Rosa Parks = Overrated

[richiecotite]

Originally Posted by ccastro02

It's not what she did, it's what she started. She marked the beginning of the civil rights movement.

not at all.
Rosa Parks was a piece of the puzzle that started the Montegomery movement, she was definitely brave for doing what she did, but as other have pointed out, others had done the same thing before without the publicity or the planning.

And while MLK had significance changing white attitude about the black struggle, people like Robert F Williams are the real reason the Movement achieved success. 

*Google Robert F Williams.

 

[dnycemodel]

Originally Posted by JTPlatnum

whoever said 'context' hit the nail on the head.

not a single one of us was around when she did it, but at the time it obviously sparked a big deal. just because we don't understand how it sparked a big deal doesn't mean it was overrated.

taking things out of a historical context don't always lead to obvious conclusions.

This

 

[thorrocksjs]

This is beyond dumb and pathetic.

 

[41239]

my girl is one of Rosa Parks' nieces, from her McCauley side, if you really want to know i can give you her email address and she can school you

 

[dunks r nice]

Originally Posted by Regis

 

[smedroc]

Uncle Phil

 

[tomdiginson]

Op is just foolish.

 

[theraygunz]

yall stupid, aint this from barbershop

 

[gotjz]

Everyone is going at OP's neck, but I understand where he's coming from. If I'm correct, he's not alluding to the fact that the movement or what sparked from her actions were overrated. Rather, OP believes that Rosa Parks was one out of many who simply refused to give in, suffered less consequence than many others who did (loss of life, severe beatings, etc.) but still gained the notoriety and praise. While overrated may not be the correct word, I completely understand the logic behind the thread/post. Same logic can be attributed to MLK which I openly do so for the fact that not much was efficiently achieved through MLK's ideals and philosophy.

Malcolm X and The Black Panther's failures are the reason we as black people (minorities and POC as a whole really) are in the present day situation that we find ourselves in. Not due to accomplishments by MLK and the Civil Rights movement. Have you guys ever thought about why we have an MLK day? It's not because blacks wanted or created that "holiday", but the fact that whites were comfortable with us all having an MLK approach....they pick and choose our heroes, always remember that. They won't give you a hero that will change your thinking to better yourself and community. They rather throw someone in front of you that still allows them to exercise control and oppression while keeping the oppressed from getting unruly. That can be seen evident in the entertainers that are shoved down our throats for us to stupidly "idolize". Ones that promote self-hate, ignorance, and materialistic desires. 

P.S.-Our current failures as a people is why we will remain in this current form of slavery and non self-sufficiency. That's all and this is simply my opinion.   

 

[illwill8710]

Originally Posted by beh235

Originally Posted by DMoney82

Successful troll is successful

30?

. Yes successful troll is successful. Well done. Change your handle to Uncle Tom lol

Fixed

 

[sneaker champ]

ignorance

 

[dmoney82]

  dudes is mad out chea

 

[huynher]

...and ignorant. 

 

[Methodical Management]

 dudes is mad out chea

You've got a choice to make, "DMoney."  
I suspect that you created this post in earnest and, once things got too hot, you tried to cover yourself by saying, "oh haha, I wasn't serious.  I was just trolling.  Now YOU'RE the ones who should feel stupid!"

If you insist on standing by that, understand that you're going to be suspended for trolling.  You can't have it both ways.  Either this is a sincere post intended to learn more about an historical figure or it's a pitiful attempt to rile people up.  I tend to think the former could be perceived is an attempt to cure ignorance, whereas the latter is a flagrant attempt to demonstrate it.  I'll let you decide. 

As for Ms. Parks, it required even more courage to serve as the "test case" for segregation than it did to defy the law itself.  Rosa Parks was an activist in her own right, prior to and beyond the events of December 1st, 1955.  She joined the NAACP's Montgomery chapter in 1943 and even served as their secretary.  Yes, her case was selected by the NAACP, but she made the ideal test case for a reason - and that's to her credit.  

There's no denying that, if only for the sake of expedience, history is condensed into a simplistic narrative.  The function of many people, events, and organizations are often attributed to individual torch-bearers.  Most students learn about the Montgomery bus boycott, but not the Baton Rouge bus boycott of 1953, which was also successful and, in fact, paved the way for Montgomery.  Similarly, very few people learn about A. Philip Randolph's 1941 March on Washington.  

However, I have difficulty with the idea that we should PENALIZE the handful of people, organizations, and events that DO receive any recognition as opposed to the system that diminishes or ignores the instrumental roles played by others.  How can you say that Rosa Parks receives MORE credit than she deserves when most people only know ONE thing about her?  If anything, the way Rosa Parks is popularly portrayed reduces her to a single act rather than as a lifetime contributor to the cause of social justice.  In that sense, she doesn't get ENOUGH credit for her life's work.

Rosa Parks gets two lousy lines in most American History textbooks.  If that's unfair, it's unfair because people don't know ENOUGH about her and about her fellow activists - not because she gets "too much credit."  

 

[hendrix watermelon]

Originally Posted by Method Man

Rosa Parks gets two lousy lines in most American History textbooks.  If that's unfair, it's unfair because people don't know ENOUGH about her and about her fellow activists - not because she gets "too much credit."  

 

[MajinZuub]

Originally Posted by TheRaygunZ

yall stupid, aint this from barbershop

 

[Maximus Meridius]

This whole thread is a mess

 

[taymane23]

Originally Posted by Patrick Bateman

Originally Posted by cartune

Originally Posted by Patrick Bateman

MLK is overrated in my opinion. *shrugs*

Now brother Malcolm on the other hand.

Malcolm X is overrated

Dude starting wars on an island

Come down south with that slander b. Dudes getting they head bust in Selma cause Red wanna down the white man on corners in Harlem.

Then he go to Mecca and change his mind 

Talkin bout Bussin ya guns where the bodies at?

RIP Rev Shuttlesworth

[color= rgb(255, 0, 0)]I wasn't too fond of the mind change, but that's how the cookie crumbles. But MLK and his NAACP connections is iffy IMO..Eh, w/e.[/color][color= rgb(255, 0, 0)] A decent size number of my people are so far gone at this point, it doesn't even matter.

[/color]

Really tho all that fighting and dying our elders did for what?

 

[ill legal operation]

Originally Posted by Method Man


As for Ms. Parks, it required even more courage to serve as the "test case" for segregation than it did to defy the law itself.  

I'm sayin'...

...like it's easy to be the sacrificial lamb.

On some, "Hey Rosa, we hope this works - but if not, Godspeed"...

 

[dmoney82]

Originally Posted by Method Man

 dudes is mad out chea

You've got a choice to make, "DMoney."  
I suspect that you created this post in earnest and, once things got too hot, you tried to cover yourself by saying, "oh haha, I wasn't serious.  I was just trolling.  Now YOU'RE the ones who should feel stupid!"

If you insist on standing by that, understand that you're going to be suspended for trolling.  You can't have it both ways.  Either this is a sincere post intended to learn more about an historical figure or it's a pitiful attempt to rile people up.  I tend to think the former could be perceived is an attempt to cure ignorance, whereas the latter is a flagrant attempt to demonstrate it.  I'll let you decide. 

As for Ms. Parks, it required even more courage to serve as the "test case" for segregation than it did to defy the law itself.  Rosa Parks was an activist in her own right, prior to and beyond the events of December 1st, 1955.  She joined the NAACP's Montgomery chapter in 1943 and even served as their secretary.  Yes, her case was selected by the NAACP, but she made the ideal test case for a reason - and that's to her credit.  

There's no denying that, if only for the sake of expedience, history is condensed into a simplistic narrative.  The function of many people, events, and organizations are often attributed to individual torch-bearers.  Most students learn about the Montgomery bus boycott, but not the Baton Rouge bus boycott of 1953, which was also successful and, in fact, paved the way for Montgomery.  Similarly, very few people learn about A. Philip Randolph's 1941 March on Washington.  

However, I have difficulty with the idea that we should PENALIZE the handful of people, organizations, and events that DO receive any recognition as opposed to the system that diminishes or ignores the instrumental roles played by others.  How can you say that Rosa Parks receives MORE credit than she deserves when most people only know ONE thing about her?  If anything, the way Rosa Parks is popularly portrayed reduces her to a single act rather than as a lifetime contributor to the cause of social justice.  In that sense, she doesn't get ENOUGH credit for her life's work.

Rosa Parks gets two lousy lines in most American History textbooks.  If that's unfair, it's unfair because people don't know ENOUGH about her and about her fellow activists - not because she gets "too much credit."  

Welp. I'll take the L. I was sincere

 

[speakup23]

Originally Posted by ILL LEGAL OPERATION

SpeakUp23 wrote:

---

Yo my man...

...where you keep gettin' these "Twerk Team" Rihanna avys from? 

 

[ill legal operation]

Originally Posted by SpeakUp23

Originally Posted by ILL LEGAL OPERATION

SpeakUp23 wrote:

---

Yo my man...

...where you keep gettin' these "Twerk Team" Rihanna avys from? 

 

 

 

[Jordan8]

Brehhhhhhhhh

 

[keif sweat]

Originally Posted by Method Man

 dudes is mad out chea

You've got a choice to make, "DMoney."  
I suspect that you created this post in earnest and, once things got too hot, you tried to cover yourself by saying, "oh haha, I wasn't serious.  I was just trolling.  Now YOU'RE the ones who should feel stupid!"

If you insist on standing by that, understand that you're going to be suspended for trolling.  You can't have it both ways.  Either this is a sincere post intended to learn more about an historical figure or it's a pitiful attempt to rile people up.  I tend to think the former could be perceived is an attempt to cure ignorance, whereas the latter is a flagrant attempt to demonstrate it.  I'll let you decide. 

As for Ms. Parks, it required even more courage to serve as the "test case" for segregation than it did to defy the law itself.  Rosa Parks was an activist in her own right, prior to and beyond the events of December 1st, 1955.  She joined the NAACP's Montgomery chapter in 1943 and even served as their secretary.  Yes, her case was selected by the NAACP, but she made the ideal test case for a reason - and that's to her credit.  

There's no denying that, if only for the sake of expedience, history is condensed into a simplistic narrative.  The function of many people, events, and organizations are often attributed to individual torch-bearers.  Most students learn about the Montgomery bus boycott, but not the Baton Rouge bus boycott of 1953, which was also successful and, in fact, paved the way for Montgomery.  Similarly, very few people learn about A. Philip Randolph's 1941 March on Washington.  

However, I have difficulty with the idea that we should PENALIZE the handful of people, organizations, and events that DO receive any recognition as opposed to the system that diminishes or ignores the instrumental roles played by others.  How can you say that Rosa Parks receives MORE credit than she deserves when most people only know ONE thing about her?  If anything, the way Rosa Parks is popularly portrayed reduces her to a single act rather than as a lifetime contributor to the cause of social justice.  In that sense, she doesn't get ENOUGH credit for her life's work.

Rosa Parks gets two lousy lines in most American History textbooks.  If that's unfair, it's unfair because people don't know ENOUGH about her and about her fellow activists - not because she gets "too much credit."  

Wow. Couldn't have said it any better if I tried.

 

[jerryjones]

ehhhh i agree wit the OP

Much respect to Rosa Parks def cant take anything from her

But imo the civil rights movement was overrated