Savings and Trust: The Rise and Betrayal of the Freedman's Bank

Savings and Trust: The Rise and Betrayal of the Freedman's Bank by Justene Hill Edwards

The Freedman's bank was formed at the end of the Civil War to give former slaves a place to save their money. It was initially charter to be a very safe savings bank in a single location. It would invest in government bond and pay a small amount of interest. It expanded to other locations. Many of the leaders were white men who desired to help the blacks. The bank later expanded to many other locations. Many of the clients were using it as a place to store money until they could buy land. Transactions tended to be small. The bank later ran into money issues. It had difficulty making the promised interest payments. It spent money on opulent buildings. The solution seemed to be to go into other money making ventures, such as making loans. It was restricted to making "safe" loans to those with significant land as collateral, and was forbidden from loaning to those controlling the bank. Alas, the first restriction ended up restricting loans to most of the black patrons and the second restriction was flouted. After a banking panic hit, the bank hit huge issues. Advance notice was required for withdrawals. (Though certain mostly white business customers could get money out easily.) The bank eventually failed. Even in failure, there were some last minute loans to friends. Almost none of the outstanding loans were paid back. The clients only received a few cents on the dollar and now were resistant to dealing with banks. It is a typically case of bank failure caused by greed, tho. This probably set back the financial condition of the freed slaves, though was only a small part of the many negative policies during reconstruction. 

A Vindication of the Rights of Woman

A Vindication of the Rights of Woman by Mary Wollstonecraft

This is an early feminist essay. The discussions include topics which seem almost foreign to us, such as joint education for boys and girls. It advocates greater respect for women and less treating of them as appendages of men. It is a little longer than I expected and does go around a lot of topics regarding women's right.

Who Was Rosa Parks?

Who Was Rosa Parks? by Yona Zeldis McDonough

I did not realize that Rosa Parks had a backstory of fighting for rights. There were other black people who failed to give up their seats for whites on Montgomery busses. However, they did not resonate with the general public the way Rosa Parks did. She was an educated, upstanding citizen. She had also worked behind the scenes for civil rights. The bus boycott and fame were challenging for her and her family. Eventually she moved to Detroit with other family members. 

This book is a quality, short introduction to her life and the background of the bus boycott and civil rights movement. It is somewhat sad that it was transportation that was attacked. In the name of improving civil rights we ended up hurting our transportation system. (Next step would be to bulldoze black neighborhoods for freeways.)

Belle, The Last Mule at Gee's Bend: A Civil Rights Story

Belle, The Last Mule at Gee's Bend: A Civil Rights Story by Calvin Alexander Ramsey (Author), Bettye Stroud (Author), John Holyfield (Illustrator)

Belle is a mule that is munching on collards from a garden. A kid notices this, and a grandma offers to tell the story of the animal. Belle had participated in the civil rights movement. The animal carried people to register to vote when the ferry was closed. The animal later pulled MLK's coffin after he had been killed. The book has a nice civil rights message, but is a bit wordy.

Eyes on the Prize: America's Civil Rights Years, 1954-1965

The Civil Rights Era had its ups and downs. Some of the bigger events seem to have been accidents. Others were very well planned. Brown vs. Board of Education really kicked things off. It was actually a collection of different lawsuits that were put together. It did not really overturn a precedent. Unstead, it used the settled law to show that things were not equal, therefore could not be valid. Interestingly, school integration has not been the end-all benefit that was hoped for. Restrictive covenants and legally segregated schools have been replaced by zoning restrictions and wealthy suburban schools. Is this what destroyed inner cities and led to the dominance of the automobile?

The Little Rock school integration was more of an accident caused by politician medling. The school district had a positive plan to integrate. However, the governor decided to insert himself into the mess.

It is interesting how the democratic party was able to pivot to take the black vote (and Republican party to take the rural white vote.) The country would be better served if allegiances were more divided.

There is still a ways to go with Civil Rights in America. It almost feels that we push one area and another issue comes up. Can we actually have a healthy multi-racial, multi-ethnic urban area where everyone can walk around together?

The Butler

Lee Daniel's The Butler makes for an akward title. It almost made for a good movie. It chronicle the life of a man from boyhood in the southern cotton fields until he "made it" as a white house butler. He worked for many years as a butler to the presidents that were key in the civil rights movement. As he was witnessing the political side of the movement, his son was involved in the "activist" side.

The movie did a good job of showing the "personal" nature of the civil rights decision. It managed, for the most part, to be politically neutral. Eisenhower struggled with how to manage things, but finally decided to send in troops to support integration. Kennedy initially dismissed civil rights, but letter became a staunch supporter. Nixon and Johnson were both portrayed as callous politicians that wanted to co-opt civil rights for their own personal gain.

While the film showed the presidents' making personal decisions about civil rights, the life of the butler's son showed us the political side. He started out in non-violent protests and passively resisted attacks by the KKK and others. He criticised of his father's life as a "servant" of white people. Martin Luther King JR responded, however, that the house negro was one of the most influential sources of change in that he showed the white man that the black man can be a civilized human. in spite of this, the relationship with father and son remained strained. (Meanwhile, the butler's other son followed the more conservative path, but eventually returned from Vietnam in a body bag.)

Up to this point, I was well pleased with the movie. However, after Watergate, the movie started to lose focus. Ford and Carter did not exist. Reagan finally appears in his second term. He is the one that finally makes sure that the black help is paid at the same rate as the white help. He also makes sure the butler and his wife are invited as guests to a state dinner. This pro-black stance is tempered with Reagan's objection to sanctions on South Africa. (I guess they couldn't make Reagan look like too much of a good guy.)

At his point, the butler is old and decides it is time to retire and reconcile with his son. It would make for a good ending to the movie. But, alas, it didn't stop there. It jumped forward 20 years to show him supporting Obama and his campaign and going back to the White House as a guest of the first black president. This section felt like it was artificially tacked on to the end. It also distracted from the other seen where the butler went back to see the abandoned cotton field where he had grown up. (Is this meant to contrast with the White/Kenyan president who never had no slave history?) Alas, it was a week epilogue for what was otherwise a good movie.