the civil rights movement itself can't be characterized as passive....



Passive describes those who were content to do nothing..and allow things to go on the way they have been. People who in any way tried to change the stauts quo and effect change of some kind weren't passive.



They were those who had different , more direct approaches....no doubt......just liek when we were enslaved....peopel resisted in different ways....



some people kiled their children rather than have them experience the hell of being a slave, others learned to read and taught others, some escaped and came back fro others..like Harriet Tubman, some led rebellions and killed their tormentors....Nat Turner style......,

DtotheJ,

Sometimes, I get miffed at grandmother for the things she say about Dr. King. She thinks that he was a violent person because of the problems that went on with the civil rights movement. When she say such things I ask her " Now what was he and his people suppose to do? Stand there and let those people kill them or do nothing and live as seperate people?" Dr. King, did his best to try to make that a non-violent event. That was way he wanted the boycotts. He didn't want nobdy to get killed, but at the same time, he didn't want us to be treated as second class citizens.

I hate that people like him, Malcolm X, Rosa Parks and other freedom fighters have died, because if you look at the so-called freedom fighters of today, they are doing exactly what my grandmother wants--absoultely nothing! They are just their for fashion and show! These people do not have the best interest of ther common man. They are just there to make a name for themselves and nothing else.

With all due respect to your grandmother.....



that mentality is by-product of decades of oppression and slavery.....many people just resolved that that's how things were and that nothing could be done about it...but to pray or something.....