Threadbare

Are Civil Rights Groups Past Their Prime?

Wherein you, the readers, talk amongst yourselves.
According to a recent story in the Washington Post, traditional Civil Rights groups that were so important 50 years ago are now becoming obsolete in favor of internet-driven groups like Color of Change. Why do you think this is? Are Civil Rights groups like SCLC, CORE, and even the NAACP faltering because they have failed to rework their message to fit modern concerns?

Apr 7, 2008 · posted by Lauren Williams, Stereohyped · Link · 11 Responses

No related posts found.

Tagged: Civil Rights, Keli Goff, Threadbare

Comments (11)

No. 1 · andrew

Interesting question, Lauren, my darling colleague. There are a few things to say here. First and foremost, since when has the SCLC been relevant? Not for quite some time, if you ask me. Specific groups aside, however, all historic civil rights groups - NAACP, gay groups, blind groups, et al - have faced an uphill battle to adapt to the changing times. It's not necessarily a lack of technological presence, I think, but a new generation's perception of such groups. Their preexistence or historical value may actually work against them. Perhaps the new generation views them as ill-equipped. Just an idea, of course. I'm no scientist.

On a related note, identity politics have lost some of their steam. Perhaps people are spending more of their energy on new, less socially-specific groups, like MoveOn.org, which may actually be more effective - and therapeutic - in the long run.

What will be interesting, I think, will be to see what happens to left-leaning groups if a Democrat takes the White House. Their numbers will, in my prediction, drop. People like to come together against opposition parties, as liberals have against the Bush administration. If Obama or Clinton take power, I bet left-leaning groups will find themselves with a membership dip.

Back to the original point, however - I do think that SCLC and NAACP are most important with regard to their prestige. I have not seen anything from them that resembles revolutionary thought in some time. Just reaction, but the same can be said about loads of organizations, including gay groups.

Anyway, good conversation starter. Thanks, friend. Yes, I'm contractually obliged to read your site, but I enjoy it every time. Now, if only we could find some time to actually talk, rather than just click clack at our desks!

xo
AB

Posted: Apr 7, 2008 at 8:18 pm

No. 2 · The Cruel Secretary

You and your mind-stimulating posts, Ms. Lauren. LOL I agree with the Post article about the traditional Civil Rights organizations losing their prestige. I just disgree w/ the major reason cited: IMO, these organizations seem to be on the wrong side of the right issues nowadays. If SCLC, CORE, and the NAACP worked with ColorofChange and secured the release, their prestige would have been burnished. If the NAACP would have supported the victims of the Dunbar Village situation (atrocity, really) in the first place instead of their violators, the group would have received some praise. (The last I heard, the NAACP, West Palm Beach chapter, who jumped in to defend the violators, didn't retract their support or apologize to the victims or has done anything else on the victim's behalf). The most sustained critiques and actions against rap's misogyny (in the music and the videos) haven't come from any of these organizations. That's why, moreso than not keeping up with technology or being a victim of their own success or their pool of middle-class donors leaving–is why these organizations are fading away.

Posted: Apr 8, 2008 at 9:38 am

No. 3 · The Cruel Secretary

Dang it! I should have said, "If SCLC, CORE, and NAACP worked with ColorofChange to secure the release of the Jena 6." Sorry about that.

Posted: Apr 8, 2008 at 9:40 am

No. 4 · D. Fears

Laura, I'd like to interview Andrew and "The Cruel Secretary" for a story I'm writing about emerging civil rights organizations such as Color of Change and the Ella Baker Center. How do I get in touch with them? My deadline is Wed., April 9, 5 p.m. - Darryl Fears, Washington Post (fearsd@washpost.com)

Posted: Apr 8, 2008 at 4:51 pm

No. 5 · Well Noted

Get your head out the gutter! They are plenty of people working or should I say volunteering at the NAACP branches who are doing a very effective job such as Barry Hall of Austin, Texas. Just because someone isn't citing your name Lauren doesn't mean you have to discount their work.

When was the last time you volunteered at the NAACP? Never. Core? Never. SCLC? Never. Nothing worse than someone married to a white man and has never volunteered at the NAACP and then having the nerve to "attack" historical African American organizations.

Posted: Apr 9, 2008 at 4:11 pm

No. 6 · Chic Noir

^^^ Wow why bring her husband into it.

Posted: Apr 9, 2008 at 6:13 pm

No. 7 · The Cruel Secretary

Agreed, Chic Noir.

Posted: Apr 9, 2008 at 9:02 pm

No. 8 · Lauren Williams, Stereohyped

Agreed, but whose husband are we talking about? I'm not married. I'm not sure the person who wrote this comment understood the post, anyway.

Posted: Apr 10, 2008 at 8:45 am

No. 9 · The Cruel Secretary

…and I'm not married, either. Though I'm not sure how being married to a white man negates the critique–my race-woman mom was married twice to Black men and never dated outside "The Race" and *she* feels the same way about the civil Rights organizations. But if Well Noted would like to arrange a white husband for me so s/he can rationalize his/her reasoning as to why I feel the way I feel about the Civil Rights organizations, I'd like Clive Owen.:-P

Posted: Apr 10, 2008 at 9:50 am

No. 10 · The Cruel Secretary

If not Clive, then Viggo Mortensen.:-D

Posted: Apr 10, 2008 at 4:25 pm

No. 11 · Chic Noir

lauren the person said thought your husband was white becasue of the attorney driving while black post that someone wrote.

I know it's late but I'm just saying.

Posted: May 19, 2008 at 5:59 pm