Martin Luther King and the Montgomery Bus Boycott 1955, Research Paper Example

Introduction

 What makes up a strong community is its capacity to stand strong for what it believes is right. Necessarily, the people making up a particular community identify well with the concept of improvement that they would want to pursue. There are instances when immediate considerations of social issues intend to make definite impact on how the concept of communal strength h becomes identifiably evident as part of a growing culture that is manifested to support the development of a unit dedicated to making life much easier and much constructive in form especially for the sake of building up the lives of the members of the society being protected. In history, several presentations of human bravery and determination have already been shown into effect[1]. The conditions by which individuals were caused to face life at a much better pace entails the condition by which the people are willing enough to sacrifice their time, effort and all the other elements making up their lives and their personal being. In this discussion, a remarkable event in the history of Montgomery shall be given specific attention to[2]. Focused on the concept of social development based on the changes that are happening in the communities that they exist with, this historical development of social improvement based on communal efforts does provide a distinct sense of control on how people coming together for one cause could actually make a definite change not only during their era of existence but even for the future generation that follows them through.

The Beginning of the Problem

 The existing social problem basically entails a better insistence on how humans tend to face particular irregularities in the community and how they hope to survive such challenges especially for the sake of creating a more workable system that will allow them embrace developmental progress. Montgomery is one of the most afflicted areas in America that has been strongly affected by the emergent impact of discrimination between the white and black American individuals residing within the said area. It could be understood that because of such point of discrimination, it has become very hard for the oppressed members of the society to exist along with the others. Relatively, black Americans were specifically set aside especially when instances of particularly defined considerations are given for public appreciation and consumption.

With regards the emergent development of the bus boycott in Montgomery, the attention is highly directed towards the unequal treatment that black Americans receive from their white counterparts. Although there were no specifically stipulated rules that would make it easier for the transportation corporate owners to mandate the ways by which they deal with their black American passengers. The issue has already been first understood and recognized by the Women Political Council (WPC) of Montgomery in 1946[3]. The group was able to observe the emergence of the situation as more and more black Americans are being set aside in the busses and are being treated unfairly when they already reach the interiors of the said transport. Among the problems that were seen to be largely affective towards the situation being handled are obvious representations of inequality between members of the society especially when it comes to mandating a better sense of imposing the real value of human development and how such changes could be mandated accordingly especially when it comes to making a definite turn on how the oppressed ones are to be treated differently later on.

Jim Crow, the owner of the Montgomery City Buses, was seen to have implicated a culture of treatment among black American passengers as they are required to pay for their fare in front of the busses and are expected to enter at the rear point of the buses. This was rather insulting as they are considered to take a lower-grade of recognition compared to their white counterparts. Basically, such treatment set them completely apart from white passengers as they are treated with disgrace and are given the least value of reputation that basically anticipates a better sense of development, one that makes a definite form of recognizable value not only of them as members of a particular unit in the community but also as individuals who deserve a particular sense of recognition depending on the role they take in the society[4].

The Montgomery Bus Boycott was then launched. Under the leadership of Rosa Parks (a remarkably notable name in the Negro community), the Montgomery Improvement Association was established. This unit entailed to create a comprehensive pattern of treatment that is expected to basically improve the condition of the black Americans especially in handling their transportation options in the community. The launching of the protest was something that created a new notion about a more identifiably effective process of creating social development based on united social movements[5]. In the past, the consideration over the need to improve transport operations especially dedicated to black Americans and how they are to be transferred from one place to another depending on their distinct destination. The group basically wants to point out that black American passengers pay the same amount of fare that the white passengers do, therefore they ought to be treated the same way to.

With Martin Luther King standing as one of the leaders of the unit, it could be realized how strong the condition of development that the group wants to embrace. Noticeably, his involvement in the group empowered the movement further and made it easier for the group to remain in a calm state while promoting a specific form of development and recognition that they want for themselves and the members of the community they exist with. The Peaceful protest gained the attention of the neighboring states therefore gaining support as well.

The Bus Boycott

 The bus boycott in Montgomery largely created a gap on the economic standing of the Montgomery City Buses. Countering the effect of the said movement was rather hard to contain. Necessarily, it was rather effective especially on the part of the individuals who were directly afflicted with the emergent condition of discrimination in the society. It was not easy for the private transportation firms to ignore the movement as it did affect their profit-rates every month. With more individuals supporting the movement, fewer passengers came in for transportation service every turn of time[6]. To face the situation, the private companies had to expand their options and become more definite in embracing their role in the community; they needed to counter the attack of the group of Park and King, however, it was not an easy task to accomplish. With firm goals, they simply lose grip of their most important resource, their passengers.

The movement was strategic enough that it was the point of unity among participants that made it all worthwhile and effective. While it was not easy to convince the private companies to succumb to the request, the response of the neighboring communities towards the goals of the group made the situation harder to ignore for the business sectors affected by the campaign. Practical conditions of development are embraced and somehow, people who have become more effective in determining a better sense of inclusion on how massive changes in the ways by which the black Americans are treated by their counterparts and the companies that are supposed to serve their needs would actually provide a larger picture of freedom and equality among the many residents of the different states in America[7]. Freedom from discrimination was the main principle promoted by the group; nonetheless, as a strong movement and a successful one at that, this peaceful protest has indeed changed the way Americans viewed the concept of being free and protected by the law.

The Long-Time Legacy

 After the 13-month long mass protest, the US Supreme Court finally rules over the case stating that the ‘segregation of public buses is unconstitutional’ in view of the basic grounds of civil rights for freedom and respect of self-value. This is where the legacy of the Montgomery Bus Boycott comes in. It was rather effective and extensive in affecting the overall concept of freedom not only in Montgomery but also in neighboring states. It could be understood that because of the strategic management of the operation of protest that the group embraced, there were two particular things that were accomplished during the event. One is that of the passing of the law that there are matters with regards the condition of treatment that black Americans receive that ought to be stopped because of it being clearly unconstitutional. Another is the implication of the fact that following a more peaceful pattern of protest is a more strategic approach to dealing with social conflicts compared to violently-defined approach towards pacifying specific social situations.

In the bus boycott, what was given high regard is the implicative application of unity. The call for attention that the organization took into account has made its approaches more effective especially with the help of internal and external supporters who pursued their way of operations affecting a much larger scope of individual players in the transportation industry. Practically seeing their value to the system of economic development among these organizations and their existence in the society, the group was able to point out how a unified movement would be able to bring into account the emergence of good assumption of possibilities, giving them better power, a better sense of control on how situations ought to be made certain, especially for the sake of promoting social involvement that empowers the scope of effect that the campaign is supposed to have on the community in a more general aspect.

Conclusion

 Leadership and strategy of management, these are two of the most important elements that drove the success of the Montgomery bus boycott movement. What makes the operation more effective is that of the use of particular influential individuals who were capable of getting the attention of the public; convincing them that the campaign is not for Montgomery’s people alone but for the general public who are being oppressed because of their color. Convincing the public that this campaign has a much larger value than it is actually viewed, the group was able to make a remarkable legacy towards the social construction of modern America up to this day. Overall, it could be agreed upon that the movement in itself was a successful one, not only in completing the task it was expected to fulfill but also in setting a better pattern of living and development for the generations that came after the movement.

This is the reason why up to this day, the leadership and the management approaches used during the said protest is still being used as reference by experts in identifying what is meant by communal unity that creates massive changes in comparison with more aggressive forms of going against social norms. Having a purpose is not enough when a particular group of individuals want to promote change; instead, it is the willingness to go against the norms and be more strategic in approach the problem that counts in making a better sense of change especially among individuals who are being fully affected by the situation being resolved through a peaceful form of protest. The success of the Montgomery Bus Boycott did not only rely on one person but on the efforts of the many participants who wanted to get involved in the process as well as in promoting the principles the organization hopes to promote.

Bibliography

Carson, Clayborne, et al., editors, Eyes on The Prize Civil Rights Reader: documents, speeches, and first hand accounts from the black freedom struggle (New York:Penguin Books, 1991).

Garrow, David J. Bearing the Cross: Martin Luther King Jr. and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. (1986)

Garrow, David J., editor, The Montgomery Bus Boycott and the Women Who Started It: The Memoir of Jo Ann Gibson Robinson (Knoxville: The University of Tennessee Press, 1987).

Williams, Juan, Eyes on The Prize: America’s Civil Rights Years, 1954-1965 (New York: Penguin Books, 1988).

[1] Garrow, David J. Bearing the Cross: Martin Luther King Jr. and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. (1986)

[2] Garrow, David J. Bearing the Cross: Martin Luther King Jr. and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. (1986)

[3] Garrow, David J. Bearing the Cross: Martin Luther King Jr. and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. (1986)

[4] Garrow, David J. Bearing the Cross: Martin Luther King Jr. and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. (1986)

[5] Williams, Juan, Eyes on The Prize: America’s Civil Rights Years, 1954-1965 (New York: Penguin Books, 1988).

[6] Carson, Clayborne, et al., editors, Eyes on The Prize Civil Rights Reader: documents, speeches, and first hand accounts from the black freedom struggle (New York:Penguin Books, 1991).

[7] Carson, Clayborne, et al., editors, Eyes on The Prize Civil Rights Reader: documents, speeches, and first hand accounts from the black freedom struggle (New York:Penguin Books, 1991).