Civil Rights Movement


To what extent did the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s challenge Americans to rethink the meaning of freedom? In what ways did civil rights activists and advocates challenge federal and state governments and American citizens? At the same time, in what ways did the presence of segregationists in government and society expose the limits of the civil rights movement? Include at least SIX primary source documents to support your argument. No sources outside of the assigned class readings may be consulted or cited in this essay.

Sample Answer

Civil rights movement was a struggle for social justice in the United States of America in the 1950s and 1960s led by prominent clergymen like Martin Luther king junior, activists like Rosa Parks and civilians like mother Pollard. The civil rights movement had officially seen the end of slavery but did not conclusively bring to an end the glaring discrimination against blacks. To a larger extent, the movement challenged the Americans of African origin to rethink their place in the American society with respect to human rights and freedom of equality. The mainstay of this paper is to discuss the civil rights movement in details focusing more on the reasons for the upsurge and the challenges faced in the course of the struggle.

During a time where each feature of our lives is getting progressively open, it is urgent for us to comprehend local observation and how it relates to current society. Readily available, we hold more data than any past age (a deceiver maybe). Our information is being gathered and used to control how we see reality, and our kindred Americans are as a rule arrogantly profiled as psychological oppressors, regularly based on their skin shading and religion. This isn't an issue that can be disregarded, and so as to take a firm position, it is basic that we know the goal certainties, appropriate to this theme. The National Security Agency has been utilizing incognito decoding projects to get to our relational correspondence utilizing indirect accesses executed by a program befittingly marked "BULL RUN". Be that as it may, this common war isn't a question between siblings. This is an oppressive dad inducing dread in the hearts of his youngsters and professing to recognize what's best for them. His thought processes may appear to be defensive, however there is an unpretentious malevolence to his cases. As the NSA Directorate compactly states "On the off chance that you don't have anything to stow away, you don't have anything to fear" (1). This over the top local observation negatively affects our general public, and that there are a few goals which show dissolvability. The United States government ought to generously abridge its utilization of residential observation by dissolving current incognito decoding projects alongside the SPOT program.

In 2013, Edward Snowden, a representative of prestigious insight contractual worker Booz Allen Hamilton, illicitly downloaded and released 1.5 million records relating to the NSA's utilization of digital observation strategies to gather private data from residents of the United States and remote partners (qtd. in Szoldra 1). Because of these releases, the program BULL RUN was uncovered, prompting a mass open clamor. In an article posted on Security Affairs site page, the writer expresses "The expansion of US observation exercises appears to have no restrictions neither fringes, each correspondence and information notwithstanding being ensured with advanced encryption instruments were available by US Intelligence and its accomplices like Britain's GCHQ" (Paganini 1). While these disclosures are intrinsically concerning, it essential to assess the legitimate, moral, and sacred priority which enabled such a program to work out as intended.

Article 4 of the Bill of Rights enriches the accompanying:

The privilege of the individuals to be secure in their people, houses, papers, and impacts, against irrational pursuits and seizures, will not be disregarded, and no Warrants will issue, yet upon reasonable justification, upheld by Oath or insistence, and especially portraying the spot to be looked, and the people or things to be seized (US Const. alter. IV, sec. 1).

It would appear to most of the populace that this alteration gives the essential and adequate intends to annul programs that infringe on the security of residents who are not under dynamic, approved examination. Sacred law advocates have arrived at an agreement on this issue; in any case, lawfulness and legitimateness are not synonymous.

There are a few contentions oftentimes made with regards to the legitimateness concerning residential observation. One oft-refered to reference is the "Joining together and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001." Under segment 215 of the PATRIOT Act, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court may give consent to "get to substantial data on account of an approved examination" (U.S cong. 215). The suggestion to this article speaks to a gross distortion of its significance. The article unequivocally expresses that data must be gathered on account of an approved examination. While some may contend that there has been a proceeding with examination since the occasions that happened on September eleventh of 2001, the article requires particularity and doesn't permit wide range observation of any resident without admirable motivation.

The utilization of decoding procedures on a country's very own residents is despicable; in any case, on account of NSA reconnaissance, it was not restricted to the U.S. populace. The hole from Edward Snowden uncovered that there were bugs put in the UN workplaces in a few areas, remembering the home office for Geneva. The relational correspondence between German residents was being recorded utilizing subtly sanctioned secondary passages, and the United States paid Great Britain 155 million dollars throughout the three years so as to access and impact the data gathered by state-subsidiary covert operatives. A digital assault of this scale will undoubtedly have repercussions on our financial and political connections.

We are regularly informed that this reconnaissance program was executed for our very own security. Because of the ongoing ascent in fear based oppression related passings, the official powers inside our nation are basically looking to make a sheltered domain, drained of psychological militants. While this may appear to be a respectable interest, its relative inefficacy infers that there might be a ulterior thought process. Benjamin Franklin once stated, "the individuals who might surrender basic freedom to buy a little brief wellbeing merit neither freedom nor security" (Franklin 2). Lauren Kirchner, senior individual and insightful correspondent at ProPublica, writes in an article with respect to the measurements of observation that the NSA has talked about just four situations where digital reconnaissance assumed a job in foiling the plot of a fear based oppressor. In just a single such case was it considered to have had a "critical distinction." In all reality, there was no causal connection between the man captured and a specific demonstration of fear based oppression. He just offered cash to a psychological militant gathering (Kirchner 1). Because of the clumsiness of NSA projects to meet their alleged objective, and the unlawful exceed unavoidably ensnared in any household reconnaissance program, the main sensible arrangement is to end the utilization of BULL RUN or any of its copied.

The NSA isn't the main party liable of executing contemptible demonstrations of residential reconnaissance. The Transportation Security Administration utilizes a program titled SPOT (Screening of Passengers by Observation Techniques) which utilizes conduct location trying to control psychological oppression. Maya Berry, official chief for the Arab American Institute, an approach establishment concentrated on issues with respect to important political issues, tended to a letter concerning this local security issue to previous Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano. The letter indicates that the utilization of the SPOT program is an insufficient, dishonest utilization of household observation. As per the Governmental Accountability Office, almost fifty thousand individuals were recognized by the program and short of what one-hundredth of these individuals were captured, none of them being fear based oppressors. Another issue that she proposes has happened because of the utilization of this program is racial profiling. Berry briefly elucidates the ineffectualness of the program and uses GAO measurements to help her cases. In exposing Muslims to additional quests and examination, we viably sanction biased arrangements (1). Any individual who professes to be a supporter for social equity ought to be fervently restricted to such an activity.

One botch that we ought to stay away from when examining such issues, is consigning mankind to a deliberation. These are genuine individuals that are as a rule contrarily profiled, only based on their skin shading or statement of faith. At the point when I was in secondary school, I was a piece of an approach banter group that contended across the nation. There was a colleague another school who was Sikh. At whatever point the group would utilize air travel, he would be halted at the TSA checkpoint and guided into another room by security authorities. They would address him as a feature of "typical procedure." Oddly enough, none of different individuals from the group were ever addressed as a piece of this "ordinary procedure." While he never felt explicitly compromised by the scrutinizing methods, it was baffling that he was consistently profiled in such a negative way. Intermittently it takes a specific vicinity to an issue with the end goal for us to feel committed to act. The TSA ought to end the utilization of the SPOT program, as it has been esteemed inadequate and destructive to certain ethnic and strict gatherings.

This issue is appropriate to everyone perusing this article. Your private data is being gathered and utilized trying to control and control the populace. The utilization of secret decoding programs is unscrupulous and illegal. In any case, Jack Balkin contends in "The Constitution in the National Surveillance State" that we have to acknowledge the cold hard truth and comprehend that it isn't up to us whether the administration abridges its residential observation. The reconnaissance state is characteristic, and keeping in mind that it might be unlawful, it is inescapable. While fear mongering is an oft-refered to purpose for observation, the most appropriate avocation is really the innovative world in which we live, and its capacity to furnish private elements with vast information assortment (4). Facebook was as of late ensnared in an embarrassment with Cambridge Analytica in which there was considered to be a blatant abuse of the individual information being utilized to impact political crusading at home and abroad. The utilization of reconnaissance isn't restricted to open substances: Private companies are naturally snared in this issue, and there ought to be an expanded official or congressional order in directing their abuse of private information assortment.

The United States national government ought to significantly diminish its utilization of residential reconnaissance by dissolving current undercover decoding programs and the SPOT program, alongside expanding the guideline of individual information assortment inside the private part. The previously mentioned projects are insufficient as well as make