This is a reiteration of /u/sauceoftherooster's unanswered earlier question, so hopefully this'll get answered second time around.
I've been wondering for awhile after the successful developments in the CRM of the Civil Rights Act 1964 & the Voting Rights Act 1965, why was there a need for groups & organisations & individuals like the Black Panthers, Black Power & Heuy Newton?
I was reading this article on Black Power & it stated the following:
"The progress made by African Americans in the 1950s and early 1960s at achieving their civil rights was compromised by violence. Frankly, many young blacks rejected the courage and patience displayed by Dr. Martin Luther King in his non-violent response to injustice in American society."
Is this statement a true reason for why the civil rights movement took the turn it did between 1964-68?
Obviously, I understand that social adaption to desegregation takes time but surely after the success of 1964/65 (which my old history teachers told me were the CRM's "primary goals") why did events like the Harlem (1964), Watts (1965), Detroit (1967), MLK assassination (1968) & Rodney King (1992) riots occur?
Why did we still see police officers being discriminatory towards blacks during the '80's? As can be seen in quite a few of the NWA's early songs from their Straight Outta Compton (1988) album notably the song "Fuck tha Police" & the poignant Boyz n the Hood (1991)
Was a merely a matter of fact that the developments of 1964/65 weren't all that "successful"?
Thanks for any answers :)
This is a pretty multifaceted question. I've studied the Civil Rights Movement a fair amount and I usually tell people if they want a good overview to check out Taylor Branch's Pulitzer prize winning trilogy on the movement.
MLK's movement that centered around non-violence was successful for many reasons. Much of the movement started around black churches (MLK's father was a prominent preacher) that already had a built in network that helped early organizing. Second, non-violence appealed to sympathetic white politicians and allies - images like Bull Conner sicking dogs and water hoses on defenseless protesters were incredibly important in more people gaining favor with the civil rights movement. Third, in the 50s and 60s, in most places it wasn't particularly safe for African Americans to express any anger or other negative things they were feeling. Even non-violent protests were met with beatings, arrests, or worse.
That being said, the feelings of anger were always there. Civil rights organizations were constantly struggling to maintain non-violence. During some of the major campaigns, such as in Birmingham, there were some, though limited, retaliation by African Americans. Some of the more militant voices in the later 60s, like Stokely Carmichael started out in the non-violent camp.
Such large-scale change takes a very long time to accomplish. While the Civil Rights Act of 64 and Voting Rights Act (among other legislation) did many great things for African Americans, true political and economic equality was slow. MLK, before his assassination was still advocating for large scale economic changes that were never made. The MLK assassination in particular caused great anger and disillusionment as well and led to mass riots in most major cities. Much institutional and other forms of racism persisted, arguably to this day.
So to boil down this answer/TL:DR: The changes made were slow and incomplete and the anger was always there.