Firstly, many blacks at the time saw King?s non-violence practices as being overly moderate and passive. This is for a number of reasons, mainly that the Negro extremists he criticised dismissed his passion for non violence and was charged as hindering the Negro struggle for equality. Many extremists and those who hoped to go about matters more actively saw King as shying away from the real problem and not confronting matters head-on.
This was affecting bus companies because more than half of their consumers were black people and so profit would be lost. King bought publicity to the bus boycott with his leadership and took the limelight away from the NAACP, who were behind the success of integration of buses. It was not the bus boycott alone that integrated buses, the NAACP taking litigation to the Supreme Court was vital because it changed desegregated buses. The bus boycott alone wouldn?t have changed segregation laws.
Good conclusions usually refer back to the question or title and address it directly - for example by using key words from the title.
How well do you think these conclusions address the title or question? Answering these questions should help you find out.
Do they use key words from the title or question?
Do they answer the question directly?
Can you work out the question or title just by reading the conclusion?
"As you can see in all three topics the blacks did find some improvements but in comparison it was very little to what was still going on. There for as my conclusion I think that the blacks were still along way away from racial equality but had found good foundations for achieving racial equality."
"In conclusion, both organisations wanted similar reforms made, but there also many differences for example there was no gerrymandering (the rigging of local electoral boundaries) was not present in America. The black civil rights movement clearly influenced NICRA and this is evident in the tactics of each organisation, which was, above all, peaceful, non-violent protests and demonstrations."
"In conclusion, by 1900, black people theoretically had the freedom to work and build lives for themselves, but realistically their opportunities were limited and they faced much discrimination and (especially in the South) hostility from whites. They had to tolerate de facto discrimination in the North, and de jure in the South, which undid most of what Reconstitution had done; they were still seen as a subspecies not fit to mix with white people. The political rights that they had been given were trampled on in the South, who ignored the US constitution with the knowledge of the Supreme Court. They therefore had little government support or protection, and, in the South, unsatisfactory representation. Compared to when they were enslaved, their situation had improved, but life in America for a black person was extremely hard, and there was a long struggle ahead for equality with whites."
Marked by a teacher
This document has been marked by one of our great teachers. You can read
the full teachers notes when you download the document.
This document has been reviewed by one of our specialist student essay
reviewing squad. Read the full review on the document page.
This document has been reviewed by one of our specialist student document
reviewing squad. Read the full review under the document preview on this page.