert Lee. With funding from the Voter Education Project, SNCC expanded its voter
registration efforts into the Mississippi Delta around Greenwood, Southwest Georgia around Albany, and the
Alabama Black Belt around Selma. All of these projects endured police harassment and arrests; KKK violence
including shootings, bombings, and assassinations; and economic terrorism against those blacks who dared to try to
register.[11]
In the fall of 1963, SNCC conducted the Freedom Ballot, a parallel election in which black Mississippians came out
to show their willingness to vote — a right they had been denied for decades, despite the provisions of the Fifteenth


Amendment to the United States Constitution, due to a combination of state laws and constitutional provisions,
economic reprisals and violence by white authorities and private citizens.
SNCC followed up on the Freedom Ballot with the Mississippi Summer Project, also known as Freedom Summer,
which focused on voter registration and Freedom Schools. The Summer Project brought hundreds of white Northern
students to the South where they volunteered as teachers and organizers. Their presence brought national press
attention to SNCC's work in the south. SNCC organized black Mississippians to register to vote, almost always
without success. White authorities either rejected their applications on any pretexts available or, failing that, simply
refused to accept their applications.
Mississippi Summer got national attention when three civil rights workers involved in the project, James Chaney,
Andrew Goodman and Michael Schwerner, were lynched after having been released from police custody. Their
bodies were eventually found after a reluctant J. Edgar Hoover directed the FBI to search for them. In the process the
FBI also found corpses of several other missing black Mississippians, whose disappearances had not attracted public
attention outside the Delta.
SNCC also established Freedom Schools to teach children to read and to educate them to stand up for their rights. As
in the struggle to desegregate public accommodations led by Martin Luther King, Jr. in Birmingham, Alabama the
year before, the bolder attitudes of the children helped shake their parents out of the fear that had paralyzed many of
them.
The goal of the Mississippi Summer Project was to organize the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party (MFDP), an
integrated party, to win seats at the 1964 Democratic National Convention for a slate of delegates elected by
disfranchised black Mississippians and white sympathizers. The MFDP was, however, tremendously inconvenient
for the Johnson Administration. It had wanted to minimize the inroads that Barry Goldwater’s campaign was making
into what had previously been the Democratic stronghold of the “Solid South” and the support that George Wallace
received during the Democratic primaries in the North.
When the MFDP started to organize a fight over credentials, Johnson originally would not budge. When Fannie Lou
Hamer, the leader of the MFDP, was in the midst of testifying about the police beatings of her and others for
attempting to exercise their right to vote, Johnson preempted television coverage of the credentials fight. Even so,
her testimony created enough uproar that Johnson offered the MFDP a "compromise": they would receive two
non-voting seats, while the delegation sent by the official Democratic Party would take its seats.
Johnson used all of his resources, mobilizing Walter Reuther, one of his key supporters within the liberal wing of the
Democratic Party, and his Vice-Presidential nominee Hubert Humphrey, to pressure King and other mainstream civil
rights leaders to bring the MFDP around, while directing Hoover to put the delegation under surveillance. The
MFDP rejected both the compromise and the pressure to accept it, and walked out.
That experience destroyed what little faith SNCC activists had in the federal government, even though Johnson had
obtained a broad Civil Rights Act barring discrimination in public accommodations, employment and private
education in 1964 and would go on to obtain an equally broad Voting Rights Act in 1965. It also estranged SNCC
leaders from many of the mainstream leaders of the civil rights movement.
Those differences carried over into the voting rights struggle that centered on Selma, Alabama in 1965. SNCC had
begun organizing black citizens to register to vote in Selma in 1963,[12] but made little headway against the adamant
resistance of Sheriff Jim Clark and the White Citizens' Council. In early 1965, local Selma activists asked the
Southern Christian Leadership Conference for help, and the two organizations formed an uneasy alliance. They
disagreed over tactical and strategic issues, including the SCLC's decision not to attempt to cross the Edmund Pettus
Bridge a second time after county sheriffs and state troopers attacked them on "Bloody Sunday" on March 7, 1965.
The civil rights activists crossed the bridge on the third attempt, with the aid of a federal court order barring
authorities from interfering with the march. It was part of a five-day march to Montgomery, Alabama that helped
dramatize the need for a Voting Rights Act. During this period, SNCC activists became more and more disenchanted


with nonviolence, integration as a strategic goal, and cooperation with white liberals or the Federal government.

Change in strategy and dissolution
Many within the organization had grown skeptical about the tactics of nonviolence. After the Democratic convention
of 1964, the group began to split into two factions – one favoring a continuation of nonviolent, integration-oriented
redress of grievances within the existing political system, and the other moving towards Black Power and
revolutionary ideologies. In 1965 the white members were expelled. These differences continued to grow during the
Selma Voting Rights campaign.
After the Watts riots in Los Angeles in 1965, some SNCC members sought to break their ties with the mainstream
civil rights movement and the liberal organizations that supported it. They argued instead that blacks needed to build
power of their own rather than seek accommodations from the power structure in place. Eventually, the leader of the
militant branch, Stokely Carmichael (later Kwame Ture), replaced John Lewis as head of SNCC in May 1966.
Carmichael first argued that blacks should be free to use violence in self-defense; later he advocated revolutionary
violence to overthrow oppression. Carmichael rejected the civil-rights legislation (that the movement had fought so
hard to achieve) as mere palliatives. The Department of Defense stated in 1967:
SNCC can no longer be considered a civil rights group. It has become a racist organization with black
supremacy ideals and an expressed hatred for whites. It employs violent and militant measures which
may be defined as extreme when compared with those of more moderate groups.[13]
Carmichael raised the banner of Black Power in a speech in Greenwood, Mississippi in June 1966. As the
mainstream civil-rights movement distanced itself from SNCC, SNCC expelled white staff and volunteers, and
denounced the whites who had supported it in the past. By early 1967, SNCC was approaching bankruptcy and close
to disappearing.
Carmichael left SNCC in June 1967 to join the Black Panther Party. H. Rap Brown, later known as Jamil Abdullah
Al-Amin, replaced him as the head of SNCC. Brown renamed the group the Student National Coordinating
Committee and supported violence, which he described "as American as cherry pie". He resigned from SNCC in
1968, after being indicted for inciting to riot in Cambridge, Maryland in 1967. Brown then became Minister of
Justice of the Black Panther Party.
Brown also proposed violence against violence if the power structure in the US did not change its racist actions
against Blacks. The FBI targeted him and incarcerated him without legal representation during 1968-1969. The
government indicted Brown to make an example of him, despite a lack of proper evidence.
By then, SNCC was no longer an effective organization. It largely disappeared in the early 1970s, although chapters
in communities such as San Antonio, Texas continued for several more years. Mario Marcel Salas, field secretary of
the SNCC chapter in San Antonio, operated until 1976. The San Antonio SNCC chapter was part Black Panther
Party and part SNCC. Dr. Charles Jones of Atlanta State University termed it a "hybrid organization" because it had
panther-style survival programs. Salas also worked closely with La Raza Unida Party, running for political office
and organizing demonstrations to expose discrimination against Blacks and Latinos. Salas later helped the New
Jewel Movement in the liberation of the island of Grenada from the dictator Eric Gairy in 1979, and became the
chairman of the Free Nelson Mandela Movement in San Antonio Texas.

SNCC and feminism
SNCC activist Bernice Johnson Reagon described the Civil Rights Movement as the "borning movement" of the
1960s.[14] The Women's' Liberation Movement was one of the many movements born out of and inspired by the
Civil Rights Movement. SNCC consisted of mostly college-age activists, and therefore provided opportunities for
young women. Participation in organizations such as SNCC essentially marked the beginning of second-wave
feminism in the US, which focused on changing social inequalities as opposed to the previous focus on legal issues


in first-wave feminism. The influence of the Civil Rights movement also introduced mass protests and awareness
campaigns as the main methods to obtain sexual equality.
Many black women held prominent positions in the movement as a result of their participation in SNCC. Some of
these women include Ruby Doris Smith Robinson, Donna Richards, Fay Bellamy, Gwen Patton, Cynthia
Washington, Jean Wiley, Muriel Tillinghast, Fannie Lou Hamer, Annie Pearl Avery, Diane Nash, Ella Baker,
Victoria Gray, Unita Blackwell, Bettie Mae Fikes, Joyce Ladner, Dorie Ladner, Gloria Richardson, Bernice Reagon,
Prathia Hall, Gwendolyn Delores Robinson/Zoharah Simmons [15], Judy Richardson, Martha Prescod Norman
Noonan, Ruby Sales, Endesha Ida Mae Holland, Eleanor Holmes Norton and Anne Moody.
Anne Moody published her autobiography, Coming of Age in Mississippi, in 1970, detailing her decision to
participate in SNCC and later CORE, and her experience as a woman in the movement. She described the
widespread trend of black women to become involved with SNCC at their educational institutions. As young college
students or teachers, these black women were often heavily involved in grassroots campaign by teaching Freedom
Schools and promoting voter registration.[16]
Young white women also became very involved with SNCC, particularly after the Freedom Summer of 1964. Many
northern white women were inspired by the ideology of racial equality. The book Deep in Our Hearts details the
experiences of nine white women in SNCC. Some white women, such as Mary King, Constance W. Curry, and
Casey Hayden, and Latino women such as Mary Varela and Elizabeth Sutherland Martinez, were able to obtain
status and leadership within SNCC.[17][18]
Through organizations like SNCC, women of both races were becoming more politically active than at any time in
American history since the Women's suffrage movement. A group of women in SNCC who were later identified as
Mary King and Casey Hayden openly challenged the way women were treated when they issued the “SNCC Position
Paper (Women in the Movement).”[19] The paper was published anonymously, helping King and Hayden to avoid
unwanted attention.[17] The paper listed 11 events in which women were treated as subordinate to men. According to
the paper, women in SNCC did not have a chance to become the face of the organization, the top leaders, because
they were assigned to clerical and housekeeping duties, whereas men were involved in decision-making. The degree
and significance of male-domination and women's subordination was hotly debated within SNCC; many of SNCC's
black women disputed the premise that women were denied leadership roles.[20]
When Stokely Carmichael took over the leadership of SNCC from John Lewis, he essentially reoriented the path of
SNCC towards Black Power. He famously said in a speech, “it is a call for black people to define their own goals, to
lead their own organizations.”[21] Thus, white women lost their influence and power in SNCC; Mary King and Casey
Hayden left SNCC to become active in pursuing equality for women. They co-authored Sex and Caste: A Kind of
Memo, which later became an influential piece in feminism.[22] As SNCC turned its focus to Black Power, black
women also lost their voice and became subject to the already-existing patriarchal structure of the organization. The
limited opportunities for women from the original community-building ideology were erased by the usurping Black
Power movement, in which power was more centralized in the hands of the male-dominated top leadership.
Former SNCC member Kathleen Cleaver played a key role in the central committee of the Black Panther Party as
communications secretary (1968). Her position in this "male dominated" leadership was both effective and
influential to Brown, Red and Yellow Power groups of the late 1960s and early 1970s.
In 2010 the Atlanta City Council renamed Raymond Street "SNCC Way".[23]


Fiftieth Anniversary Conference
A conference marking the fiftieth anniversary of the founding of SNCC was held at Shaw University on 15–18 April
2010.[24]

References
[1] Bond, Julian (October 2000). "SNCC: What We Did" (http:/ / findarticles. com/ p/ articles/ mi_m1132/ is_5_52/ ai_66937932/
print?tag=artBody;col1). Monthly Review: p. "legacy".
[2] Clayborne Carson, In Struggle, SNCC and the Black Awakening of the 1960s: Harvard University Press, 1981
[3] Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee Founded (http:/ / www. crmvet. org/ tim/ timhis60. htm#1960sncc) ~ Civil Rights Movement
Veterans
[4] Lewis, John (1998). Walking With the Wind. Simon & Schuster.
[5] Bruce J. Dierenfield, The Civil Rights Movement, Harlow, England: Pearson Education Limited, 2004.
[6] Freedom Rides (http:/ / www. crmvet. org/ tim/ timhis61. htm#1961frides) ~ Civil Rights Movement Veterans
[7] March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom (http:/ / www. crmvet. org/ tim/ tim63b. htm#1963mow) ~ Civil Rights Movement Veterans.
[N.B. this text must be from a different source; at least three versions of the speech were written, and this is the earliest of those three, before
"we cannot support" was changed to "we cannot wholeheartedly support" and then later "we support with reservations". See James Forman,
The Making of Black Revolutionaries (1971; 1997), pp.334-337.]
[8] The version of the speech that was delivered by Lewis to the march can be found in Forman's autobiographical history of SNCC, The Making
of Black Revolutionaries (1971), pp.336-337.
[9] James Forman, The Making of Black Revolutionaries (1971; 1997), p.335
[10] James Forman, The Making of Black Revolutionaries (1971; 1997), p.341
[11] History & Timeline (http:/ / www. crmvet. org/ tim/ timhome. htm) ~ Civil Rights Movement Veterans
[12] Selma – Cracking the Wall of Fear (http:/ / www. crmvet. org/ tim/ timhis63. htm1963selma1) ~ Civil Rights Movement Veterans
[13] Stokely Carmichael and SNCC - Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) (http:/ / www. aavw. org/ protest/
carmichael_sncc_abstract06_full. html)
[14] Payne, Charles (1995). I've Got the Light of Freedom: The Organizing Tradition and the Mississippi Freedom Struggle. University of
California Press.
[15] http:/ / www. pbs. org/ thisfarbyfaith/ witnesses/ zohara_simmons. html
[16] Coming of Age in Mississippi, Anne Moody
[17] Personal Politics, Sara Evans
[18] Curry et al., Constance (2002). Deep in Our Hearts: Nine White Women in the Freedom Movement. University of Georgia Press.
[19] SNCC position paper: Women in the Movement, Anonymous (http:/ / www2. iath. virginia. edu/ sixties/ HTML_docs/ Resources/ Primary/
Manifestos/ SNCC_women. html)
[20] Women & Men in the Freedom Movement (http:/ / www. crmvet. org/ disc/ women1. htm) ~ Civil Rights Movement Veterans
[21] Stokely Carmichael, 1967
[22] Mary King, Casey Hayden, Sex and Caste: A Kind of Memo (http:/ / www. feministezine. com/ feminist/ modern/ Sex-and-Caste. html)
[23] http:/ / citycouncil. atlantaga. gov/ 2010/ images/ proposed/ 10O0135. pdf
[24] SNCC 50th Anniversary Conference - Program (http:/ / www. sncc50thanniversary. org/ program. html)

External links
• SNCC 1960 - 1966: Six years of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (http://www.ibiblio.org/
sncc/index.html). Retrieved 2 May 2005.
• Civil Rights Movement Veterans (http://www.crmvet.org)
• Stokely Carmichael - Leader of SNCC's militant branch (http://stokely-carmichael.com)

Further reading
Archives
• Ellin (Joseph and Nancy) Freedom Summer Collection (http://www.lib.usm.edu/~archives/m323.htm).
Collection Number: M323. Dates: 1963 - 1988. Volume: 1.7 ft³ (48 L) The University of Southern Mississippi
Libraries Special Collections (http://www.lib.usm.edu/~spcol/index.php). Retrieved 2 May 2005.
Books


• Carmichael, Stokely, et al. Ready for Revolution: The Life and Struggles of Stokely Carmichael (Kwame Ture).
Scribner. 2005. 848 pages. ISBN 0-684-85004-4
• Carson, Claybourne. In Struggle, SNCC and the Black Awakening of the 1960s. Cambridge Massachusetts:
Harvard University Press. 1981. ISBN 0-674-44727-1
• Forman, James. The Making of Black Revolutionaries, 1985 and 1997, Open Hand Publishing, Washington D.C.
ISBN 0-295-97659-4 and ISBN 0-940880-10-5
• Greenberg, Cheryl Lynn, ed. A Circle of Trust: Remembering SNCC. Rutgers University Press. 1998. 274 pages.
ISBN 0-8135-2477-6
• Halberstam, David. The Children, Ballantine Books. 1999. ISBN 0-449-00439-2
• Deep in Our Hearts: Nine White Women in the Freedom Movement, Univ of Georgia Press, 2002. ISBN
0-8203-2419-1
• Holsaert, Faith (and 5 others) Hands on the Freedom Plow Personal Accounts by Women in SNCC (http://www.
press.uillinois.edu/books/catalog/54yed3wd9780252035579.html). University of Illinois Press, 2010. ISBN
978-0-252-03557-9.
• Hogan, Wesley C. How democracy travels: SNCC, Swarthmore students, and the growth of the student movement
in the North, 1961-1964.
• Hogan, Wesley C. Many Minds, One Heart: SNCC's Dream for a New America, University of North Carolina
Press. 2007.
• Holsaert et al. Hands on the Freedom Plow: Personal Accounts by Women in SNCC. University of Illinois Press.
2010.
• King, Mary. "Freedom Song: A Personal Story of the 1960s Civil Rights Movement". 1987.
• Lewis, John. Walking With the Wind: A Memoir of the Movement. New York: Simon & Schuster. 1998.
• Pardun, Robert. Prairie Radical: A Journey Through the Sixties. California: Shire Press. 2001. 376 pages. ISBN
0-918828-20-1
• Salas, Mario Marcel. Masters Thesis: "Patterns of Persistence: Paternal Colonialist Structures and the Radical
Opposition in the African American Community in San Antonio, Texas,1937–2001, by Mario Marcel Salas,
University of Texas at San Antonio, John Peace Library 6900 Loop 1604, San Antonio, Texas, 2002. Other
SNCC material located in historical records at the Institute of Texan Cultures, University of Texas at San Antonio
as part of the Mario Marcel Salas historical record.
• Sellers, Cleveland and Robert Terrell. The River of No Return: The Autobiography of a Black Militant and the
Life and Death of SNCC. University Press of Mississippi; Reprint edition. 1990. 289 pages. ISBN 0-87805-474-X
• Zinn, Howard. SNCC: The New Abolitionists. Boston: Beacon Press. 1964. ISBN 0-89608-679-8
Video
• SNCC 50th Anniversary Conference (http://newsreel.org/video/SNCC-50TH-ANNIVERSARY) 38 DVD
collection documenting the formal addresses, panel discussions and programs that took place at the 50th
anniversary conference at Shaw University in Raleigh, North Carolina.
Interviews
• Transcript: An Oral History with Terri Shaw (http://www.lib.usm.edu/~spcol/crda/oh/shaw.htm). SNCC
member and Freedom Summer participant. The University of Southern Mississippi Libraries Special Collections
(http://www.lib.usm.edu/~spcol/index.php). Retrieved 2 May 2005.
• Interviews with civil rights workers from the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC). Stanford
University Project South oral history collection. Microfilming Corp. of America. 1975. ISBN 0-88455-990-4.
SNCC publications and documents
• Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee Founding Statement (http://lists.village.virginia.edu/sixties/
HTML_docs/Resources/Primary/Manifestos/SNCC_founding.html).


• Memorandum: on the SNCC Mississippi Summer Project Transcript (http://anna.lib.usm.edu/~spcol/crda/
ellin/ellin062.html). Oxford, Ohio: General Materials (ca. June 1964). Retrieved 2 May 2005.

Article Sources and Contributors 10

Article Sources and Contributors
Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=487082604 Contributors: AEMoreira042281, Accurizer, Afrolezfemcentric, Apeloverage,
Arjun01, Barrie415, Bart133, Bdorman, Becritical, Bigtimepeace, Bobblewik, Brucehartford, Bry9000, CardinalDan, Cgingold, China321, Chris01720, Christopher Parham, Chubbles,
ChudeAllen, Closedmouth, Computerjoe, D99figge, DBigXray, DJ Silverfish, DanKeshet, Darklilac, Ddd42, Deflective, Discospinster, DocteurCosmos, Dwalls, Edgar181, ElationAviation, Eru,
Euchiasmus, Evrik, Flyguy649, Fratrep, Freechild, Fylbecatulous, Gaius Cornelius, Gatta, Giemmevi, Goramon, Havivi, Highground79, Hmains, HowardMorland, Howcheng, Hu12, Hyacinth,
Hydrogen Iodide, II MusLiM HyBRiD II, Iridescent, Italo Svevo, J.delanoy, JK the unwise, JNW, Jacksinterweb, Jandalhandler, Jengod, Jeremyb, JerseyJoe2, Jgrant9nc, Jkshrews, Jonathan71,
Jrtayloriv, Jswba, Jwy, KMeyer, Kaihsu, Keizers, Klilidiplomus, Kumioko, Lankyspotamus, Lawcenter, LegCircus, Lmvt, LordNader, Martindo, Mboverload, Mdmcginn, MelbourneStar,
Michael Snow, MishaPan, Montanean, MovementLessRestricted, N. Wang, Nakon, Namiba, Ndteegarden, Netesq, Nimur, Noah Salzman, Noleander, North Shoreman, Parkwells, Petrb,
Pgan002, Pigman, Piquant, Pohick2, Postdlf, Preschooler.at.heart, Prof75, Quadell, RFD, Radicalsubversiv, Randy Kryn, RapidSkis, Retired username, Rich Farmbrough, Richard Arthur Norton
(1958- ), Rjwilmsi, Rrburke, Sam Hocevar, Sardanaphalus, Savidan, Seanahan, Shanes, Sharamt, Shimgray, SimonP, Skywriter, Sluzzelin, SonicAD, Srikeit, StephNJ, Stevietheman, Supadawg,
TFCforever, TGGP, Taw, The Rambling Man, The Thing That Should Not Be, The wub, Tombomp, Toshiba99, Tothebarricades.tk, Trgiii, Ublawstudent, Ulric1313, VMS Mosaic,
VirginiaEditor, Wapcaplet, Whitejay251, Wikignome0530, Will Beback, Wmahan, Yboord028, Yonghokim, Youryellowbird, Youzwan, 274 anonymous edits

Image Sources, Licenses and Contributors
File:Loudspeaker.svg Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Loudspeaker.svg License: Public Domain Contributors: Bayo, Gmaxwell, Husky, Iamunknown, Mirithing,
Myself488, Nethac DIU, Omegatron, Rocket000, The Evil IP address, Wouterhagens, 18 anonymous edits

License
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported
//creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee Position Paper the Basis of Black Power (1966)

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (9)

Mehr von RBG Communiversity

Mehr von RBG Communiversity (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee Position Paper the Basis of Black Power (1966)