Prejudice in the Modern World Reference Library (Prejudice Throughout History Reference Library)

Prejudice in the Modern World Almanac

VOLUME 1

Prejudice in the Modern World Almanac

VOLUME 1

Richard C. Hanes, Sharon M. Hanes, Kelly Rudd Sarah Hermsen, Project Editor

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac Richard C. Hanes, Sharon M. Hanes, Kelly Rudd Imaging and Multimedia Dean Dauphinais, Lezlie Light, Mike Logusz

Project Editor Sarah Hermsen Rights and Acquisitions Margaret Abendroth, Tim Sisler

Product Design Jennifer Wahi

ª 2007 Thomson Gale, a part of The Thomson Corporation. Thomson and Star Logo are trademarks and Gale is a registered trademark used herein under license. For more information, contact: Thomson Gale 27500 Drake Rd. Farmington Hills, MI 48331-3535 Or you can visit our Internet site at http://www.gale.com ALL RIGHTS RESERVED No part of this work covered by the copyright hereon may be reproduced or used in any form or by any means— graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, taping, Web distribution, or informationstorage retrieval systems—without the written permission of the publisher.

For permission to use material from this product, submit your request via Web at http://www.gale-edit.com/ permissions, or you may download our Permissions Request form and submit your request by fax or mail to: Permissions Department Thomson Gale 27500 Drake Rd. Farmington Hills, MI 48331-3535 Permissions Hotline: 248-699-8006 or 800-877-4253, ext. 8006 Fax: 248-699-8074 or 800-762-4058 Cover photographs reproduced by permission of ª Bettmann/Corbis (big photo), ª Greg Smith/Corbis Sygma (KKK), and Getty Images (wheelchair).

Composition Evi Seoud Manufacturing Rita Wimberley

Since this page cannot legibly accommodate all copyright notices, the acknowledgements constitute an extension of the copyright notice. While every effort has been made to ensure the reliability of the information presented in this publication, Thomson Gale does not guarantee the accuracy of the data contained herein. Thomson Gale accepts no payment for listing; and inclusion in the publication of any organization, agency, institution, publication, service, or individual does not imply endorsement by the editors or publisher. Errors brought to the attention of the publisher and verified to the satisfaction of the publisher will be corrected in future editions.

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS CATALOGING-IN-PUBLICATION DATA Hanes, Richard Clay, 1946– Prejudice in the modern world. Almanac / Richard C. Hanes, Sharon M. Hanes, and Kelly Rudd; Sarah Hermsen, project editor. p. cm. — (Prejudice in the modern world reference library) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN-13: 978-1-4144-0204-8 (set hardcover: alk. paper)— ISBN-10: 1-4144-0204-X (set hardcover: alk. paper)— ISBN-13: 978-1-4144-0205-5 (v. 1 hardcover: alk. paper)— ISBN-10: 1-4144-0205-8 (v. 1 hardcover: alk. paper)—[etc.] 1. Toleration—Juvenile literature. 2. Prejudices—Juvenile literature. 3. Intergroup relations— Juvenile literature. 4. Ethnic relations—Juvenile literature. 5. Race relations—Juvenile literature. I. Hanes, Sharon M. II. Rudd, Kelly, 1954– III. Hermsen, Sarah. IV. Title. HM1271.H36 2007 303.3’85—dc22 2006036955

ISBN-13:

978-1-4144-0203-1 978-1-4144-0204-8 978-1-4144-0205-5 978-1-4144-0206-2 978-1-4144-0207-9

ISBN-10:

978-1-4144-0208-6 (set) (Primary Sources) (Almanac set) (Almanac vol.1) 978-1-4144-0209-3 (Cumulative Index) (Almanac vol.2) (Biographies)

1-4144-0203-1 (set) 1-4144-0204-X (Almanac set) 1-4144-0205-8 (Almanac vol.1) 1-4144-0206-6 (Almanac vol.2) 1-4144-0207-4 (Biographies)

1-4144-0208-2 (Primary Sources) 1-4144-0209-0 (Cumulative Index)

This title is also available as an e-book. ISBN-13: 978-1-4144-1057-9; ISBN-10: 1-4144-1057-3 Contact your Thomson Gale sales representative for ordering information. Printed in the United States of America 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

T a b l e o f Co n t e n t s

Reader’s Guide vii Timeline of Events xi Words to Know xxvii Research and Activity Ideas xxxv VOLUME 1 Chapter 1: Foundations of Modern Prejudice 1 Chapter 2: Causes of Prejudice 19 Chapter 3: Ethnic Prejudice 39 Chapter 4: Racial Prejudice 61 Chapter 5: Religious Prejudice 83 Chapter 6: Social Class Prejudice 105 Chapter 7: Gender Prejudice 123 Chapter 8: Sexual Orientation Prejudice 151 Chapter 9: Nationalism 171 Chapter 10: Disability Prejudice 193 Chapter 11: Consequences of Prejudice 215 VOLUME 2 Chapter 12: Genocide in Rwanda 237 Chapter 13: Japanese Internment in America 259 v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter 14: Prejudice in Iraq: Shiı´tes, Sunni, and Kurds 279 Chapter 15: Multi-Ethnic Conflict: Yugoslavia 297 Chapter 16: The Arab-Israeli Conflict 317 Chapter 17: Racial Segregation in the American South: Jim Crow Laws 333 Chapter 18: Native Americans 359 Chapter 19: The Holocaust 381 Chapter 20: Religious Politics: Northern Ireland and England 407 Chapter 21: Prejudice Against Hispanic Americans 421 Chapter 22: Apartheid of South Africa 443

Where to Learn More xlv Index li

vi

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Reader’s Guide

Of the many kinds of emotions and feelings a person may hold, prejudice is perhaps one of the most common yet complex. Prejudice is a negative attitude, emotion, or behavior towards others based on a prejudgment about those individuals with no prior knowledge or experience. Prejudice can be extremely harmful, oversimplifying diverse aspects of human nature and making broad generalizations about entire races and cultures. These generalizations are frequently based on stereotypes. The use of stereotypes employs negative images of others. Such negative stereotypes may lead to certain forms of behavior including discrimination or even hostile violent acts. This kind of use of generalizations and stereotypes becomes especially critical when people in power, or seeking political power, manipulate through the media the stereotypes of social groups they wish to dominate, or perhaps eliminate. People in these stereotyped groups often become less valued socially. They are frequently made scapegoats, blamed for the problems affecting society in general, even if they have nothing to do with it. Prejudices usually form very early in life; they are shaped by family, schools, and society in general. Prejudice can assume many forms based on the kinds of traits that others are being prejudged by. Racial prejudice focuses on physical biological traits, such as skin color. Religious prejudice considers the beliefs held by others or what religious denomination they are associated with. Ethnic prejudice identifies people who share common backgrounds or social customs. Nationalism is a form of prejudice that focuses on the political systems others live under. Sexism is a gender prejudice against men or women. Sexual orientation prejudices are usually against people who are homosexuals or transgendered. vii

READER’S GUIDE

Some prejudices focus on disabilities of others, ranging from physical handicaps to mental disabilities to mental illnesses. Normally, people—both as a group and individually—are acting out multiple forms of prejudice at any one time. One group of people may hold prejudices and discriminate against another group because of combined religious and ethnic prejudices, racial and social class prejudices, or gender and disability prejudices. Similarly, any multiple combinations of prejudices are possible and may even occur in different combinations in the same individual over time. No matter the complexity of prejudice, one simple fact exists—prejudice has long been one of the greatest barriers and most destructive forces in human history. Prejudice has been a major influence on human relationships throughout the history of humankind. Not only has prejudice existed throughout the history of civilization, it has dominated certain historic periods and historical events, such as the invasion of Christian armies into the Muslim-held Holy Lands beginning at the end of the eleventh century, the sixteenth century religious upheaval of the Reformation in Europe, and the Holocaust in World War II (1939–45) in the midtwentieth century. Despite this influence of prejudice throughout history, the actual concept of what prejudice is did not develop until the twentieth century, when the study of prejudices gained recognition. Slavery, colonialism, and world empires had largely ended by the early twentieth century. However, racial discrimination, particularly against those groups previously enslaved, ethnic conflicts, and international conflict driven by nationalism remained major influences on the course of modern history. Instances where the consequences of prejudice were most apparent included the racially discriminatory Jim Crow laws of the American South, the extermination of European Jews by Nazi Germany in the Holocaust, ethnic conflicts in former Yugoslavia in Eastern Europe, genocides in the African states of Rwanda and Somalia, and religious conflicts in Northern Ireland and the Middle East. The nature of prejudice-driven discrimination and violence has changed over time. Efforts by national governments, human rights watch groups, and international organizations, such as the United Nations, have made strides in combating prejudice through various educational and humanitarian programs. However, it appeared that prejudice would continue as a major influence and source of conflict in the world into the twenty-first century. viii

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

READER’S GUIDE

Features Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac offers twenty-two chapters in two volumes. The first eleven chapters explore the many different types of prejudice, their history, what causes these prejudices in people and societies, and their consequences. The types of prejudice described in detail include ethnic, racial, religious, class, gender, sexual orientation, nationalism, and disabilities. Each chapter contains a list of additional sources students can go to for more information; sidebar boxes highlighting people and events of special interest; and a Words to Know section that introduces students to difficult or unfamiliar terms (terms are also defined within the text). Over 120 black-and-white photographs help illustrate the material. Both volumes begin with a timeline of important events in the history of prejudice and a Research and Activity Ideas section. The volumes conclude with a general bibliography and a subject index so students can easily find the people, places, and events discussed throughout Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac.

Prejudice in the Modern World Reference Library Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac is only one component of the three-part Prejudice in the Modern World Reference Library. The other two titles in this set are: Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies presents the life stories of twenty-five diverse and unique individuals who played key roles in the history of prejudice. Some were prominent national leaders in fighting well-established prejudices while some promoted prejudices in order to pursue their own political and economic gain. Other figures were activists combating the various types of prejudice. Profiles include Paul Kagame, president of Rwanda; Saddam Hussein, president of Iraq; Golda Meir, prime minister of Israel; Wilma Mankiller, chairperson of the Cherokee Nation; social activists Gloria Steinem, Cesar Chavez, Mine Obuko, and Mahatma Gandhi. Other biography subjects range from Nazi German military leader Heinrich Himmler, the primary instigator of the Holocaust, to the Dalai Lama, the Tibetan spiritual leader who promoted religious tolerance. Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources tells various stories in the words of the people who fought prejudice, acted out prejudices, and those who were the victims of prejudice. Sixteen excerpted documents touch on a wide range of topics on prejudice. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

ix

READER’S GUIDE

Included are excerpts from published diaries, national magazine and news articles, reports produced by the United Nations and human rights watch groups, published interviews, and Web sites dedicated to the elimination of prejudice in everyday life. A cumulative index of all three titles in the Prejudice in the Modern World Reference Library is also available.

Acknowledgements These volumes are dedicated to our new granddaughter Jenna Grace Hanes. May she grow up to enjoy a world far less shaped by the destructive consequences of prejudice. Special thanks are due to Dr. Mick Bollenbaugh and Matt May for their contributions to the Almanac volume.

Comments and Suggestions We welcome your comments on Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac and suggestions for other topics to consider. Please write: Editors, Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac, U
X
L, 27500 Drake Rd. Farmington Hills, Michigan 48331-3535; call toll free: 1-800-8774253; fax to (248) 699-8097; or send e-mail via http://www.gale.com.

x

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Timeline of Events

632 Conflict erupts among Muslims after the death of Islamic Prophet

Muhammad leading to a major split between Sunni and Shiı´te Muslims over who should rightfully succeed Muhammad. 1095 The first of a series of Crusades is launched into the Middle East by

an alliance of Christian armies from Europe determined to recapture lands lost to Muslim populations. 1200s Genghis Khan and his sons carry out possible genocides through-

out much of Europe and Asia systematically killing millions of civilians. 1492 European explorer Christopher Columbus arrives in San Salvador

leading to a mass killing of native peoples throughout the Western Hemisphere over the next several centuries through military conquest, introduction of foreign diseases, and general hardships caused by the loss of traditional homelands and resources. 1534 King Henry VIII of England breaks ties with the Roman Catholic

Church, whose seat of power is in Rome, and establishes a new church, the Church of England also known as the Anglican Church; this revolt against Catholicism results in the birth of Protestantism and future religious conflict. 1624 British colonists arrive in India and gain control over much of India

by 1858. 1648 The Treaty of Westphalia marks the initial rise of nation-states in

Europe, replacing religion as a main organizing force of populations and leading to the growth of nationalistic prejudices. xi

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

1770s The ideas of social class and wage labor emerge as industrialization

begins in British textile mills; industrialization, capitalist economies, and their social consequences will expand throughout much of the Western world over the next century. 1770 British explorer Captain James Cook arrives on the shores of

Australia, a vast continent inhabited by diverse indigenous peoples. 1788 British colonists begin arriving in Australia and restrict the free-

doms of the natives, whom they collectively refer to as Aborigines, by passing a series of Aboriginal Acts. 1808 The booming international slave trade is officially banned in the

United States; since 1700 as many as fifteen million black African slaves had been transported across the Atlantic Ocean to the Americas. July 1848 The first women’s rights convention is held at Seneca Falls, New

York, marking the beginning of an organized feminist movement. Mid-1800s Chinese and Japanese begin immigrating to America finding

work in mines and railroad construction in the western United States. 1865 Slavery ends in the United States with the South’s defeat in the

American Civil War (1861–65). 1867 Diamonds are discovered in Southern Africa followed by the

discovery of gold in 1886; the newfound wealth draws broad international interest from foreign investors and lays the foundation for future racial segregation policies among the labor force. 1870s European countries rush to divide up Africa under their control,

leading to German colonies in Southwest Africa, French control of Algeria, Italian control of Somaliland in Eastern Africa and later Ethiopia, and British control of Egypt and South Africa; the division of Africa is completed at the Berlin Conference of 1885. 1880s Southern and Eastern European immigrants began arriving in

America in large numbers, increasing ethnic and racial prejudices in the United States. 1882 U.S. Congress passes the Chinese Exclusion Act, the first of various

laws restricting foreign immigration. 1887 The U.S. government begins a major period of forced cultural

assimilation with passage of the General Allotment Act, known as the xii

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

Dawes Act, authorizing the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) to divide communal reservation lands into smaller, privately owned parcels. 1890s Jim Crow laws are introduced in the United States to legally

enforce public racial segregation for the next half century. New Zealand becomes the first nation to establish universal suffrage, meaning voting rights for all adults.

1893

1895 The Basque Nationalist Party led by Sabino Arana is established

seeking a nation based on Basque racial purity with exclusion of what they consider racially inferior Spaniards. 1898 German doctor and scholar Magnus Hirschfeld forms the Scientific-

Humanitarian Committee whose purpose is to oppose German laws outlawing sexual intercourse between men; later in 1919 Hirschfeld founds the Institute for Sexology to conduct research that promotes sexual reform, education, and women’s rights. The First International Convention for Women meets in Washington, D.C., with representatives arriving from ten nations to plot an international strategy for gaining suffrage.

1902

1905 Black American leaders meet in Niagara Falls, Canada, to develop a

strategy to fight racial prejudice in America; it becomes known as the Niagara Movement. 1909 The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People

(NAACP) is established to fight lynchings and other racist activities in the United States through legal action, educational programs, and encouraging voter participation. 1910 The National Urban League is founded to help black Americans

adjust to city life as they move to the North seeking jobs in industry; through World War I (1914–18) hundreds of thousands of blacks leave the rural South in what becomes known as the Black Migration. 1910 The Mexican Revolution sends that country spiraling into polit-

ical, economic, and social upheaval for a decade, and leads to over 680,000 Mexican citizens immigrating to the United States in search of jobs through the next twenty years. 1912 Hundreds of prominent Africans form the South African Native

National Congress, later renamed the African National Congress (ANC), to protest racial segregation in South Africa. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

xiii

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

1916 The Irish Republican Army (IRA) forms to fight a guerrilla war for

Ireland’s independence from England; the Irish Free State is formed five years later. 1918 Since 1889, 2,522 black Americans are lynched—hung, burned

alive, or hacked to death—largely in the American South, as a result of extreme racial prejudice. 1918 Following World War I the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats, and

Slovenes is formed, later adopting the name Yugoslavia; it soon becomes apparent that the various ethnic groups are unwilling to blend together. 1918 Defeat of the Ottoman Empire in World War I leads the victors

Britain and France to divide up the Middle East under their control with Britain forming a new country called Iraq and establishing rule over Arab Palestinian territory. 1919 Twenty-five race riots erupt across the United States leaving one

hundred people dead and increasing membership in the Ku Klux Klan (KKK), a white supremacist hate group. 1920 The All India Home Rule League is formed, with Mahatma

Gandhi as its president, to seek independence from British rule. It adopts anti-British measures including a boycott of British imported goods, refusing employment by the British, and refusing to pay taxes; these actions lead to the imprisonment of Gandhi. 1920 The United States passes the Nineteenth Amendment to the

Constitution extending the right to vote to women. 1923 Forty states in the United States have institutions housing approx-

imately forty-three thousand mentally defective persons. 1924 Congress passes the U.S. Immigration Act to limit all immigration

to the United States, particularly immigration from Asia and eastern and southern Europe. 1928 The resistance movement for India’s independence creates the

Indian National Congress following a massive protest march that journeys over 250 miles. 1928 The Muslim Brotherhood is created in Egypt to resist European

colonial powers controlling much of the Arab world in northern xiv

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

Africa and the Middle East and promote a return to Islamic states of past centuries. 1929 To improve human genetic qualities, twenty-three states in the

United States legalize sterilization of the mentally defective so they can not produce children. Soviet Union dictator Joseph Stalin allows seven million Ukrainians to starve to death during a harsh winter as a form of ethnic cleansing to provide room for Soviet expansion.

1932

1933 Nazi Germany establishes its first concentration camps within

Germany to hold political prisoners and those considered undesirable. 1933 The Holocaust, the most noted case of genocide in the twentieth

century, lasts until 1945, during which the Nazi German government kills eleven million people including six million European Jews; other victims included Poles, Gypsies, Slavs, homosexuals, and various political opponents. 1934 The U.S. Congress passes the Indian Reorganization Act (IRA)

providing opportunities for Native Americans to receive federal funds to purchase land, start businesses, and receive social services; tribes are to adopt written constitutions establishing democratic forms of government and forming federally chartered corporations. November 9, 1938 Known as the Night of Broken Glass, the German

government carefully orchestrates violence against Jews across Germany and German-controlled Austria for two days as rioters burn or damage over one thousand Jewish synagogues and damage almost eight thousand Jewish-owned businesses; some thirty thousand Jewish men are arrested and sent to concentration camps, the first mass arrest of Jews by Nazi Germany. 1940 The fourteenth Dalai Lama is installed as the religious leader of

Tibet at the age of seven. 1941 For a four year period until the end of World War II in 1945, over

300,000 Serbs and Jews in Croatia are killed, disappear, or placed in concentration camps under the Croatian government led by Ante Pavelic´. 1942 The United States and Mexico establish the Bracero Program that

allows Mexican day laborers to legally enter the United States for Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

xv

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

seasonal work on farms and other jobs until 1964 when the program officially ends; almost five million workers journeyed from Mexico though working conditions were often harsh. February 19, 1942 U.S. president Roosevelt signs Executive Order 9066

authorizing the removal of Japanese Americans from their homes in the West Coast to detention camps established by the War Relocation Authority (WRA). July 19, 1942 Heinrich Himmler gives the order to begin deportation of

Jews from the Polish ghettos, leading to the deaths of three million Jews, over 90 percent of the Jewish population in Poland. December 1944 With the end of World War II in sight, the remaining

forty-four thousand Japanese Americans being detained since 1942 are freed, although the last camp does not close until March 1946. 1945 The United Nations forms as an international world body to

resolve international disputes; its membership includes fifty-one nations; among its branches is the Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). Following World War II, the Federal Peoples Republic of Yugoslavia is established as a communist country under the control of the USSR, including the six states of Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, Serbia, Slovenia, Montenegro, and Macedonia.

1945

1946 Thousands of immigrants begin legally entering France from

Northern Africa and Asia searching for work in rebuilding Europe from the ravages of World War II; by 1974 one million immigrants had entered France and by 1995 legal and illegal foreigners account for 25 percent of France’s population. 1947 The Indian government stops legally enforcing the traditional caste

system, establishes prohibitions against discrimination against members of former castes, and creates an aggressive affirmative action program to help those lower caste members historically discriminated against. August 1947 Pakistan gains independence from India, leading to massive

population displacements as an estimated ten million Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs move from one country to the other. The Jewish state of Israel is formed within Palestinian Arab territory forcing thousands of Arabs from their homelands and

1948

xvi

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

leading to a long-standing conflict between Arabs and Jews over control of the region. 1948 The South African Nationalist Party, campaigning on its policy of

apartheid, wins an election victory over the Unionist Party and immediately creates laws to impose racial segregation that remain in place for decades. 1948 Sri Lanka gains independence from Britain triggering long-standing

ethnic conflict between the Tamils and Sinhalese. December 1948 The United Nations adopts the Convention on the

Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in response to the Holocaust during World War II; the resulting trials continue through the remainder of the twentieth century setting precedents for future war crimes trials conducted by international tribunals. April 18, 1949 The Republic of Ireland declares independence from

Britain and pursues efforts to unite Protestant Northern Ireland with the Catholic Republic of Ireland. 1954 The U.S. Supreme Court rules in Brown v. Board of Education

that racially segregated public schools are illegal marking a major legal victory for black Americans against Jim Crow laws. June 1955 The South African Congress of the People, consisting of over

three thousand delegates opposed to apartheid, assemble to draft the Freedom Charter for a future democratic South Africa. October 29, 1956 Through November 6, Egypt nationalizes the Suez

Canal blocking Israeli commercial ships from passing through the critical waterway and leading to a brief war in which Israel wins. 1957 For the first time an Aborigine is granted Australian citizenship;

Aborigines finally gain the right to vote in national elections in 1962 and in 1967 they are finally included in the Australian national census. 1958 Racial violence breaks out in the Notting Hill district of London

leading to calls for increased restrictions on immigration. 1959 Tibetan resistance to Chinese control and discrimination escalates

into violence in Tibet’s capital city of Lhasa causing the Dalai Lama and tens of thousands of Tibetans to seek exile in India while the Chinese systematically destroy Tibetan monasteries. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

xvii

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

1960s Development of the oral contraception pill is one of the most

significant steps in liberating women from traditional gender roles. Newly elected U.S. president John F. Kennedy forms the President’s Commission on the Status of Women, chaired by former First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt; the resulting 1963 report identifies numerous national gender prejudice issues affecting women including discrimination at the workplace and unequal pay.

1961

1962 The British Parliament passes the racially-prejudiced Commonwealth

Immigrants Act increasing restrictions on immigration of blacks from Commonwealth nations to Britain. July 1, 1962 The African state of Rwanda gains independence from

Belgian rule. 1963 The U.S. Congress passes the Equal Pay Act addressing gender

prejudice affecting equal pay for equal work. August 28, 1963 Black leaders including Martin Luther King Jr. Philip

Randolph, Roy Wilkins, James Farmer, and Whitney M. Young, Jr., lead a massive protest march on Washington, D.C., attracting over two hundred thousand people, both blacks and whites. 1964 The U.S. Congress passes the landmark Civil Rights Act prohibit-

ing discrimination based on race and gender in public places and calling for equal opportunity in education and employment. 1964 Violence erupts in Northern Ireland as Catholics rebel against

Protestant oppression, leading to a bloody terrorist campaign by the Irish Republican Army (IRA) leaving thousands dead. 1965 A gay rights march held outside Independence Hall in Philadelphia

marks the beginning of the modern gay rights movement and formation of such groups as the Gay Liberation Front and Gay Activists Alliance. 1965 U.S. president Lyndon Johnson signs a presidential order establish-

ing affirmative action programs to correct for past governmental injustices and end Jim Crow discriminatory social customs. March 20, 1965 Martin Luther King Jr. leads a massive four-day march

of thirty thousand protesters from Selma to the state capitol building in Montgomery protesting restrictions on voting rights of racial minorities, such as poll taxes. xviii

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

August 6, 1965 The U.S. Congress passes the Voting Rights Act banning

poll taxes as a voting requirement and placing close federal oversight over Southern voting practices such as voter registration. 1966 Two Mexican American farmworker unions merge to form the

United Farm Workers and choose a Mexican Aztec eagle as its symbol; they begin nonviolent strikes against California grape growers to gain better working conditions. June 1966 The National Organization for Women (NOW) is formed at the

Third National Conference of the Commission on the Status of Women. June 5, 1967 Israel goes to war against Syria, Egypt, and Jordan, referred

to as the Six Day War because it ends on June 10 with another Israel victory. 1968 As part of the growth of Native American activism in the 1960s, the

American Indian Movement (AIM) is created on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation, an Indian community long known for its poverty and isolation. February 1968 The Southwest Council of La Raza is formed in Phoenix,

Arizona, that grows into a national organization known as the National Council of La Raza (NCLR) in 1972. December 1968 Eunice Kennedy Shriver founds the Special Olympics

dedicated to empowering persons with mental retardation through sports training and competition; the Special Olympics eventually spreads throughout the United States and over 150 countries. 1970 A loosely organized group of lesbians, referred as the Lavender

Menace, becomes extremely frustrated with the leadership of the women’s rights movement and protests against activities of the National Organization of Women (NOW) until their social issues finally gain acceptance by the organization. 1970 The Khmer Rouge, led by Cambodian communist leader Pol Pot,

murder some two million Cambodians either by execution, starvation, or exhaustion resulting from forced hard labor. 1972 The French Front National (FN) political party organizes to promote

anti-immigrant government policies and gains considerable popularity. 1972 Ed Roberts, a quadriplegic, forms the Center for Independent

Living (CIL) to advocate for an end to discrimination against persons Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

xix

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

with disabilities and to instill pride and empowerment within the disabled community; numerous CIL branches open across the nation during the following years. 1972 The U.S. Congress passes Title IX as part of a national education

bill that calls for equality in sports opportunities for women and men at most universities in America. 1972 A new magazine is founded by Gloria Steinem called Ms. Magazine

to focus solely on second wave feminism issues. March 1972 The U.S. Congress passes the Equal Rights Amendment

(ERA) legislation that guarantees equal rights under the law regardless of sex and gives the state legislatures a seven-year deadline to ratify the amendment; by March 1979 thirty-five states have ratified the amendment, three short of the required number. 1973 The U.S. Congress passes the Rehabilitation Act, the first of three

core laws created to give persons with disabilities legal access to life activities that are available to nondisabled Americans; the other two later acts are the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1974, that in 1990 is renamed the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990. January 22, 1973 The U.S. Supreme Court issues the landmark decision

on abortion rights in Roe v. Wade ruling that most laws prohibiting abortion, including many existing state laws, violate the constitutional right to privacy of women. October 6, 1973 War again breaks out between Israelis and Arabs

referred to as the Yom Kippur War after a very important Jewish holiday on which the war begins. 1975 In response to Mexican American strikes against California grape

growers, the U.S. Congress passes the Agricultural Labor Relations Act that allows for collective bargaining by agricultural workers. 1975 In support of tribal sovereignty and economic self-sufficiency, the

U.S. Congress passes the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act giving the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and other federal agencies authority to transfer responsibility for administering certain tribal programs to the tribes. December 9, 1975 The United Nations General Assembly adopts the

Declaration on the Rights of Disabled Persons declaring that disabled xx

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

persons are entitled to the same rights as the nondisabled in all areas of life including rights to an education, medical services, employment, legal aid, to live with their families, and to be protected against abuse and discrimination. 1976 After monitoring racial discrimination in South Africa since 1946,

the United Nations establishes apartheid as an international crime, imposes an oil and arms embargo against South Africa, and creates the International Criminal Court to discourage any other nation from adopting similar practices of racial domination and oppression as practiced in South Africa. 1979 Iranian Islamic fundamentalists led by Muslim cleric (religious

leader) Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini overthrows the secular government of Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, a close ally of the United States and Western Europe. 1979 The Rwandese Refugee Welfare Foundation (RRWF) is estab-

lished to aid Rwandan refugees in exile; after several name changes the organization becomes the Rwandese Patriotic Front (RPF) in December 1987. 1980s Europe right-wing political parties gain increased support largely

for their anti-immigration positions. 1980 The World Conference of United Nations Decade for Women

held in Copenhagen attracts women from around the world and highlights the diverse goals and disagreements over priorities of the worldwide women’s rights movement. 1980 A Miami, Florida, court acquits four police officers in the beating

death of a black businessman leading to an eruption of violence as blacks attack whites on the streets, sometimes dragging them from cars, leading to the deaths of eighteen people and hundreds of millions of dollars of property damage. 1981 Members of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, a violent wing of the

Muslim Brotherhood, assassinate Egyptian President Mohamed Anwar Sadat for introducing Western ideas into Islamic societies. 1981 A wave of violence spreads through several major cities of Britain

with minority youth, including blacks and Asians, clashing with police in reaction to charges of racial harassment by police authorities; over three thousand youth are arrested. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

xxi

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

1983 Janjaweed militias with support of the Sudanese government begin

systematically killing black Africans in the Darfur region of western Sudan leading to the murder of some two million people and displacement of another four million. 1984 For three years violence in Punjab orchestrated by Sikh separatists

desiring independence from India leads to thousands of deaths with the majority of victims being innocent Sikh civilians due to military rule established in 1987 by the Indian government to stop the violence; the Sikhs claim extensive human rights violations. 1985 Violence erupts again in the major cities of Britain largely between

black youth and police leading to the death of one police officer and injury to some 220 police. 1986 The U.S. Congress passes the Immigration Reform and Control

Act, establishing crimes for American companies that hire illegal immigrants. 1988 Islamist rebels heavily funded by the United States successfully

drive the armed forces of the Soviet Union out of Afghanistan after eight years of war. 1988 The U.S. Congress passes the Civil Liberties Act, symbolically

named House Resolution 442 in honor of the U.S. Nisei battalion 442 of World War II, that awards each Japanese American who was interned during the war an apology and $20,000. March 1988 Ali Hasan al-Majid, who becomes known as Chemical Ali,

unleashes chemical weapons against the Kurdish populations of northern Iraq including residents of Halabja, a town of over forty thousand people. 1989 Newly elected South African president F.W. de Klerk announces he

will seek to overturn all racial discriminatory laws, release political prisoners of apartheid including Nelson Mandela, and lift the ban on anti-Apartheid organizations such as the ANC. 1990s Accusations of discriminatory racial profiling escalate in various

Western countries leading to the black community’s frustration with alleged police harassment. 1991 Following the demise of the communist governments of Eastern

Europe, a wave of nationalistic movements and their related prejudices sweeps the region leading to the formation of the Baltic States of xxii

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

Lithuania, Estonia, and Latvia and the breakup of Yugoslavia; the ethnic struggles among the Serbs, Bosnian Muslims, and Croats of Serbia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, and Croatia leads to two hundred thousand Bosnian Muslims, Croats, and Serbs being killed and over one million being displaced from their homes. Croatia and Slovenia declare independence from the Yugoslav federation followed by Bosnia-Herzegovina on April 6, 1992.

June 25, 1991

1992 The fight against prejudices leads the U.S. Congress to create a new

type of crime category, the hate crime, described as acts committed against a person only because that person is considered to be a member of some social group that is devalued by society in general. April 1992 A Los Angeles jury acquits police officers charged with

assaulting Rodney King, triggering riots in Los Angeles and an outpouring of anger and loss of faith in the U.S. criminal justice system by blacks; the riots result in forty-four deaths, two thousand injured, and eleven hundred arrests. 1993 The UN Security Council establishes an international tribunal,

known as the International Court Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), at The Hague, Netherlands, to prosecute war crimes allegedly committed during the conflict in Bosnia-Herzegovina since 1991. 1994 With the ANC winning all but two provinces, black African

Nelson Mandela becomes the new president of South Africa. 1994 The UN Security Council establishes the International Criminal

Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) to bring to trial those accused of genocide; by 2005 sixty-three individuals accused of being genocide leaders come under the ICTR process. 1994 During a one-hundred-day period the Hutus of Rwanda kill

almost one million Tutsis and politically moderate Hutus. November 8, 1994 California voters pass Proposition 187, the first of

several propositions that directly discriminates against illegal immigrants. July 1995 The Muslim community of Srebrenica in eastern Bosnia-

Herzegovina falls to ethnic Serbs who perpetrate horrible crimes against the people of that town, including the murder of eight thousand men and boys. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

xxiii

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

December 14, 1995 The Dayton Peace Accords are signed, ending ethnic

conflict in Bosnia but not before two hundred thousand Bosnian Muslims, Croats, and Serbs are killed and hundreds of thousands had fled their homes. 1996 The U.S. Congress passes the Defense of Marriage Act that denies

same-sex couples federal benefits including Social Security pensions; survivor benefits for federal employees; Medicaid coverage; next-of-kin status for emergency medical situations; domestic violence protection orders; inheritance of property; and joint adoption and foster care benefits. 1996 The Taliban, an Islamist fundamentalist organization, gains power

in Afghanistan. 1998 The FRY begins an ethnic cleansing of Albanians remaining in

Kosovo, causing over 300,000 Albanians to flee Kosovo for Macedonia. April 10, 1998 Violence in Northern Ireland finally ends as voters in

Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland approve the Good Friday Agreement, or Belfast Agreement, by a large margin that provides for power sharing between Northern Ireland’s Catholic and Protestant populations in an elected Northern Ireland Assembly and directs that the political status of Northern Ireland can only change with the approval of a majority of Northern Ireland voters. March 18, 1999 Albanian, American, and British delegations sign the

Rambouillet Accords calling for NATO to administer Kosovo as an autonomous province of Serbia. March 24, 1999 Following the Rambouillet conference, the FRY inten-

sifies a genocide campaign in Kosovo that lasts until June 20, 1999, with the murder of thousands of Albanians; NATO begins air strikes in Kosovo in late March. 2000 Studies estimate that domestic abuse affects 10 percent of the U.S.

population, roughly thirty-two million Americans. 2000 The Leadership Conference on Civil Rights releases a report

indicating that people of color in America are treated more harshly by police and the U.S. criminal justice system than whites. 2001 The U.S. Supreme Court rules that the Boy Scouts of America

organization is not required to follow state anti-discrimination laws regarding sexual orientation and can exclude gays from membership. xxiv

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

September 11, 2001 Attention of the world is dramatically focused on

the Islamic fundamentalist movement when Islamic extremists slam two fully fueled jetliners into the World Trade Center Towers in New York City and the Pentagon in Washington, D.C., killing some three thousand civilians and starting a strong wave of nationalistic fervor in the United States. 2003 U.S. forces invade Iraq and drive Saddam Hussein from power;

religious hatred between Shiı´tes and Sunni surfaces after decades of oppression under Hussein causing a deep divide in Iraq society. 2003 The Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA) bill that would ban

same-sex marriages is introduced for the first time in U.S. Congress but fails to pass. 2003 The U.S. Supreme Court invalidates all state sodomy laws that

restrict personal activity by ruling that a Texas state law criminalizing homosexual sodomy is unconstitutional; consensual sexual contact becomes a liberty protected by the U.S. Constitution. The Australian government begins providing assistance to Aborigines directly through the agencies that serve the general population and establishes the Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination within the Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs to coordinate the various programs for indigenous peoples.

2004

2004 The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) reports that over 15

percent of hate crimes committed in the United States are based upon the perceived sexual orientation of the victims. November 2004 The question of gay marriage divides many Americans

and becomes a major factor in the 2004 presidential election as socially conservative groups rally against the prospect of various states legalizing same-sex marriages. 2005 A study by the National Council on Disabilities indicates that

while substantial gains against prejudice of the disabled have been made discrimination in housing is still a major problem. 2005 The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, established

in December 1950, reports the existence of over nine million known refugees in the world not including four million Palestinian Arabs permanently displaced with creation of the state of Israel in 1948. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

xxv

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

2005 In Egyptian parliamentary elections, members of the Muslim

Brotherhood win 20 percent of the parliament seats even though the organization is still officially banned. July 28, 2005 The IRA declares an end to its military campaign for

independence for Northern Ireland and removes its store of weapons from service. November 2005 Race riots across France increase fears of continued high

immigration levels as anti-immigration feelings rise. January 2006 The radical Palestinian group Hamas wins the majority of

seats in Palestine’s parliamentary elections, gaining a political victory over the PLO, the controlling political party in Palestine since 1967. February 2006 The South Dakota legislature passes a bill making the

performance of all abortions a felony crime. Summer 2006 Israel launches a major offensive against Lebanon after

Hezbollah militia kidnaps two Israeli soldiers and kills another.

xxvi

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

W o r d s to Kn o w

affirmative action: A program to provide opportunities in education and

employment long denied to minorities due to discriminatory social customs of the past. alien: People who hold citizenship in a foreign country. anti-Semitism: Prejudice against members of the Jewish faith. apartheid: A government-enforced policy of racial separation and

discrimination. assimilate: Conforming to the cultural values of another social group and

ultimately losing one’s original ethnic identity to the new dominant culture. asylum: A place of protection for those suffering from prejudice and

discrimination. autonomy: Freedom of a government to make its own decisions; also

known as self-rule.

barrio: Spanish word referring to a neighborhood largely inhabited by

people of Hispanic ancestry. belief system: A set of values that guides peoples’ lives. bias: A personal judgment, often unreasoned; a prejudiced outlook. xxvii

WORDS TO KNOW

bisexual: A person who participates in both heterosexual and homosexual

relationships. boycott: An organized effort to not buy certain products or use certain

services in order to express disapproval with a person, store, or organization. bracero program: A program to allow Mexican laborers to legally work on

a temporary basis in the United States.

caste system: A rigid series of social classes allowing little opportunity for

people to improve their individual standing in society. civil rights: The protections and privileges that law gives to all citizens in a

society, such as the right to a fair trial, freedom from discrimination, right to privacy, right to peaceful protest, right to vote, and freedom of movement. civil union: A legal partnership between two people that confers many of

the legal benefits of marriage. classism: Prejudice against a social class. colonization: One nation populating and gaining political and economic

control of another, usually lesser developed, country and its resources. Communism: A political and economic system in which a single political

party controls all aspects of citizens’ lives and private ownership of property is banned. concentration camp: A guarded location set aside to hold detainees,

usually prisoners of war, displaced peoples, or political prisoners. conformity: A means of trying to avoid being a victim of prejudice and

seeking acceptance by simply behaving within the traditions or norms of a society; it is also a means of perpetuating prejudices in the moral codes of the society or group. crime against humanity: A criminal offense in international law that

refers to murderous actions on such a large scale that it effects the global population as a whole. cultural traits: Aspects of a society that include language, religion, mar-

riage preferences, food preferences, music, dances, literature, games, and occupations. xxviii

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

WORDS TO KNOW

decolonization: A nation withdrawing political and economic control

from another, usually causing a major drop in income of those peoples previously colonized. deportation: Lawful expulsion or removal of a person from a country. diaspora: The dispersal of a population of people to other countries after

being forced to live outside their traditional homeland. discrimination: Treating some people differently than others or favoring

one social group over another based on prejudice. displaced persons: People forced to leave their homes, either entering

other countries becoming refugees or remaining in their own country at some other safer location.

embargo: A ban on shipping of goods and trade, usually for the purpose

of taking an action against a foreign nation in response to violated treaties or other undesired behavior. enemy aliens: Noncitizens considered potential threats from a country at

war with the host nation the foreigners are visiting. ethnicity: Recognizing a group by certain traits such as a unique culture,

common national origin or ancestral history, or certain physical traits. ethnic cleansing: To eliminate the presence of a particular ethnic group

from a region either through mass murder known as genocide, through displacement of the undesired population to another region or country, or placement in concentration camps. ethnic prejudice: Holding negative opinions, beliefs, or attitudes about

people for the simple reason that they belong to a specific ethnic group. ethnocentrism: A group feeling superior to other groups because of

physical trait or cultural differences including religious beliefs or other long-held traditions. evangelical: Teaching a close personal relationship with God through

rigorous faith in written passages of the Bible. exile: Forced absence from one’s own country due to consequences of

prejudice or some other reasons. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

xxix

WORDS TO KNOW

exploitation: Making use of people without appropriate or just compen-

sation, often based on prejudices such as through colonial rule. extremist: One who takes a position on an issue that is beyond ordinary

or moderate positions.

fascism: A strong central government usually run by a dictator. federalist state: A national government system in which a central govern-

ment shares power with provincial governments such as states. feminism: A belief in the social equality of women. fundamentalist movement: A movement stressing strict adherence to a

basic set of religious beliefs and seeking to place a secular government with a sectarian one.

gay: A term used in referring to homosexuals. gay bashing: Speaking hateful about homosexual people. gender prejudice: Holding opinions about women or men, usually based

on negative stereotypes; also referred to as sexism. genocide: A deliberate destruction of a political or cultural social group. ghetto: Small, run-down sections of cities where Jews were forced to live,

usually behind stone walls or barbed-wire fences policed by armed guards. guerrilla warfare: Irregular fighting by independent militant bands.

hate crime: A violent attack or verbal abuse against a person or group

because of their race, ethnicity, religion, or gender. heterosexual: A person who participates in sexual relations with, or is

sexually attracted to, a person of the opposite gender. Hispanic: A term referring to peoples of Spanish descent who settled

various regions of the Western Hemisphere since the sixteenth xxx

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

WORDS TO KNOW

century including Central America, Mexico, the American Southwest, parts of South America, and the Caribbean. Holocaust: The program of genocide pursued by Nazi Germany during

World War II to rid Europe of Jews leading to the murder of eleven million people overall including six million Jews; literally meaning a burnt sacrifice. homophobia: An irrational fear of homosexuality or homosexual individuals. homosexual: A person who participates in sexual relations with, or is

sexually attracted to, an individual of the same gender. human rights: Freedom from unlawful imprisonment, torture, or

execution.

immigrant: A person who leaves his country of origin to reside perma-

nently in another. imperialism: One nation expanding its political control over other

nations by force. indigenous: The first or earliest inhabitants of a particular region. industrialization: A change in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries to

a new economic system of mass producing large quantities of goods by wage-earning workers operating machines located in factories. infanticide: A tradition in some cultures of selectively killing newborn

infants, such as killing female infants while keeping males. infrastructure: Public roads, power stations, and buildings necessary for a

healthy economy. internment: To confine or imprison a person without a trial. isolationism: Opposition to foreign commitments or involvement in

foreign disputes. Issei: The first generation of immigrants moving from Japan to America.

Jim Crow laws: Legally enforced racial segregation in the American

South during much of the twentieth century sustaining the racial dominance of white Americans from earlier days of slavery. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

xxxi

WORDS TO KNOW

lesbian: A female homosexual person. lynching: A violent crime of extreme racial hatred involving the murder

of a minority person accused of wrongdoing by hanging or some other means often by a mob without giving the accused the benefit of a fair trial in a court of law.

marginalized: To be excluded from full participation in a society or fully

enjoying the benefits of being a member of that society. monarchy: A royalty line of kings and queens. mosque: An Islamic place of worship.

nationalism: A belief that a particular nation and its culture, people, and

values are superior to those of other nations, often leading to the promoting of one nation’s interests over the interests of other nations; can also refer to promoting the creation of a new nation. nation-state: A politically independent country, usually forming the basis

of nationalistic prejudice. naturalization: The process through which a citizen of one country

becomes the citizen of another country, often requiring a certain length of residence. Nisei: Japanese Americans born in the United States to Japanese immi-

grants known as Issei.

picket: An organized line of people in front of a business or organization

holding signs protesting the policies of that organization with the purpose of discouraging others from using their services or buying their goods. poll tax: A fee required to vote in a public election. xxxii

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

WORDS TO KNOW

prejudice: A negative attitude, emotion, or behavior towards others based

on a prejudgment about those individuals with no prior knowledge or experience.

racism: Prejudice against people of a particular physical trait, such as skin

color, based on a belief that the physical trait primarily determines human behavior and individual capabilities; social and cultural meaning is given to skin color or whatever other trait is considered important. refugee: A person seeking safety in a foreign country to escape prejudice

or persecution. repatriation: Sending an individual, usually a prisoner of war, immigrant,

or refugee, back to his country of origin. reservation: A tract of public land set aside for a special purpose, such as

placement of an undesired social group away from mainstream society.

scapegoating: Shifting the blame for one’s own difficulties, failures, and

mistakes onto someone else, such as another ethnic group. sectarian government: A government run by religious leaders of one

religion. secular government: A government run by nonreligious political leaders. segregation: Using laws or social customs to separate certain social

groups, such as whites and blacks or women and men. separatism: The desire to form a new nation from a part of one currently

existing. sexism: A form of prejudice aimed at particular genders. sit-in: The act of entering an establishment, such as a restaurant, and

peacefully refusing to leave until the prejudicial policies of the establishment are changed. socialization: The manner through which people learn, usually in their

early youth, the proper social roles of their community, such as gender roles. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

xxxiii

WORDS TO KNOW

social class: Groups of people sharing similar wealth and social standing. social codes: Patterns of expected behavior in society. social hierarchy: The valuing of some social groups above others. social mobility: The amount of opportunity a person has in a particular

society to change their social standing from one social class to another. sovereignty: A nation’s ability to govern its own internal affairs. stalking: To harass someone by relentlessly pursuing them, often driven

by gender prejudice or some other form of prejudice. stereotyping: An oversimplified prejudgment of others using physical or

behavioral characteristics, usually exaggerated, that supposedly apply to every member of that group. stigma: A person feeling shame or of lesser social value than others due to

some form of prejudice aimed against them. suffrage: The ability of all adult members of a society to vote regardless of

gender or race or religious affiliation.

termination: The process adopted by the U.S. Congress in the 1950s in

determining that certain Native American tribes no longer would enjoy a special tribal government legal status and, as a result, no longer qualify for certain government-funded social services. Third World: Nations lagging in economic development and, as a result,

facing impoverishment and the target of prejudice. totalitarianism: Governments in which dictators hold absolute rule over a

nation. transgender: A person who appears as a member of the opposite gender.

xenophobia: A fear of people who are different.

Zionism: A movement that called for the reuniting of Jewish people and

lobbied for the creation of a Jewish homeland in Palestine. xxxiv

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Research and Activity Ideas

The following research and activity ideas are intended to offer suggestions for complementing social studies and history curricula; to trigger additional ideas for enhancing learning; and to provide cross-disciplinary projects for library and classroom use. 

Oral History Interviews: Make a list of persons in your community, perhaps families of fellow students, of various ethnic and racial backgrounds and ancestry. Also, consider including people of different religious beliefs, the disabled, or families of mixed ethnic or religious backgrounds. Developing questions ahead of time, tape record interviews or take careful notes about the prejudices in society that one person you interview may have experienced. Transcribe the tapes or rewrite the notes into a clearly written story retelling the interview. This process is known as taking or recording an oral history. Share the oral history with the class.



Prejudice in Local Communities: With the help of a librarian at your public library look into the history of your own hometown. How has your community been effected by prejudice and discrimination? Are their individual neighborhoods predominately reflecting different ethnic groups, races, or specific religious denominations? How did attitudes toward minorities in your community change through the twentieth century? Were there any community leaders who helped ease local prejudices? Looking at a map of your community, research what the race, gender, and social class of people for whom buildings, parks, and other public places are named for. If you find a pattern, what does it say about your community? xxxv

RESEARCH AND ACTIVITY IDEAS

xxxvi



Student Support Organizations: Do student organizations in your school exist to help students who face prejudice of some sort, such as racial, ethnic, religious, sexual orientation, or gender? Interview the student leader, sponsoring faculty, and perhaps some members of the organization about how they offer support. What kinds of prejudice are they concerned about? What rights do gay and lesbian students have in school? Are courses that strive to reduce classroom prejudice taught in your school? Do teachers respond to questions by students differently depending on their gender or race?



Employment Policies: Visit a human resources department of prominent companies or government agencies in your city or community. Determine what personnel policies relate to employee diversity. How do the policies affect employees on the basis of race, gender, sexual orientation, and so on?



Write an Essay: Selecting several students who have different race, gender, social class, and other factors interview them to determine how their life experiences differ from yours. Write an essay describing how their positions in society have helped or hindered their ability to attain what they want in life.



Local Anti-Discrimination Organizations: Contact the local branch of a national organization dedicated to fighting prejudice and discrimination. Interview a representative about the kinds of prejudice they combat. What has it been like for people facing that particular prejudice at various times through the twentieth and early twenty-first centuries in your community and state. What progress has the organization seen in achieving greater equality and less prejudice for those people they represent? Have a class discussion how prejudice has changed through time.



Local Racial Prejudice Issue: Contact the local branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and arrange to attend their next meeting. Identify the people who attend. What race and gender is most represented? What are the issues that are of current interest? What issues are the local branch currently working on?



Public Housing: Does your community have public housing? If so, walk or drive around the area and determine what race and gender are predominant there. What is the condition of the housing and parks? Look at the parking lots, lawns, and playgrounds. If Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

RESEARCH AND ACTIVITY IDEAS

possible, ask residents about the quality of service they receive and the condition of their residential units. 

School Survey About Prejudice: Do a survey of students in your school. Ask students if they think prejudice is a problem in the United States in the twenty-first century. If so, rank the forms of prejudice in order of their severity—racism, sexism, and classism. Record the gender and race or ethnicity of the students. After gathering your survey information, analyze the data to determine which prejudice is considered the most threatening and who thinks so.



Personal Experiences in Prejudice: Check your own prejudices in regard to gender and racial biases. Go to the Beyond Prejudice Web site and click on ‘‘Assessing Your Own Prejudices’’ (http:// www.beyondprejudice.com). Do you agree with the results? Also, have a friend make a list of various occupations. Then have the friend read out the occupations one at a time and write down your initial response regarding the type of person you expect to fill that occupation. What does this say about your prejudices?



International Courts: Explore information about the special war crimes tribunals established to prosecute people charged with war crimes. Visit the International Criminal Tribunals and Special Courts Web site (http://www.globalpolicy.org/intljustice/tri bindx.htm). Select one of the special courts and report on its successes in bringing alleged criminals to trial and conviction. Also explore the Web site of the International Criminal Court (ICC) (http://www.icc-cpi.int/home.html&l=en). Click on ‘‘Situations and Cases’’ to identify what issues have been related to prejudice. What was the prejudice?



Genocide in the World: Make a chart with accompanying map noting the various occurrences of genocide that have occurred in the world since the beginning of the twentieth century. Note the number of people believed killed and the number of people displaced as refugees to escape death and oppression. Are there any patterns of occurrence, such as an increase or decrease through time? What does this say about efforts to eliminate prejudice in the world? What can be done to stop further genocides in the world?



Research a Country: Using the Human Rights Watch Web site (http://hrw.org/wr2k5/) that contains their ‘‘2005 World Report’’

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

xxxvii

RESEARCH AND ACTIVITY IDEAS

and the Amnesty International Web site that contains the ‘‘Countries and Regions’’ webpage (http://www.amnestyusa.org/ countries/index.do), have each member of the class select a different country or region. Identify the key human rights issues for the selected country. Focus on prejudices and their consequences. You can also use the Central Intelligence Agency’s World Fact Book Web site (https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/index.html) to gain more information about the country and any other issues identified by the CIA.

xxxviii



First-Hand Accounts: Many oral histories of people who experienced Jim Crow laws in the American South, apartheid racial segregation policies in South Africa, Japanese American internment in the American West, the Holocaust in Europe, ethnic conflict in former Yugoslavia, and Rwanda genocide in Africa have been published in the 1990s and early twenty-first century, such as Remembering Manzanar: Life in a Japanese Relocation Camp (2002) by Michael L. Cooper. Pick out two of the oral histories and identify the various feelings ranging from hope to despair as people faced the extreme consequences of prejudice. Consider how you would feel if in their place. What would you consider doing to ease the oppression?



The Holocaust: Over a half century after the end of World War II the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum (http:// www.ushmm.org) was completed. Located on the Washington, D.C., mall, the memorial serves as a lasting reminder of the most horrible results of prejudice. Research the issues surrounding the memorial’s development. Visit the ‘‘Holocaust Encyclopedia’’ on its Web site (http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/) to explore other aspects of the Holocaust. Also visit the Anti-Defamation League Web site (http://www.adl.org/backgrounders/Anti_Semitism_us.asp) to find out more about the prejudice against Jews in the world.



United Nations Declarations: Go to the United Nations Web site and lookup the ‘‘Declaration of Human Rights’’ (http://www. un.org/Overview/rights.html). List the rights that are recognized by the international organization. Do you think they have been effective in combating prejudice?



Human Rights Watch Groups: Explore the Web sites of Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. What situations are they currently monitoring? Select a study and report to the class what current issues are involved. What prejudices are driving the issues? Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

RESEARCH AND ACTIVITY IDEAS



Middle East Class Debate: Have the class divide into two groups to discuss the Arab-Israeli conflict. One side present the arguments of the displaced Palestinian Arabs and the other side defend the existence of the state of Israel. What solutions can the class come up with to reach a peaceful co-existence of both?



Gender Discrimination: Show the class a videotape or CD of The Fairer Sex (Primetime Live, Oct. 7, 1993), a film that explores the world of gender discrimination in various facets of life. After watching the film, have the class consider whether the discrimination shown is common in their community. If not, why would that be? How is gender discrimination similar to other forms of discrimination, such as racial discrimination? Do the students feel they experience less gender discrimination than shown in the film? Why do they think that is?



Gender and the Media: What gender roles do you see portrayed in popular television programs? How much variation in gender roles do you see? Are there any consistent role models you can identify? How are people portrayed who do not conform to standard gender roles in television programs?



Sexual Orientation Prejudice: Because of the prejudice they face, gays and lesbians often hide their true sexual identity individually and as a group. To gain a better understanding of this segment of society, obtain a list of gay and lesbian groups in your state from the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Web site (http://thetask force.org/). Make a list of the issues currently of concern to gays, lesbians, and transgender groups at http://thetaskforce.org/issues.



Gays and the Courts: Visit the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) Web site to see how they fight sexual orientation prejudice in the criminal justice system (http://www.aclu.org/lgbt/crimjustice/ index.html). To explore further the legal issues facing gays, lesbians, and transgenders, visit the Web site of the Lamda Legal Defense and Education Fund (http://www.lamdalegal.org). To learn more about violence against gays and lesbians, see the New York City Gay and Lesbian Anti-Violence Project Web site (http://www.avp.org).



Government Policies Toward Gays and Lesbians: In what ways do laws discriminate against gays and lesbians? How are federal employees who are gays or lesbians treated differently than others regarding employment benefits? How do the different legal

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

xxxix

RESEARCH AND ACTIVITY IDEAS

standards applied to gays and lesbians correspond to the equal protection under the law guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution?

xl



The Military and Gays: What are the military policies toward gays and lesbians? What kind of prejudice from others do gays and lesbians experience in the military?



Prejudice in Democracies: How have prejudices affected representative, democratic governments, such as in the United States? Are the working and lower classes underrepresented among those who vote, donate monies to candidates for public office, and hold office? Can a system be developed that makes access to political power less dependent on wealth? What legislative changes might occur if more women or minorities become members of Congress? How does the percentage of people in different ethnic and gender categories in the last U.S. census compare to percentage of women and minorities in elected offices?



Enemy Aliens: At the beginning of the U.S. involvement in World War II 112,000 Japanese Americans were rounded up by U.S. authorities along the West Coast and placed in remote detention camps. Many were kept there for three years. Sixty years later following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on New York City and Washington, D.C., Arab Americans became highly suspected by the U.S. government and the general public. What similarities and differences to you see between the two periods? How has prejudice played a role in the treatment of people suspected of being enemy aliens? Divide the class into two groups. First discuss the earlier time period from the perspectives of Japanese Americans and general public. Then discuss the later time period from the perspective of Arab Americans and the general public.



Race Riots: Race riots have erupted in various countries throughout the twentieth and early twenty-first centuries, including in France, the United States, South Africa, and Britain. Select a country and write down what factors contributed to its riots. Consider relations between minorities and police departments, treatment of minorities in the criminal justice system, availability of jobs and a good education, and other social factors. See if there was a specific incident that sparked the riots. Compare in class the information gathered on various countries.



Racial Profiling: Examine the issues surrounding racial profiling. Visit the American Civil Liberties Union Web site at http://www. aclu.org/profiling. Contact the local police department and see if Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

RESEARCH AND ACTIVITY IDEAS

you can ride along with a police officer on his or her shift. Discuss how the officer keeps alert toward possible crimes. What characteristics of people does the police officer pay attention to? Observe who is stopped and how they are treated. 

Discussing Racism in Groups: Examine among class members recent current events that involve racism. How do reactions vary among class members of different racial or ethnic backgrounds? Is the discussion relaxed, or more tense than other kinds of discussions?



Crime Statistics: Annual publications reporting crime statistics in the United States can be found either online or in the reference section of local libraries. They include the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Uniform Crime Reporting Program (UCR) yearly report (http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm) or the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, an agency in the U.S. Department of Justice (http://www.ojp.us doj.gov/bjs/cvict.htm). Information is provided about both offenders and victims. Look up and report to the class on various statistics reported in the publications relating to different racial groups and each gender. What trends do you detect in homicide victims and offenders by race and gender? What patterns are evident in those who are executed or sentenced to death? How do the statistics reflecting race compare to the overall percentage of minorities in the general population?



Prejudice in Advertising: Advertisements placed in popular magazines through the twentieth century provide a unique look at everyday American life. Not only did companies promote sales of their products in these advertisements, but they eagerly demonstrated expected gender and social role models of the types of people expected to use their products. Magazines that had many full-page advertisements included Life, Ladies Home Journal, Woman’s Home Companion, Good Housekeeping, House & Garden, The Saturday Evening Post, McCall’s, and Business Week. At a public or college library request a few issues printed from the early and mid-twentieth century and look at the many advertisements. See if you can detect a gradual change in the ads that reflect changes in society and broader acceptance of people with different backgrounds.



Native American Marginalization: Visit a nearby American Indian reservation or community. If a cultural center exists, visit

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

xli

RESEARCH AND ACTIVITY IDEAS

it and explore the history of that particular tribe and of Native Americans in general. What prejudices had they experienced in life? How did government policies influence Indian marginalization? If there is not a reservation nearby, research if there ever had been one in your area and if so, what happened to it.

xlii



Hate Crime: Divide the class into five groups and assign each group to learn about one type of hate crime: (1) racial, (2) gender, (3) religious, (4) sexual orientation, or (5) religion. Find actual high profile examples of hate crime incidents. Each group explain their type of hate crime so the rest of the class can readily understand what is involved.



School Violence: Research, then have a class discussion about what possible prejudices might push a young person to acts of violence ranging from vandalism to shooting his teachers and classmates. What is your school doing to combat acts of prejudice and discrimination, such as bullying?



Hate Web sites: Cyberspace is full of what are referred to as hate Web sites promoting various forms of prejudice, such as neo-Nazis posting anti-minority and anti-Semitic prejudices. Gather information from the Anti-Defamation League Web site in regard to hate crimes (http://www.adl.org/hate-patrol/main.asp). What kind of effect do these Web sites pose for society? What leads people to be attracted to such Web sites? What should be done about them while still protecting people’s freedom of speech?



Social Class Prejudice: Are social classes in the United States organized groups or simply collections of individuals who happen to have similar incomes and lifestyles? How is the nature of jobs and social classes changing with the loss of higher paying jobs from the United States to other nations in the global economy? Will it continue to change over the next decade or two? How?



Employment Trends: Using America’s Career InfoNet Web site (http://www.acinet.org/acinet), identify what occupations are growing fastest in your state? Which ones are declining? What do these patterns suggest about opportunities for minorities or women to improve their social status? Visit the AFL-CIO union site (http:// www.aflcio.org/home.htm) to see what labor issues are most important to workers at present.

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Prejudice in the Modern World Almanac

VOLUME 1

1

Foundations of Modern Prejudice

rejudice is a negative attitude, emotion, or behavior toward individuals based on a prejudgment about those individuals with no prior knowledge or experience. Prejudice is a learned value or belief that causes a person to be biased for or against members of particular groups. The groups may be distinguished according to ethnicity (a group recognized by certain traits such as a unique culture, common national origin or ancestral history, or certain physical traits), race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, disabilities, or some other identifying characteristic. Prejudices are commonly based on stereotyping. Stereotyping is assigning an individual or group with certain generalized characteristics, usually exaggerated, that supposedly apply to every other member of that group. Once stereotypes are established, these generalizations can lead to not only prejudice, but discrimination and even violent, hostile behavior. Often these stereotyped groups are made scapegoats, blamed for problems suffered by the dominant group even though those made scapegoats in no way caused the problem. Although problematic and ineffective, this is a common way of selecting simple solutions to often complex problems.

P

Prejudice is a basic part of the human state of mind, maybe even a necessary part to make life’s endlessly diverse experiences more understandable. Humans have the complex capacity to form opinions and project future consequences of their own or other people’s actions. The expectations of these future conditions or consequences are normally based on past experiences and information provided by others. Processing many avenues of information in a person’s mind requires some degree of simplification as well as generalizations as the person attempts to make order of the world around them. Prejudices play a key role in this simplifying and generalizing process. Because of this basic role in a person’s thought processes, prejudice has been a major influence on human relationships throughout the 1

Foundations of Modern Prejudice

WORDS TO KNOW colonization: Large-scale immigration to a new land, bringing governmental controls from the distant nation of origin. ethnicity: Recognizing a group by certain traits such as a unique culture, common national origin or ancestral history, or certain physical traits. nationalism: A belief that a particular nation is superior to other nations. prejudice: A negative attitude, emotion, or behavior toward individuals based on a prejudgment

about those individuals with no prior knowledge or experience. race: A socially defined group based on physical appearances, primarily skin color but may also include hair texture and eye shape. stereotyping: An oversimplified prejudgment of others using physical or behavioral characteristics, usually exaggerated, that supposedly apply to every member of that group.

history of humankind. Not only has prejudice existed throughout the history of civilization, it has dominated certain historic periods and historical events, such as the invasion of Christian armies into the Muslim-held Holy Lands beginning at the end of the eleventh century, the sixteenth-century religious upheaval of the Reformation in Europe, and the Holocaust in World War II (1939–45) in the mid-twentieth century. Despite this influence of prejudice throughout history, the actual concept of what prejudice is did not develop until the twentieth century, when the study of prejudices gained recognition. The consequences of prejudice are found throughout society. Some are more subtle (not readily apparent) than others. Perhaps the person acting in some prejudicial way is not aware at all of her prejudices and thus does not aggressively act out on them. Prejudice can also take the form of open hostility, such as abusive or hate language (verbal attack against a person or group because of their race, ethnicity, religion, or gender intended to cause anger), or even violence. The most horrible consequence is mass murder. Sometimes others force prejudicial behavior. For example, there always exists a great deal of pressure on individuals within groups to conform to the behaviors and beliefs of that group, including their prejudices. Often this conformity must be demonstrated for confirmation with their peers through discriminatory acts against persons of other groups, such as verbally abusing a minority person in front of the abuser’s friends. People do not normally go through this mental process alone of using prejudices to simplify their experiences and understand the world around 2

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Foundations of Modern Prejudice

them. They do this with others in some defined social group, such as a nation, a region, a religious denomination, or an ethnic group. Social groups have formed throughout human history as people develop bonds with others based on shared traits or experiences; this includes shared prejudices. Primary types of groups in the early twenty-first century are ethnic groups, religious groups, and races.

Ethnic prejudice People in ethnic groups share certain common origins and interests with others in the group. As a group, they continue to develop shared experiences. For many ethnic groups throughout history, this experience has been one of deprivation (forced to live without necessities), such as immigrants entering a new nation or an indigenous people whose homeland is being forcibly settled, or colonized, by foreigners from a distant country. Others are forcibly taken to another country or continent to become slaves, such as black Africans who were shipped to North America in the eighteenth century. These types of ethnic groups become marginal (not fully accepted) in mainstream society. They develop their own customs and beliefs and view others with disdain. A similar process of marginalization occurs with other groups that are victimized by prejudicial actions. For example, the disabled, or women, or a person of a particular religious sect may be marginalized from contributing to society because members of the dominant social group value them less. Ethnic groups are often formed in reaction to some outside pressure posed by another group, such as indigenous peoples faced with domination by a foreign nation, known as colonialism. Ethnic groups become self-perpetuating (continuing the same practice or custom through time) as beliefs and customs are passed from generation to generation. They compete with other ethnic groups over control of lands and resources. Prejudice in the form of ethnocentrism has led to millions of deaths and much brutality worldwide. Ethnocentrism is when members of a group believe their values and living standards are superior and behaviors of other groups are less valued and offensive or strange.

Racial prejudice Some groups formed on physical distinctions are called races. Prejudice based on the perceived race of a person is known as racism. Because of a person’s skin color, hair type, head shape, or some other distinguishing trait, certain behavioral characteristics are assigned to that group, such as Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

3

Foundations of Modern Prejudice

presumed lower intelligence or laziness. The concept of race is a culturally developed notion as the existence of races cannot be defended in science only by biological factors. People considered to be of different races may share common life styles, such as being members of the same ethnic group. Racial prejudices came to the forefront with European exploration of the world during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Stories of people and traditions very different from those in Europe came back to capture the imaginations of people. Given the military superiority of the sailing vessels and armed crews, a feeling of superiority built quickly over the indigenous peoples discovered. The European settlement of colonies around the world through the nineteenth century in Africa and Asia brought race relations to the forefront. Indigenous peoples, distinguished frequently by their skin color and other physical traits, were subjected to hard labor or extermination, or both, as racism defined the boundary between diverse cultures. Such relations contributed to the slave trade of the eighteenth century and continuation of slavery in the United States until the last half of the nineteenth century. Racism was the basis for immigration controversies through the twentieth century into the twenty-first.

Religious prejudices Some of the oldest prejudices in the world are religious prejudices dating back thousands of years. For much of human history, religious affiliation has been a major means of distinguishing human groups. As a result, religious prejudice between groups promoted discrimination and open conflicts. Often religious groups also corresponded to certain ethnicities, such as European Christians and Arabian Muslims. Some of these religious biases continued into the twenty-first century, such as prejudices against Muslims in the United States and France in reaction to the activities of Islamic terrorists. As religious crusades and other empire expansions occurred in early historic times, diverse populations came into contact with each other, including various European and Asian groups. Religious differences and prejudices were associated with physical differences among the diverse groups, such as Asian peoples associated with Buddhism. Religious prejudices have been prominent among different branches of a single religious sect as well. For example, Sunni and Shiı´te Muslim conflicts date back to the death of the Prophet Muhammad (571–632) in 4

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Foundations of Modern Prejudice

the seventh century. The two major Muslim groups each claimed allegiance to a separate successor to Muhammad. The Sunni chose Abu Bakr (c. 573–634), Muhammad’s closest companion. The Shiites chose Ali (c. 598–661), Muhammad’s son-in-law. Each assumed different names for their groups and prejudices grew. The differences are very fundamental (basic). For example, Shiites claimed the Sunni’s hadiths (wise sayings of Muhammad) were biased against Shiites. Another example of long-standing religious prejudice involved Islam and Hinduism. The religion of Hinduism can be traced back at least 3,500 years in India. The practices and traditions varied between regions and villages. Unlike Muslims who only worship one God, Hindus worship many gods thus forming the basis for prejudice and conflict. Conflict arose in northern India by the eleventh century and continued until the nineteenth century as Islamic leaders gained control of much of northern India. Hindu temples were destroyed and Hindus were forced to pay higher taxes by Muslim leaders. Conversion to Islam from Hinduism by many peoples occurred in the regions of the modern countries of Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Kashmir to escape oppression. Hindus suffered prejudice and discrimination from other directions as well. In southern India, Portuguese colonists settled the west coast of India at Goa beginning in 1498. At that time, numerous independent kingdoms governed India. The Portuguese brought with them Roman Catholic missionaries committed to converting Hindus to Catholicism. The situation of religious subjugation of Hindus changed through time. After more than a century of Portuguese rule, the British arrived in India in 1624 and by the nineteenth century had gained control over much of India through the British East India Company. The company, established to conduct trade with India and Eastern Asia, did not support missionaries for fear of antagonizing Indians and interfering with their business. However, by the early nineteenth century the fervor of Christian conversion back home in Britain caused the company policy to change. Protestant (a Christian religious denomination born in the sixteenth century in protest of Catholicism) missionaries came into the region eager to convert Hindus. Other major religions developed in Asia through time, causing more friction and prejudice. Tibet was a dominant power in central Asia from the seventh to ninth centuries. Buddhism, founded by Siddhartha Guatama (563–483 BCE ), also known as the Buddha, became the principal religion of Tibetans. Buddhism grew to be the world’s fourth largest Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

5

Foundations of Modern Prejudice

The Crusades The Crusades were a series of military campaigns lasting from the eleventh to the thirteenth century. They were driven by religious prejudice, particularly in the early campaigns. The Crusades reflected early conflicts between Christians and Muslims that still influence world relations in the twenty-first century. Arab Muslims conquered the area of Palestine on the eastern shores of the Mediterranean Sea including taking Jerusalem from Christians in the seventh century. They also gained control of the former Christian lands of Egypt, Syria, and Lebanon. For centuries and despite Arab Muslim control, Christians were able to regularly visit holy sites in Jerusalem until 1009 when the caliph (Islamic spiritual leader) of Egypt destroyed the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem, a church built on the location where Jesus Christ had been crucified and initially buried. After that time, Christians were less welcomed and faced persecution on their pilgrimages, or journeys to sacred places. Conflict between Christians and Muslims had already broken out in Spain in what was known as the Reconquista (718–1492). There Christian forces of northern Spain were trying to recapture southern Spain, known as the Iberian Peninsula, from Muslims who had gained control in 711. The Reconquista lasted for centuries until the Christians finally won permanent control in 1492. In the late eleventh century, Arab Muslims were threatening the Byzantine Empire in the area of modern Turkey. The Byzantine leader sent for help from a fellow Christian leader, the Roman Catholic pope who held much power in Europe. In response, Pope Urban II (1042–1099) gathered a large force from many areas of Western Europe. However, they were instructed not only to defend the Byzantines, but to recapture Jerusalem as well. The First Crusade in 1095 was the first effort by Christians to recapture lost lands from their religious enemy, the Muslims. While the united Christian army from Europe marched toward Jerusalem, driven by their religious prejudices, they also massacred Jews and attacked Orthodox Christians in the Byzantine Empire. In

6

1099, they captured Jerusalem and massacred the local Muslim population. The Crusaders established the Kingdom of Jerusalem and other states that lasted for almost a century. Other crusades were organized in the following centuries, but the religious fervor steadily declined. The Second Crusade came in the 1140s when a combined French and German army marched again to the region between the Black Sea and the Mediterranean Sea to gain back more lands from Muslims. However, they attacked the well-guarded Damascus in Syria with little success. In 1187, Jerusalem once again fell under Muslim control, triggering Pope Gregory VIII (1100–1187) to call for the Third Crusade. A large alliance including English forces marched once again around the coast of the Mediterranean Sea recapturing various places from Muslims. However, they failed to recapture Jerusalem when they ran short of supplies. Pope Innocent III (c. 1160–1216) launched the Fourth Crusade in 1202 to invade the Holy Land. However, this time the army was diverted by its leaders who became more interested in capturing the riches of Constantinople in Turkey. They captured the Byzantine center in 1204 but following the difficult battles for Constantinople were unable to push on to the Holy Lands. These and later crusades left a major mark on world history and religious prejudice. Some benefits came from the Crusades. They opened up much commerce between Europe and the Middle East and led to the inclusion of advanced Islamic thought in the sciences and medicine in European circles. Though the crusaders were never permanently successful in controlling the Holy Lands, Muslim peoples forever regarded the Crusades as brutal attacks by Christian armies. The Crusades were also a major chapter in the history of anti-Semitism (prejudice against Jews) even though Jews were never the principal target. In the West the term crusade came to mean to fight for a just cause or a righteous campaign. To Muslims in the East, the term represented religious persecution and brutality.

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Foundations of Modern Prejudice

Woman praying in front of statue of the Buddha. # J OHN DAK ER S; E YE U BI QUI TO US/ CO RB IS.

religion by the first of the twenty-first century. Buddhism teaches that everything is constantly subject to change and suffering. The only way to escape suffering is to stop craving things of the world and live a virtuous life by doing no harm to living things and by never stealing, lying, bragging, and using drugs or alcohol. Religious prejudice fueled conflict over lands along the eastern shore of the Mediterranean Sea for centuries. The area has variously been known as Palestine, Israel, or Judea, depending on what particular group held control. Hebrew tribes known as the Israelites had long controlled the region. However, beginning 2,500 years ago the region was overrun by a series of other peoples from various regions including the Romans. By the seventh century, Arab Muslims gained control of many areas in the region. For a time, the region fell under control of the Turkish Ottoman Empire at the end of the thirteenth century. Their primary religion was Eastern Orthodox, a Christian religion, and Arab Muslims inhabited the region thereafter into the twentieth century. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

7

Foundations of Modern Prejudice

A long history of prejudice

Mongol conqueror Genghis Khan. # BE TTM AN N/C OR BIS .

8

Ethnic, religious, and racial prejudices have led to genocide throughout history and continue in the twenty-first century. Genocide is the deliberate destruction of a political or cultural human group. The Bible contains accounts of possible genocides: the Egyptians killing Israelites in mass numbers and the Israelites waging genocide on the Middle Eastern population of Canaanites on the eastern shores of the Mediterranean Sea. In addition, major conquests by Middle Eastern peoples led to mass murders by the empires of Babylon and Assyria. Greek historian Herodotus (484–425 BCE ) made reference to mass killings in the seventh century BCE , in a broad area extending from the Caspian Sea westward to Romania and Turkey. The Roman Empire carried out several campaigns that likely involved genocide. Julius Caesar (100–44 BCE ) led a military campaign in present-day Switzerland, killing about 60 percent of the Swiss tribe. His campaign against the Gauls of modern-day France resulted in over one million killed, or about one-fourth of the population. Approximately eight hundred cities were destroyed. The Romans similarly captured the cities of Carthage in North Africa and Jerusalem in the Middle East, killing and enslaving their populations. Genghis Khan (c. 1162–1227) built a powerful army from what was originally numerous nomadic tribes in Mongolia. Genghis Khan and later his sons greatly expanded Mongolian rule across much of Asia and Europe in the thirteenth century. They carried out genocides, systematically killing millions of civilians throughout much of Europe and Asia, from China in the East to Hungary in the West. This included the capture of Baghdad in 1258, one of the world’s largest cities at the time. Approximately one million of Baghdad’s 1.5 million residents were killed in an ultimately unsuccessful effort to conquer all Islamic peoples. Genghis Khan’s conquests were built on his legendary ruthlessness across an extensive region. If a group resisted his advance, he exterminated them. This occurred to the Ismaili Muslims of the Middle East. However, if a people did not militarily resist his conquest, he allowed them to continue existing cultural Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Foundations of Modern Prejudice

practices. As a result, his Mongol Empire became remarkably ethnically and culturally diverse, keeping ethnic and religious prejudices in check. Genghis Khan always kept his troop units ethnically mixed to create a sense of unity and avoid conflict based on prejudices. The most extreme act of genocide in the nineteenth century was the Russian onslaught against the Circassian peoples living in Southwest Russia, in the Caucasus Mountains that finally ended in the 1860s after several decades of conflict. Some 1.5 million were killed and over a million were exiled to the Middle East. This event represented the first extensive modern-day genocide. The surviving Circassian peoples were permanently scattered in other regions.

Early prejudices beyond Europe and Asia The Western Hemisphere witnessed large population losses among its indigenous (native) peoples following the arrival of Christopher Columbus (1451–1506) in San Salvador in 1492. The mass killing lasted centuries as native peoples were steadily displaced from traditional homelands. The deaths of the indigenous populations occurred through military conquest, introduction of foreign diseases (for which native populations had no natural immunities) such as smallpox, and general hardships, such as loss of native foods. Some indigenous groups disappeared altogether. The entire indigenous population of the Caribbean was exterminated by European colonizers. The scale of the population losses was staggering as the militarily superior Europeans dominated what they considered the ethnically inferior indigenous populations. The Europeans sought control of the lands and resources in hopes of finding gold and other riches. Ethnic prejudice led to mass murder. For example, prior to the arrival of the Spaniards in the early sixteenth century, about twenty-five million people lived in Central Mexico. Only one million natives survived into the seventeenth century. Throughout Mexico, the population declined from thirty million to only three million in just the first four decades of Spanish rule. Throughout the nineteenth century and into the twentieth century, those Native Americans in North America who survived the spread of unfamiliar disease and violent conflict with prejudiced settlers faced the efforts of the U.S. government and missionaries to assimilate (absorb) them into the mainstream white society. Private landownership and a farming lifestyle, neither familiar to the traditional Native American way Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

9

Foundations of Modern Prejudice

of life, were enforced by the dominant white culture, often with little success. From the white society viewpoint, men were meant to be farmers and plow the land, while the prevalent traditional perspective of Native Americans relied on men hunting and gathering native foods. The native population declined to less than 300,000 by 1900, down dramatically from the estimated ten million in the fifteenth century before the arrival of European colonists in the Western Hemisphere. European settlements in other continents led to similar consequences. Almost the entire Aborigine population (group of people first known to have lived in a region) in the Tasmania region of Australia was exterminated in the early nineteenth century. The 1870s saw the beginning of a great rush by European countries to divide up Africa under their control. For example, German colonies were established in Southwest Africa, France conquered Algeria, Italy colonized Somaliland in Eastern Africa and later Ethiopia, and Britain gained control of Egypt and South Africa. In the African Congo region, populations of native Africans declined from thirty million in the mid-nineteenth century to less than nine million by the end of the century while under Belgian rule. They were murdered, starved, killed by disease, and worked to death. These cases of colonialism (extending a nation’s control beyond its existing borders) were accompanied with strong prejudices ranging from racial and ethnic prejudice to religious prejudice. Missionaries brought the Christian religion to indigenous peoples as a way to introduce major social change not just in religion, but in almost all aspects of indigenous society including adoption of European gender roles. Although the intentions may have been good in most cases, these missionaries actually prompted the destruction of numerous societies and cultures.

Colonialism and the spread of racism When European explorers sailed the high seas during the Age of Exploration that lasted from the early fifteenth century to the early seventeenth century, racial prejudices were transported worldwide. The explorers came into contact with, or, as described by later Western society textbooks, ‘‘discovered,’’ peoples of many physical types. With a growing interest in the sciences including human biology, Europeans began to categorize these peoples into groups called races. Unlike ethnic distinctions based to a large extent on cultural and social differences, these prejudices were based more over visible biological traits, such as skin color, size and form of head, hair type, nose shape, and body size. 10

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Foundations of Modern Prejudice

It was apparent early on that the different ways of grouping peoples could be numerous depending on who was making the categories. Published categories ranged from three to more than thirty. Despite the lack of agreement on how races were defined or what races actually existed, racial prejudice became a major factor in world history as European countries colonized various regions of the world that had long been the homelands to diverse indigenous peoples. Skin color proved to be the major distinguishing factor reflected in such simplistic racial labels as white, red, black, and yellow. The notion of race became a major obsession of Western Europeans through the eighteenth century. Through colonialism in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, racism spread across the globe along with other prejudices such as those based on religion and gender biases. Whereas religious prejudice was largely based on ideas, racial prejudices were based largely on economics. The conquistadors of Spain slaughtered millions of indigenous peoples in the New World (Western Hemisphere) in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries over the search for gold and other natural riches. As European colonies became established in the New World based on agricultural economies, the subordinated indigenous peoples provided cheap field labor; millions were thrust into slavery. They were viewed strictly as property and not as humans. Some indigenous groups, such as black Africans, were rounded up and shipped long distances to be used as slaves, servants, and housemaids. In the seventeenth century, black Africans became the largest ethnic group in the Caribbean. As late as the nineteenth century, local native populations in Argentina were being exterminated between 1829 and 1852 as part of the ongoing European conquest. The prejudice toward indigenous peoples of color was reflected in the paternalistic (as parents to children) treatment of European employers and landowners toward them. Through this subjugation, the native populations became dependent on the dominant cultural groups for life’s necessities, such as housing, food, and clothing. This dependence further fueled prejudices and feelings of inferiority. By the beginning of the twentieth century, much of the world was dominated by Western European culture, and racial prejudice spanned the globe. The established dominance only reinforced racial and religious prejudices. By the end of the nineteenth century, many Westerners were convinced that various indigenous populations represented different stages of human evolution, still trapped in a lesser stage of cultural development. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

11

Foundations of Modern Prejudice

Some considered black Africans as a subhuman form. The British Empire was built on the notion that colonizers were bringing civilization to the foreign lands, like a gift, given in exchange for the use of their lands to extract valuable resources. This same idea fueled America’s expansion into other territories throughout the twentieth century.

Social class prejudice Social class (groups of people sharing similar wealth and social standing) has also been a primary means of dividing society into groups. Social class prejudice is known as classism. These groups are usually distinguished at different levels of social status (the social standing in a society determined primarily through the prestige of occupations, education, or professions). Economic systems such as capitalism are based on the exploitation (making use of people without appropriate compensation) of segments of society based on social classes. Capitalism is an economic system in which production of goods and services is privately owned, financed through private investments, and the demand for those goods and services is established through an open market system largely free of government involvement. The upper class owns the factories and businesses while the working-class members earn wages working for the company owners, performing such tasks as working on assembly lines. Prejudices are held by members of each group against the other group. The owners consider the wage earners as less cultured, meaning less worldly and educated. The wage earners consider owners as inept at working with their hands and actually producing something of quality. Around the time of the Industrial Revolution (1878–1900), when America’s economy switched from one rooted in agriculture to one based on industry, a middle class emerged composed of managers who supervised the workers. Social classes can form independently of ethnic distinctions. For example, social class distinctions and prejudices can occur within an ethnic group, or ethnic groups may be largely associated with certain social classes. By the early twenty-first century, ethnic distinctions became more prominent than social class as a major way of dividing of society.

Other forms of prejudice In addition to major long-term ethnic, racial, and religious prejudices, other forms of prejudicial influences have played key roles over time. 12

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Foundations of Modern Prejudice

Romanian woman in traditional domestic role. # C AR OLI NE P EN N/C OR BIS .

The prejudice of nationalism Another major means of distinguishing

large groups of people began to appear in the mid-seventeenth century in Europe with the rise of nation-states (countries having full political independence or sovereignty). They quickly became the means of drawing the allegiance of large populations. Economies, educational systems, publications, and of course governments became centered on national loyalties. Boundary disputes between nations became a major source of conflict as prejudices against peoples of other nationalities grew. Nationalism led to separatism when groups of people, usually drawn together by ethnic ties, wanted to form their own nations separate from their current national affiliations. By the beginning of the twentieth century, the division of much of the world into nation-states had occurred. Nationalism would be major driving force in large-scale conflict through the twentieth century. Gender prejudice Gender prejudice had long been woven into the fabric

of most societies. It was driven by a universal belief that women were the Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

13

Foundations of Modern Prejudice

weaker of the sexes emotionally as well as physically and must be protected from the world outside the home. Normally, males were expected to be the provider and dominated in family matters, particularly those relating to the outside world in commerce and politics. Females were expected to assume domestic chores, cook and bake, spin yarn, sew, and make soap and candles and other needed household goods. At the same time, it was their responsibility to bear children and raise them according to the values and morals of the society in which they lived. In a farming economy, males cleared land, plowed, planted and harvested fields, hunted, chopped wood, built structures, and constructed fences. Wives were sheltered from most relations outside the family and not allowed to take part in business or politics. Similarly, sons in families enjoyed more freedoms than daughters in just about every known society. Emerging industrialization brought major changes to gender roles and prejudices. Industrialization was a major economic change in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries in which large quantities of goods became produced by wage-earning workers operating machines located in factories. Home became the woman’s world even more than before, as men were away much of the time at wage-earning jobs. Throughout history, men in farming societies were in charge of children, particularly boys, after they grew into adolescence and worked with their fathers in the fields. Now women guided the children through adolescence and into adulthood. By the 1860s, the U.S. courts began recognizing mothers as the primary custodial (having legal responsibility) parent of minor children, a status previously reserved for men. When families no longer needed children to help in the fields, the birth rates of white women fell by half from seven in 1800 to less than four in 1900. The separate spheres of sexes were demonstrated in other aspects of life, such as religious practice. Orthodox Jews directed women to worship in separate sections of synagogues. Some masses in Roman Catholic churches were for men only. In addition, some activities were considered as appropriate for men only, such as debating current events at public gathering places like taverns. Women in racial or ethnic minorities faced the complexities of both gender and racial prejudices. Following the end of slavery in the nineteenth century, black men enjoyed even fewer job opportunities than black women since black women enjoyed an extra advantage over men by being able to do laundry for others at home and provide childcare for others, a traditional female gender role. Men were limited to work as domestic servants and unskilled laborers. They were frequently 14

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Foundations of Modern Prejudice

unemployed. Though employed, the women routinely faced sexual harassment and racial prejudice. Nonetheless, black women often had greater influences over their families than white women over theirs. These gender roles and prejudices continued into the twenty-first century despite gains against gender prejudice, such as the right to vote Other longstanding prejudices Prejudices and discrimination against

those with sexual orientations not conforming to heterosexual and transgender lifestyles have a long history. Laws have banned homosexual relationships at least dating back to Biblical times over two thousand years ago. Sometimes these laws imposed death penalties for violators. Activists proposing acceptance of homosexuality in society first appeared in the late eighteenth century in Western society. The first nation to repeal laws banning homosexuality was France in 1791 as part of the new personal freedoms brought by the French Revolution. Reform movements to combat sexual orientation prejudice grew in Europe through the nineteenth century. An example of the attitudes still prevalent, famous playwright Oscar Wilde (1854–1900) was arrested on charges of indecency in April 1895 for his homosexual relations with other men. He was convicted and sentenced to two years of hard labor. He died not long after his release, suffering from health problems that came from his imprisonment. Transgendered individuals are those who have sexual orientation identities not conforming to normal gender roles in societies. Transgendered conditions come in a wide range of forms, such as persons physically being of one sex, but psychologically identifying with the other sex. Some transgendered individuals may not identify with either gender and are referred to as androgynous. Transgender people have faced considerable prejudice around the world throughout time, even with sex-change operations and hormone replacement therapy that became more available in the twentieth century. For centuries attitudes and actions toward persons with mental or physical disabilities included rejection, removal from society, and neglect. By the nineteenth century the disabled were often relegated to institutions for the insane known as asylums. They were considered worthless to society. The institutions kept the disabled isolated from family and mainstream society. In public schools principals could deny entrance to any child they did not believe had the ability to enter the school. Negative labels, such as imbecile, were applied to persons with disabilities for centuries. By the end of the twentieth century major strides had been made to incorporate persons with disabilities into mainstream society. Access to workplaces was greatly improved and new technologies expanded the capabilities of people with Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

15

Foundations of Modern Prejudice

For centuries attitudes and actions toward persons with mental or physical disabilities included rejection, removal from society, and neglect. P HOT O RE SE ARC HE RS , IN C.

16

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Foundations of Modern Prejudice

physical disabilities. Accommodation of disabled persons in housing and public places also saw great advances in Western societies.

On the threshold of the twentieth century By the twentieth century prejudice took many forms around the world. Religious prejudice had greatly influenced the course of world history for thousands of years. The effects of religious prejudice declined in some regions of the world with the rise of nationalism. A national allegiance often began to carry more influence than religious differences within a nation. With its beginnings in the seventeenth century, nationalism spread extensively around the world in the twentieth century. Racial prejudice became a cornerstone of Western European expansion through the sixteenth to nineteenth centuries. It was also a hallmark of the U.S. march westward in the nineteenth century that displaced Native Americans from their homelands. Another major form of prejudice was ethnic prejudice. Ethnic prejudice steadily grew in importance over time, perhaps becoming the prejudice of greatest consequence in the twentieth century. Other forms of prejudice persisted throughout much of history as well. These included gender, sexual orientation, disabilities, and social class prejudice. Though social class distinctions were highly influential in medieval Europe between landlords and peasants, they took on new and highly consequential meaning in the nineteenth century with the rise to prominence of industrialization, nationalism, and capitalism. There were now upper and lower classes. These different forms of prejudice are explored in the following eleven chapters, as are the causes and consequences of prejudice. These general overview chapters are followed by twelve chapters providing case examples of prejudice in the world since the beginning of the twentieth century. The cases involve numerous regions of the world including Rwanda and South Africa in Africa, the Middle East, Northern Ireland in Great Britain, Yugoslavia and Germany in Europe, and the Hispanic, Native American, and Japanese populations of the United States in North America. The case studies highlight the complexity of prejudice. Normally, people both as a group and individually are acting out multiple forms of prejudice at any one time. One group of people may hold prejudices and discriminate against another group because of combined religious and ethnic prejudices, racial and social class prejudices, or gender and disability prejudices. Similarly, any multiple combinations of prejudices are possible and may even occur in different combinations in the same individual over time. No Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

17

Foundations of Modern Prejudice

matter the complexity of prejudice, one simple fact exists—prejudice has long been one of the greatest barriers and most destructive forces in human history.

For More Information BOOKS

Allport, Gordon W. The Nature of Prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., 1979. Dovidio, John F., Peter Glick, and Laurie A. Rudman, eds. On the Nature of Prejudice: Fifty Years After Allport. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 2005. Pincus, Fred L., and Howard J. Ehrlich, eds. Race and Ethnic Conflict: Contending Views on Prejudice, Discrimination, and Ethnoviolence. 2nd ed. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1999. Plous, Scott, ed. Understanding Prejudice and Discrimination. Boston: McGrawHill, 2003. WEB SIT ES

Anti-Defamation League. http://www.adl.org (accessed on November 29, 2006). The Prejudice Institute. http://www.prejudiceinstitute.org (accessed on November 29, 2006).

18

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

2

Causes of Prejudice

he term prejudice means ‘‘prejudgment.’’ A person is prejudiced when he has formed an attitude toward a particular social group of people before having enough information on which to form a knowledgeable opinion. A negative prejudice is when the attitude is hostile toward members of a group. A positive prejudice is when the attitude is unduly favorable toward a group. Groups that are the targets of prejudice may be distinguished by any one of several characteristics such as religion, ethnicity, language, social class, gender, physical abilities, age, or sexual orientation. Frequently they are distinguished by specific inherited physical characteristics such as skin color.

T

Prejudice is such a basic part of a person’s complex thought process that any one of many causes may be a factor, such as a person’s appearance, unfamiliar social customs of others, or even the type of motor vehicle a person drives. As noted by Gordon Allport in his landmark book, The Nature of Prejudice, it is more likely that multiple causes of prejudice may be involved at the same time. In addition, prejudice exists not only at the personal individual level, but also at the collective societal level. All human societies have prejudice in some form and to some degree. In fact many societies have multiple prejudices, such as gender prejudice against female members, racial prejudice against people of color, and religious prejudice against Catholics or Jews. As there are many causes of prejudice, there can be many forms of prejudicial expression, the most common of which is discrimination. Discrimination is the unfair treatment of people simply because they are different from the dominant group in society. An example would be a person, group, or company favoring one person over another on some arbitrary basis, such as gender or social class (groups of people sharing similar wealth and social standing), rather than on individual merit. Prejudice and discrimination cause inequality, another phenomenon common to all societies, especially when minorities, such as people of 19

Causes of Prejudice

WORDS TO KNOW attitude: A mental position regarding a particular fact or topic. bias: A personal judgment, often unreasoned and prejudiced outlook. discrimination: Unfair treatment based on arbitrary standards or criteria.

prejudice: An adverse opinion, often accompanied by irrational suspicion or hatred, formed towards a particular race, religion, or group. socialization: The process by which a culture is learned, usually through the influences a youth experiences while growing up.

emotion: A strong mental reaction to something, often causing sudden behavioral changes.

color, including Hispanic and black Americans, may be readily identified. Racism, sexism, and anti-Semitism (hostility toward Jews as a religious or ethnic group) are all forms of prejudice and discrimination. The first prejudices in human history perhaps resulted from a fear of strangers or feelings of superiority over others. As societies became more complex, due to an increase in population and in the ways to group people, such as through social classes and multiple ethnic groups, prejudices also became more complex. Because prejudice frequently involves multiple factors both at the individual and group levels, determining the cause of prejudice in any single person is difficult. Most people do not willingly reveal their prejudices or the reasons for them, if they are even aware of their prejudices at all. Some people may have become prejudiced through some traumatic event they experienced in their lives. Others are simply conforming to the society in which they live, expressing the same prejudices as parents, popular political leaders, or employers. Regardless of the cause of a person’s prejudice, stereotypes, oversimplified opinions of others (see box), are usually involved.

What prejudice means To understand what causes prejudice, one must first have a grasp of the concept of prejudice. Prejudice has much the same meaning as bias. It is not just an emotion or feeling, a habit or personality trait. It is more an attitude that has been influenced by family, friends, church groups, and first-hand experiences. Humans are not born prejudiced, yet they often cultivate one form of it or another at a very early age. A prejudiced person assumes that one group, usually his own, is superior in some way to another group. A 20

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Causes of Prejudice

Stereotyping Prejudice obscures the complexity of the human experience because the person with prejudices simplifies the diversity of life found in a single society or throughout the world. A major misleading notion of prejudice is that members of a group considered a minority in some way are also majorities in other ways. They may actually share more similarities than differences with the dominant group. These simplified prejudgments of people lead to the formation of stereotypes. Stereotypes are largely taught through the socialization process by family, schools, and media such as books, television, and newspapers. The origin of stereotyping often comes from stress. Stress causes people to view things simplistically in order to cope with the situation and seek attainable solutions. For example, in a border war between two nations, the people of one nation will view members of the other nation as strongly possessing negative traits in order to go into combat and try to kill them. Stereotyping can build a remarkable consensus in society through time. However once considered less acceptable by society, stereotypes through time

may decline. Perhaps legislation is passed banning discrimination. This may lead to a decline in prejudice, but it may often occur with a long time-lag after the legislation is passed. Such change will likely lead to limits on socially acceptable behavior before actual mental attitudes change. Stereotypes may derive from some actual aspect of the victim group such as differing typical social roles of men and women. This truth provides a starting point for the specific attribute to become exaggerated and eventually leads to a prejudice. Such stereotypes may be adopted to use in some way to justify some existing situation, such as maintaining dominance over an ethnic group. Stereotypes may not only cause prejudice, but grow from prejudice as well. When a member of an undesired group does something not socially acceptable, the behavior may be projected to others in the group. For example, if a black person assaults another in a public setting, then a prejudiced person may associate aggressive behavior with skin color.

person often forms prejudices in his mind before ever meeting someone representing the group against which the person is prejudiced. In racial prejudice, the groups are defined solely by skin color. In social class prejudice, the groups are defined primarily by the part of town or area in which they live. As the person grows older, the prejudice often becomes a well-established part of his inner psychological self. It becomes an inflexible generalization about others that is difficult to change once established. These generalizations are normally hastily made. Any evidence that the assumptions about another group may be wrong, such as a female college student excelling in engineering studies, is simply considered an isolated exception. Not all prejudice involves negative attitudes. Some prejudices are favorable toward others, such as voting for people with similar backgrounds without Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

21

Causes of Prejudice

knowing much about the individual person. However, even these prejudices are considered inappropriate because of the unjustified generalizations supporting them. Favorable prejudices have directly produced far less damaging consequences than negative prejudices. For this reason, they have drawn far less attention from researchers and social activists.

Persistence of prejudice A prejudice often becomes a habit after having it for a time. Once formed, prejudices can have great persistence. The person comes to believe his opinion is well thought out, regardless of the amount of objective information provided to suggest otherwise. Prejudices become locked in a person’s thought processes. Changing or eliminating these attitudes is difficult, and in many cases impossible, even when the person is presented with new information about the targeted group. This is not only true of prejudice against people. The same rigid adherence to prejudice occurs in other kinds of bias, such as prejudice against certain kinds of video games, reading material, or geographic locations. A reason for this inflexibility is that people are prone to overgeneralize about the world around them when trying to categorize their observations. As a result, a prejudiced person thinks in terms of oversimplified images of groups. These generalized, oversimplified images are called stereotypes. The simplistic manner of viewing the world leads to the prejudice being considered ‘‘common sense.’’ The prejudiced person likely will then accept only that information which confirms or supports his attitude, and ignore information that does not. Despite the misconceptions involved, prejudices in a person are frequently not considered abnormal thinking. In many people prejudice results from normal thought processes no matter how misguided. Prejudices become dangerous and abnormal when they lead to hostile or discriminating behavior. That there are usually multiple causes of a person’s prejudice contributes to the persistence of prejudice. Prejudice in people can be caused by psychological sources in addition to social sources, such as what is learned from parents and friends. Among psychological causes, prejudice can develop from a person’s feelings of insecurity and inferiority. These feelings can stir deep emotions in people and these emotions can overwhelm other factors that might cause prejudices, such as learned social values. Because emotion is such a strong motivator of prejudice, it can be difficult to change once established. 22

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Causes of Prejudice

Psychological explanations As described by author John Duckitt in his 1992 book The Social Psychology of Prejudice, psychologists have concluded that many people have an underlying prejudiced personality that makes them less sympathetic to others who are different—for example, the disabled or people suffering from a disease such as AIDS. Psychological factors related to prejudice may include fear of the unknown, of something different, or the use of others to blame for one’s own misfortunes. A fear of diversity Studies have shown that persons

Scapegoating Scapegoating is a prejudicial thought process that has been used by people throughout history. It can cause prejudice in situations where hardships lead people to strike out. In these cases the authority figures who might be responsible for their plight are distant and inaccessible. Therefore, harsh disciplinary measures can cause the targets of the discipline to display an aggressive reaction toward others. They find scapegoats for their plight. Scapegoating means someone is blamed for something they have no control over. The scapegoat is innocent. Nonetheless, the people subject to the harsh discipline lash out at others who are more accessible, identifiable, and perhaps safer to confront than a parent or governmental authority. This usually involves looking for easy targets who are outnumbered, such as ethnic minorities or gays, or who may be physically weaker, such as women. Through their prejudices they socially devalue their target groups. Scapegoating can ultimately lead to violence and death.

prone toward prejudice, particularly having well established prejudices, often share certain common psychological traits. Individuals with an extreme, unquestionable respect for authority figures are called authoritarians. Authoritarianism is considered an important personality factor in the development of prejudice and sustaining it. People with authoritarian personalities are considered predisposed to becoming prejudiced. Certain traits are commonly attributed to this personality type. Authoritarians typically have rigid beliefs, possess traditional values in the mainstream of society, do not tolerate weakness in themselves or others, are generally suspicious of others, believe in a strict system of punishments, and are highly respectful of authority. They have a very strong desire for conformity to society and a fear of diversity represented by others. The person reveres his own group of like-minded people while having anxieties about others. Therefore those with a particularly high level of authoritarianism are often prejudiced against all minorities. If a person does not like people of color, he probably does not like Jews or immigrants either. It is highly likely his parents were also very prejudiced against minorities. These other groups are always blamed, or made scapegoats, for the problems of prejudiced people. Scapegoating is the displacement of hostilities produced by frustrations. Psychologists have sketched out what they believe are causes for a person to be authoritarian. These personalities often result from strict, loveless parenting. The parents imposed strong discipline, including the use of conditional love (the child was not shown affection unless he Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

23

Causes of Prejudice

behaved as expected). As a result the child develops insecurities with a strong respect for authority figures. He cannot tolerate ambiguities or uncertainty. While becoming highly dependent on his parents, he shows both outward affection and inward hostility. He eventually grows up to harbor much anger in adulthood. The anger coupled with insecurity can cause prejudice and spark aggression toward powerless groups in society. The person feels the need to project his fears onto an inferior group in order to feel more self-respect. In addition to needing inferior groups, he also seeks hero figures to show exaggerated respect. When authoritarians become extreme in their attitudes and actions, psychologists consider them pathological (extreme or abnormal). Most people with prejudices would not be considered pathological. Other psychological states of mind can also lead to prejudices. For example, a mood is a more general psychological condition than an emotion. An emotion is more of a quick, frequently negative, reaction to something. A mood is a longer lasting state of mind. Good and bad moods can greatly influence how a person views members of other groups. Good moods can lead to an appreciation of individuals in other groups. A bad mood can lead to viewing members of the other group negatively. Researchers have found that both heightened happiness and anger can lead to resorting to stereotypes in resolving issues. Feelings of frustration caused by a mood are often considered a cause of aggression as well as a cause of prejudice. What has intrigued psychologists as well as sociologists is that two people may grow up under the same home conditions and influences, yet one may be susceptible to strong prejudices and the other not. Of course, psychological factors like authoritarianism are intertwined with a host of social, cultural, and historical factors, such as legally enforced segregation in schools in the twentieth-century American South, the rise of national border disputes with other ethnic groups in the neighboring country, and a rapid rise of an activist movement such as gay rights or women’s rights.

Sociological causes Sociological causes of prejudice can take many forms They range from the natural process of a child learning the norms of a society into which she is born to economic and religious causes or fear of threats, imagined or real. Socialization Prejudice is taught and promoted by socialization.

Socialization refers to influences a youth experiences while growing up. An individual experiences social attitudes around her from the time of birth. 24

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Causes of Prejudice

As time passes, children learn prejudices not only from family, but also schoolteachers, churches, and peer groups. # D AVI D H. WEL LS /C ORB IS .

A family history of intolerance runs deep in a person’s personality. Receptiveness to certain simplistic and rigid ideas is established as the family seeks conformity with conventional moral codes of the group with whom they identify. The personality of an individual is largely formed by age five. The child learns of prejudice largely unconsciously as part of general society. As time passes, she learns prejudices not only from family, but also schoolteachers, churches, and peer groups. In addition mass media such as movies, television, and music play a large role of at least reinforcing what the child learns from family. By the age of five a youth has learned about categorizing people. Most people have learned some social categories by age three and almost all by age five. As described by Fiona Devine in the 1997 book Social Class in America and Britain, U.S. and British studies showed that ethnicity was the most influential factor in forming categories by youth, with gender second. Social or economic status was least important. Disabilities also had little influence on forming prejudices at early ages. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

25

Causes of Prejudice

Pressures to conform to prejudicial thought and behavior become very strong when the prejudices are accepted as the social norm. Prejudice becomes perpetuated from generation to generation by blind imitation of past behavior, perhaps based on centuries of unequal relationships between certain groups. This tradition of prejudice occurred in U.S. race relations as black slavery in the nineteenth century gave way to legally enforced segregation in the twentieth century and continued discrimination based on social customs into the twenty-first century. The youth also learn by what they observe around them. Any form of treating groups differently in a society such as racial segregation in housing, church, or school adds further reinforcement to learned prejudices. Language can also create and reinforce prejudice with degrading terms such as ‘‘nigger’’ for blacks. Socially learned prejudice commonly results from a young person forming ideas of other groups of people with which he has no real immediate contact. This happens in adults as well. Much less often does prejudice result through direct contact with other people. In fact, prejudice may be overcome through direct contact under certain circumstances, such as assistance when having a problem or being forced to work together as a team in school or at work. Therefore it is an imaginary process through which prejudice often forms. The person grows up comparing himself with various groups and identifying with at least one. It is likely the only one about which he has much personal knowledge. As he gets older usually he will marry a person in the group with whom he has grown to identify. Discrimination and prejudice Prejudice is far more than simply a negative

attitude, it often involves action such as discrimination or violence. Prejudice is not the same as discrimination. Whereas prejudice is an attitude, discrimination is an action or behavior. Studies indicate that prejudice frequently leads to discrimination. Though prejudice is often and rightly considered a key cause of discrimination, discrimination can cause prejudice, too. Discrimination means one group enjoys an undue or undeserved advantage over another group possessing the same qualifications based on arbitrary, or random, standards or criteria. As a result the disadvantaged group faces unjustified penalties or barriers. For example, discrimination driven by prejudice can lead to a group receiving fewer opportunities for education, jobs, and career advancement. These barriers to self-improvement result in low morale and the development of few skills among members of the disadvantaged group. These results of discrimination 26

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Causes of Prejudice

General Eisenhower and U.S. troops viewing victims of the Holocaust, an example of genocide, an extreme form of discrimination. # B ETT MA NN/ COR BI S.

can cause further prejudice and discrimination. It becomes a vicious, endless cycle. Despite this close tie between the two, prejudice and discrimination are somewhat independent of each other. As noted previously, prejudice can encourage discrimination and discrimination can cause prejudice. However, prejudice does not automatically lead to discrimination. Also, a person can discriminate without being prejudiced. For example, a nonprejudiced public servant could be responsible for enforcing a law or ordinance that is discriminatory in some way. Nonetheless, prejudice and discrimination are certainly related and often found existing simultaneously within an individual or group. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

27

Causes of Prejudice

Discrimination can take many forms. Extreme forms of discrimination include genocide, the deliberate killing off of a racial, religious, political, or cultural group. More subtle forms include exclusion from social activities and consistently biased media portrayals in newspapers, movies, television programs, and radio talk shows. The media and public institutions, such as schools and government agencies, can give prejudice and discrimination a social legitimacy by promoting certain social customs and influencing laws that enforce discrimination, such as the segregationist Jim Crow laws of the American South in the twentieth century. Another example of the connection between prejudice and discrimination has come from historical efforts to reduce discrimination, such as through laws and government policies. Such attempts to ban discrimination also can lead to a reduction in prejudice, though perhaps very slowly. This trend occurred in the United States in the late twentieth century as racial discrimination became prohibited in public facilities. Though some forms of discrimination largely disappeared, prejudice decreased to a lesser degree and still remains a major feature of U.S. society. The decline in prejudice may not involve everyone. Using laws to ban discrimination driven by prejudice may actually make some individuals more prejudiced. Social status and ethnocentrism Another social factor that contributes to

the establishment of prejudices includes a need for maintaining or elevating one’s social status. This desire can lead a person or group to form prejudices and discriminate against a minority. Perhaps the person or group is in a low socio-economic position. Fearing competition over jobs and frustrated, they need to feel superior over someone. Often people prejudiced against blacks or Jews have held a low social status in their own society. A person with a low or declining social status is more likely to have prejudices than one who has a high social status. People experiencing a low social status (a person’s social standing in a society determined primarily through the prestige of his occupation, a family name, education, or profession) frequently come from near the bottom of education, income, and occupational social levels. They are also most likely to be violent in acting out their prejudices. The desire for improved social status by a group can lead to ethnocentrism (an environment in which a social group shares certain traits, such as a unique culture, common national origin, or ancestral history, and feels superior to other ethnic groups). A person feels that the ethnic group she 28

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Causes of Prejudice

associates herself with is superior to other ethnic groups. Usually the group is distinguished from other groups by their cultural differences or some physical characteristics such as skin color. In the latter case, ethnocentrism takes the form of racism. Usually the person is linked through marriage and kinship relations to the group she identifies with and members of the group live close to one another. As with other forms of prejudice, an ethnocentric person may blame others for undesired events or conditions. As the intensity of ethnocentrism grows, the possibility of conflict increases, and the ethnocentrism develops into a strong prejudice. Threats and fear Threats to a person or group can also lead to prejudice. The threat may be either real or imagined. Threats involve fear not only of physical violence, but the loss of material wealth or financial wellbeing. An example would be an economic threat from new immigrants arriving into a country where competition over jobs is high. Also if one group believes that another group is gaining in prestige, certain emotions such as anger or frustration may trigger prejudice toward that group. In these situations prejudice results from expectations that others could cause some kind of physical or financial harm. For example, in the nineteenth century, when thousands of immigrants came to America, xenophobia (the fear of strangers) was high. White protestant Americans hated the Chinese, Irish, Jews, and Catholics because they saw them as a threat to their livelihood and familiar way of life.

Imagined threats often also involve threats to closely held social values, symbols, traditions, or viewpoints, such as the redefinition of marriage by gay activists or burning of the American flag by protestors. Though those threats may only be imagined they still lead to prejudice, especially if some level of anxiety (fearful of some possible event) already exists. Such anxiety can result from previous interaction involving conflict, from stereotypes already established in people’s minds, from very different levels of social or economic status between the groups, and from competition over natural resources. Anxiety often causes people to oversimplify a situation, such as increasing use of stereotypes, and can cause less than clear thinking. Other factors, as always, can enter into raising threat fears. Stereotyped mass media portrayals of certain groups of people can heighten fear and threats. As a result movies or television programs can unknowingly promote prejudice. Such threats can spur authoritarian behavior in the dominant groups. They impose stiffer or mandatory criminal penalties for lawbreakers Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

29

Causes of Prejudice

Chinese immigrants being harassed and attacked upon arrival in San Francisco in the 1870s.

who are largely believed to be members of a minority group. Those in leadership roles such as heads of government may gain greater tolerance among the population for their oppressive government actions and support for discriminatory policies toward minorities. Prejudice can also result from a person’s fear that he may suffer some negative repercussions from his own group because he interacted with people in a subordinate group. The person could face embarrassment, ridicule, or even rejection by his own group for interacting with members of a minority. Whatever the nature of the threat, fear is a major cause of prejudice. Fear often comes from the unknown, or ignorance (lack of knowledge) about something or some group. If ignorance causes fear and fear causes prejudice, then it may be assumed that increased knowledge or information, such as meeting the feared group, would lead to less fear and, as a result, less prejudice. However, this is not always the case. Certain conditions about the 30

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Causes of Prejudice

kind of contact between groups must be met for prejudice to actually decrease. For example, the contact must be positive between groups or individuals and they must be of relatively equal social status. They should share common goals and have little competition between them over resources. The contact should also be supported and encouraged by government authorities of some sort. Though prejudice is a deeply ingrained part of a person’s character, it is a habit that can be broken. Immigration An immigrant is a person who intends to reside perma-

nently in another country. Immigration is a controversial issue throughout the world, and many people are uncomfortable with immigration. Xenophobia is fear of strangers, often leading to distrust and hatred. Prejudices build as people claim immigrants isolate themselves and do not blend into their new country, acquire jobs that others native to the country could have obtained, lower wage levels by working for less money, consume the nation’s limited resources, and put a strain on social systems such as welfare and public schools. Immigrants are frequently used as scapegoats when unemployment rises, crime increases, or the quality of education declines. Often politicians take strong anti-immigrant positions to distract voters from real political or economic problems facing society. In the United States anti-immigrant views existed throughout the twentieth century in different forms. Prejudices against Irish and Italians gave way to prejudices against Asian Americans, then Mexicans, and finally Arabs and Muslims. Illegal immigration across the U.S.–Mexico border became a major concern in the early twenty-first century. Several hundred volunteers patrolled the Mexican border to assist law authorities. Prejudices against immigrants led to various laws to restrict immigration, such as the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 and the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 establishing crimes for companies hiring illegal immigrants (people in the country without proper approval). Immigration was not a major cause of prejudice in Western Europe until the 1970s. With an increased arrival of Muslims from North Africa into France and other European countries fears and prejudices rose. Even new political parties were established with anti-immigration as their main political position. These include the New Britain Party, founded in Britain in 1977, the Republicans Party in Germany, and France’s National Front Party, founded in 1972. Riots in France in November 2005 increased fears of continued high immigration levels. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

31

Causes of Prejudice

Immigration is a controversial issue throughout the world and people have protested against it for years. AP I MA GE S.

Conformity Conformity is behaving within the traditions or norms of a

society. By seeking acceptance in a society, conformity creates or perpetuates prejudice in a person. In this way, conformity to existing attitudes and traditions may be the cause of most prejudice. It is a very powerful 32

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Causes of Prejudice

Sharecroppers being evicted from a plantation for participating in a union. (The Jim Crow laws of the American South legally enforced racial segregation in the twentieth century.) COU RT ESY OF T HE L IBR AR Y O F CO NGR ES S.

motivator of prejudice. Studies have shown that people who move into areas where prejudice is the norm show increased prejudice in their behavior. In contrast, a person moving to an area of less prejudice shows a decline in his level of prejudice. Some societies in which the dominant group gains economic or political advantage form prejudice against minorities and intentionally promote prejudice through laws and policy to gain a conformity in prejudice among its members. A key example was the Jim Crow laws of the American South that legally enforced racial segregation in the twentieth century. The laws sustained white dominance existing from the earlier days of slavery. Such laws create the appearance or illusion of inferiority of the minority such as black Americans. Economic competition Some groups create racial prejudice for personal

gain. Economic factors can play a major role in fostering prejudices when one group or nation seeks to gain control of the resources of another group Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

33

Causes of Prejudice

or nation. Growth of the British Empire in the seventeenth century is a prime example of economic domination based on prejudices. Britain colonized (settled and governed) major parts of several continents including Africa, India, Asia, Australia, and North America. Racist prejudice was established to spur this global expansion. In addition, the colonizers gained cheap, plentiful labor through racial dominance for their growing worldwide economy. In some cases British colonizers sought to eliminate the histories of the subordinate minorities such as the Aborigines of Australia. From history come traditions and norms and social institutions that perpetuate lifestyles and views of the world. The British sought to undermine Aborigine independence. One means of accomplishing this goal was to take Aborigine children from their homes and place them in foster homes of non-indigenous people. This effort proved devastating to the families involved, and was unsuccessful in terms of eliminating indigenous culture. Once prejudice is created to control access to goods or wealth, then it becomes self-perpetuating because of the disparities or inequalities created. Those in lower social classes, such as the working class, typically become characterized as uneducated and lazy and given few opportunities for economic improvement. Sometimes financial greed leads to the formation of prejudice when a group feels as though another group is blocking its access to certain opportunities. The group forms prejudices to justify ways of overcoming the barriers such as through force or political dominance. One group often uses discrimination driven by prejudice to gain an economic advantage over others. History has shown that as the number of available jobs decreases, prejudice and discrimination increase. In this way, economic competition causes prejudice and discrimination. When two social groups of relatively equal standing are economically competing, the chance of prejudice increases. Usually the economic competition is related to struggles over political control or power and social prestige. Economists believe that prejudice frequently grows from competition over access to wealth and resources. One group eventually gains economic dominance over other groups aided by prejudicial attitudes established toward those other groups. The other groups become portrayed as threats to the interests of the dominant group increasing fears among dominant group members. To reinforce its prejudice, the dominant group demonizes the minority group by claiming that its social norms are deviant. The dominant group usually has the power to portray minorities as stereotypes in the media, such as in newspapers or movies. Such portrayals are offered as just 34

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Causes of Prejudice

plain common sense. The dominant group can also promote prejudice among its members through governmental laws and policies that affect religious practices, educational opportunities, and relations in the workplace. This group may also protect these stereotypes by admitting that exceptions can be found in the minority group, but those exceptions do not change the overall deficient character of the minority. In this way the stereotype persists despite evidence to the contrary. As a result, minority groups lack equal access to certain natural resources, such as valuable timber stands or minerals, certain social privileges such as healthcare, and job opportunities enjoyed by others. Such inequality of power promotes prejudice, and prejudice leads to an even greater inequality of power. Sometimes the minority groups in these situations also develop prejudices; these are called reactive prejudices and are driven by envy as well as anger as the domination grows over the minorities. Economists believe the economic causes of prejudice, even within a single society, outweigh political, religious, and cultural factors since money in the twenty-first century carries with it influence and political power. Prejudices fueled by economic factors lead to a society of different social classes (different groups distinguished by their degree of their wealth or prestige). According to these scholars, the concentrated control of property by the dominant group leads to prejudice in the dominant group over minorities. This dominance leads to the formation and perpetuation of social classes in which prejudice play a prominent role. Social classes are another form of social groups. Not only do the upper classes form prejudices against the lower classes, the lower classes also become prejudiced against members of the upper classes. Therefore the control of money and property (such as factories and natural resources) spurs prejudice among different classes of society. One group includes those who control the available capital (money to invest), business owners, and the large landowners. The other main group includes the workers themselves who sell their labor to factories and businesses to make a living. The distinction of these basic social classes is maintained in certain ways, with prejudices playing a key role. For example, the government can use police powers or legislation to maintain order and class separation. Prejudices are built directly into these governmental policies and actions. Another means of maintaining separation and domination is development of ideology, or myths, that maintain the legitimacy of those in power. Those in power control information and even religion that supports their grip over resources and capital. The lower classes come to Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

35

Causes of Prejudice

view their situation as inevitable in life, something they cannot change. It becomes difficult for workers to resist or rebel due to lack of money and the political control exerted over them. In addition, state-sponsored social reforms such as welfare are spurred by those in power to help to maintain the status quo (existing situation) by undercutting efforts by the poor and powerless to rebel. Force is used when needed to maintain the order. The gap in distribution of money and wealth within the United States between the upper and lower classes has continued to grow wider into the twenty-first century. Consequently, prejudices between rich and poor carry on. A key part of this trend through time has been the increased concentration of corporate power. Many believe that for the economic system to survive and grow, inequality must be maintained. Restricted educational and job promotion opportunities maintain lower classes while the privileged maintain their control and position. Prejudice in the dominant groups creates lesser valued groups referred to as ‘‘Others,’’ who do not measure up to the privileged. As a result, people grow up learning their position in society. Notions become set among the poor and minorities that they are that way due to their own fault, not because of the barriers placed in front of them that inhibit their improvement in social position. Some economists claim that inequalities, maintained through prejudices, are necessary for a society to function. They believe that societies need minority groups to serve as a working class. Political and religious causes The social restrictions of governmental

systems and religious organizations have also caused prejudices. Not only does political control, including police powers, keep minority groups in check, but nationalism does as well. Nationalism is the favoring of one’s own country over others. Nationalism can create political unity through identification with commonly held traits such as language, religion, or some physical trait. Solidarity in striving toward a common national goal is established such as expansion of political or economic control by taking over other countries. The strength of nationalism, another social cause of prejudice, also works against efforts by dominated groups, such as the working class, to rebel. People’s strong affiliation to the nation in which they live inhibits them from combating the prejudice and discrimination of those in power. The dominant group constructs a society with symbols, such as flags and stately capitols, and words, such as allegiance and patriotism, to perpetuate these nationalistic prejudices and maintain the desired social order. 36

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Causes of Prejudice

Religion can serve to combat prejudice, but it also promotes prejudice by promoting the ideas that certain people are the ‘ chosen’’ people and others are not. Religion can preach that unity is the natural order of humankind and that unity is characterized by diversity, not prejudice and discrimination.

Rationalizing prejudice Acting out a prejudice in some discriminatory way or even causing a prejudice can involve the mental process of rationalization. Rationalization means making something seem reasonable even when it is not to most people. A person persuades himself that discriminating against some group is for the good of society. During World War II (1939–45), Nazi Germans became convinced that ridding society of Jews and others considered genetically or behaviorally undesirable would improve the German race. Perhaps the discrimination is supposedly necessary for religious reasons. Conquest or murder can be carried out for religious reasons based on a person’s or group’s rationalization toward prejudice. Various forms of rationalization may come into play. A dominant group may keep a minority group in an inferior status by rationalizing that it was in the minority’s best interest. The prejudicial action may likely be considered noble in character. The fatherly, or paternal, treatment of Native Americans and blacks in America owes to this type of rationalization. Through its own prejudice, the dominant group believes it needs to guide and protect the dominated group. Even the worst atrocities inflicted by people against fellow humans—including genocide—have been rationalized.

For More Information B O O KS

Allport, Gordon W. The Nature of Prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., 1979. Baird, Robert M., and Stuart E. Rosenbaum, eds. Bigotry, Prejudice, and Hatred: Definitions, Causes and Solutions. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books, 1992. Brown, Rupert. Prejudice: Its Social Psychology. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell, 1995. Devine, Fiona. Social Class in America and Britain. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press, 1997. Domhoff, G. William. Who Rules America? Power, Politics, and Social Change. Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2005. Dovidio, John F., Peter Glick, and Laurie A. Rudman, eds. On the Nature of Prejudice: Fifty Years after Allport. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 2005. Duckitt, John. The Social Psychology of Prejudice. New York: Praeger, 1992. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

37

Causes of Prejudice

WEB SIT ES

The Prejudice Institute. http://www.prejudiceinstitute.org/ (accessed on November 29, 2006). Understanding Prejudice. http://www.understandingprejudice.org/ (accessed on November 29, 2006).

38

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

3

Ethnic Prejudice

thnic prejudice is the holding of negative opinions, beliefs, or attitudes about people for the simple reason that they belong to a specific ethnic group. Scholars at the start of the twenty-first century had not reached a precise definition of the complex concept of ethnic group. The broadest definition is that ethnic group is a group recognized by certain markers. Markers include a unique culture, common national origin or ancestral history, and/or certain physical traits such as skin color or facial characteristics. Not only does an ethnic group identify itself by such markers, but nonmembers identify it by the same markers. While many ethnic groups have all three markers, not all three are required. When the group has at least one of the determining markers, it may be considered an ethnic group.

E

Unique cultural traits Unique cultural traits encompass language, religion, marriage choices, food preferences, music, dances, literature, games, and occupations. Religion is one of the most defining traits of an ethnic group. Members come into the group through birth and prefer marriages between group members. There is a strong sense of loyalty, solidarity, and varying degrees of resistance to outsiders joining the group. Ethnic groups advocate for their own group interests by leaders promoting certain cultural practices. Most have been involved in conflict with another ethnic group at some point in their history. National origin or ancestral history Ethnic group members look back on

a common national origin or ancestral history to create a bond among themselves. Frequently members of an ethnic group live concentrated in a specific geographical area of the world. However, an ethnic group differs from a family or town by having a much larger population. The Basques of Northern Spain and Southwestern France, numbering nearly three million people, are an excellent example of an ethnic group that remain geographically concentrated in a region that has been their homeland for 39

Ethnic Prejudice

WORDS TO KNOW assimilate: To conform to the values of a new group or country, ultimately losing one’s original ethnic identity to the new dominant culture.

immigration: The movement of people from one country to another intending to reside permanently in the new country.

ethnic discrimination: A major consequence of ethnic prejudice by treating differently or favoring one ethnic group for some arbitrary reason.

scapegoating: Shifting the blame for one’s own difficulties, failures, and mistakes onto someone else, such as another ethnic group.

ethnocentrism: A group feeling superior to other groups because of physical traits or cultural differences including religious beliefs or other longheld traditions.

stereotyping: Defining a group with characteristics, usually exaggerated, that supposedly apply to every member of that group.

thousands of years. Some Basques have left through time, most notably to Argentina, Mexico, the United States, Chile, and Venezuela. Jewish people have maintained ethnic identity although for most of their history they have not lived in their ancient homeland in the Middle East. Israel, the modern-day Jewish homeland, was created after World War II (1939–45) in 1948 to provide a safe haven for the surviving European Jews who had faced genocide by Nazi Germany during the war. Through a common ancestral history Jews held their ethnic identity intact for centuries even though they lived throughout the world and Hebrew, the Jewish language, was used mainly in religious practices. Not only do ethnic group members look back to a common history but forward to a shared future. In the early 2000s, ethnic groups with millions of members persist even in the highly mobile world. Many persons identify ethnically even as they live within a larger diverse society far from their original homeland. For instance, Polish Americans or Danish Americans live far from Poland or Denmark. Although they speak English and are U.S. citizens with intentions to stay in the United States, many still think of themselves as uniquely Polish or Danish, connected culturally and historically to their original ethnicity. Physical or race characteristics At the start of the twenty-first century, the

meaning of race is highly controversial. Most people think of race as defined by physical characteristics such as skin color or facial features. However, social scientists and anthropologists, those who study human societies, find the term so confusing that they advocate no longer using it. 40

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Ethnic Prejudice

They see a group that some would call a race as having a web of many physical and cultural traits too complex to allow physical characteristics alone to define a single ethnic group. For example, if people with white skin are defined as a racial group known as whites then people with black skin could be defined as a racial group known as blacks. However whites are not an ethnic group because they have many differing cultural traits and countries of origin. Likewise African blacks are ethnically very different from black people of the Caribbean. Nevertheless, in the everyday world and for the everyday man, physical characteristics often continue to define ethnicity. Within this volume prejudice against Black Americans is studied in Chapter 4, Racial Prejudices. Likewise prejudice and discrimination directed at blacks in England, blacks in South Africa, and the Australian aboriginal people are studied in the Racial Prejudice chapter.

Viewing other ethnic groups There are three ways in which every ethnic group in the world views other ethnic groups. First, all ethnic groups are ethnocentric. Ethnocentric means members consider their own way of life—their culture—to be the right way, superior to all others. They judge other groups by their own standards. Second, people in all groups engage in stereotyping, both stereotyping their own group and other groups. Stereotyping means defining a group with characteristics that supposedly apply to every member of that group. Members of an ethnic group usually stereotype their own group in an exaggerated positive light. For example, Norwegians and Swedes stereotype themselves as tall, strong, beautiful people with a strong work ethic. Ethnic groups typically stereotype other groups negatively. Exaggerated or inaccurate negative characteristics are applied to all members of the ethnic group. Examples of common negative stereotyping are that all Italians are part of organized crime and all Roma, more commonly known as Gypsies, steal. Europeans stereotype Americans by saying all Americans own and carry guns. Third, eager to blame someone other than themselves for their troubles, people in all ethnics groups engage in scapegoating. Scapegoating is shifting the blame for one’s own difficulties, failures, and mistakes onto someone else. Ethnic scapegoating shifts blame onto another ethnic group, a group that is unable to adequately defend itself against the charges. In the 1930s and World War II (1939–45) German Nazis blamed all of Germany’s economic difficulties on the Jews living in the country. In Central Africa in Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

41

Ethnic Prejudice

the early 1990s the Hutu blamed Rwanda’s economic and political problems on the Tutsi. In both cases, scapegoating led directly to genocide (systematic destruction of a cultural, ethnic, or racial group). Negative stereotyping and scapegoating of entire ethnic groups is based on inaccurate, incomplete, or oversimplified information. Such practices lead directly to ethnic prejudice. For instance, those outside a stereotyped group become suspicious, distrustful, and fearful of that group, perhaps because of some random experience with one member of the group, or one piece of inaccurate information, hence they are prejudiced against that group. They do not wish to live, go to school, or work with any member of the stereotyped group. They are likely, if they have power, to act out against that group in a discriminatory manner by restricting their freedom of movement or access to an education.

Ethnic discrimination Ethnic discrimination involves negative actions or behaviors toward people or groups solely because of their ethnicity. Discriminatory actions include restrictions on job opportunities, education, religious worship, housing, use of a particular language, and on participating in a political process such as as holding office or voting. Ethnic discrimination is most often carried out by a majority ethnic group against a minority ethnic group. It may also involve two ethnic groups relatively equal in numbers, political, and economic power. Ethnic discrimination can involve individuals discriminating against individuals. For example, an apartment manager refuses to rent an apartment to a family of a certain ethnic group; an employer ignores a job application from a person belonging to a particular ethnic group. Ethnic discrimination can also be applied against whole ethnic groups by laws and policies of a government or institution. The internment (round up and placement in remote guarded camps) of Japanese Americans during World War II by the U.S. government is an example of discrimination against an entire ethnic group. Degrading (attempting to make an ethnic group appear less than human) is a common discriminatory practice. German Jews during World War II were forced to pin yellow stars to their outer clothing to identify themselves as Jews. With hate-filled propaganda, the Nazi German government tried to convince the non-Jewish German people that Jews were less than human and had no right to live. In the early 1990s the Hutu 42

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Ethnic Prejudice

The bodies of Rwandan Tutsi decay after a massacre that killed 200 at one of many churches that were the scene of massacres during the 1994 genocide. # B ACI /C OR BIS .

officials of Rwanda convinced the Hutu peasantry that members of the Tutsi ethnic group were evil beings with tails and should be exterminated. Genocide is the most extreme form of ethnic discrimination. About one and a half million Armenians of southwestern Asia were the victims of a Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

43

Ethnic Prejudice

genocide carried out between 1915 and 1918. Russian dictator Joseph Stalin (1878–1953) allowed seven million Ukrainians to starve to death in 1932 and 1933. Nazi Germany exterminated six million European Jews during the late 1930s and World War II. In 1970 Cambodians were murdered by Cambodian communist leader Pol Pot (1925–1998) and his Khmer Rouge. Two million died, either executed, of starvation, or in performing hard labor for the Khmer Rouge. Hutu exterminated up to 800,000 of their fellow Rwandans, the Tutsi, in only a few months in 1994. A phrase with the same meaning as genocide is ethnic cleansing, which came into worldwide focus in the 1990s when the media used it to describe the killing among Serbs, Croats, Bosnian Muslims, and Kosovo Albanians as the country of Yugoslavia broke apart. Genocide is normally supported by a government, such as the mass killing of ethnic Kurds by Iraqi forces in 1988 under the leadership of Saddam Hussein (1937–2006).

Homogeneous or heterogeneous countries An ethnically homogenous country is one that is made up almost entirely of people from one ethnic group and that group dominates the country. Of the world’s approximately two hundred countries, only a handful are ethnically homogeneous (of the same kind). Examples are Japan, Saudi Arabia, Puerto Rico, Norway, Finland, and Iceland. Ninety-nine percent of Iceland’s population is composed of Icelanders. In Saudi Arabia, 90 percent of the people are of the Eastern Hamitic Arab group. The majority of nations have two or more ethnic groups. They are called ethnically heterogeneous countries. In the twenty-first century, the United States is an ethnically heterogeneous country made up of at least two hundred ethnic groups. In some heterogeneous nations, one majority ethnic group dominates in all areas, politics, economy, and culture, such as the United States where whites of northern and western European ancestry have historically dominated. Minority ethnic groups often experience prejudice and discrimination. In other countries ethnic groups have relatively equal influence. Sometimes these groups live peacefully; in other instances they constantly struggle to gain power over the other.

Ethnic conflict By the mid-twentieth century, following World War II, countries began to gain independence from European control, especially in Africa and Asia. More powerful ethnic groups asserted cultural, political, and economic influence on weaker ethnic groups, which led to resentments, 44

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Ethnic Prejudice

prejudicial attitudes, and discrimination. In many of these countries, when freed from European control, long-simmering ethnic prejudice and discrimination surfaced. When the Soviet Union broke apart in the early 1990s, ethnic groups long suppressed by the world superpower asserted themselves not only in eastern Europe, but Africa and Asia as well. Ethnic groups had long been controlled by the government in Moscow, the capital of the Soviet Union. As independent countries emerged from the old Soviet Union, so did suppressed ethnic group rivalries. A key example is the ethnic conflict experienced with the breakup of Yugoslavia formerly controlled by the Soviets. Ethnic Serbs, Croats, and Bosnian Muslims, highly distrustful of each other, vied for political control of the region. In 1900 there were approximately fifty countries in the world. That number had quadrupled by the year 2000 to over two hundred. Competition between ethnic groups over natural, economic, and political resources threatened the unity of many countries. In some, separatist movements developed. An ethnic separatist movement is created when an ethnic group attempts to become politically independent and establish a separate country. A few examples of separatist movements include the Tamils and Sinhalese in Sri Lanka, Chechen-Inguish in Russia, Kashmiri in Northern India, Basques of Northern Spain, Kurds in the Middle East, and Ossetes in Georgia, previously part of the Soviet Union. These movements rarely saw success despite long-standing struggles. In other countries, governments discriminate against and suppress minority ethnic groups, threatening the groups’ very survival. Survivalist conflicts are numerous. Several examples of ethnic groups struggling for survival include the Indo-Fijians in Fiji, Nepalese in Bhutan, Chakma in Bangladesh, and Roma in Europe. Less frequent than separatist and survival conflicts but extremely intense are ethnic conflicts called irredentist conflicts. These disputes involve claim to a certain territory by an ethnic group based on historical or ancestral rights. The classic irredentist example is the Israeli/Palestine ethnic conflict. Both groups claim ancestral and ancient homeland rights to the same territory where Israel was founded in 1948. The intensity of conflict remained high into the twenty-first century punctuated through time with a number of wars, ongoing terrorist strikes by Palestinians, and Israeli military occupation of Palestinian lands. Another irredentist conflict involves the Nagorno-Karabakh region between Armenia and Azerbaijan. It is a mountainous region in western Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

45

Ethnic Prejudice

Azerbaijani. Only a small strip of Azerbaijani land separates NagornoKarabakh from Armenia. The region is inhabited mostly by ethnic Armenians who desire to unite with Armenia. The area has been in contention throughout the twentieth century but the conflict was suppressed from 1923 until 1991 by the Soviet Union. Both Armenia and Azerbaijan were controlled by the Soviet state during that time period. At the breakup of the Soviet Union, bloody riots occurred in cities of both countries over Nagorno-Karabakh. In May 1994 an uneasy ceasefire was established but not before twenty thousand people were dead and a million people had been displaced from their homes. No solution to the irredentist dispute had been found as of late 2006. Adding to the varied, confusing, and conflicting ethnic picture by 2000 was immigration of people from different ethnic groups across national boundaries. Like millions of immigrants before them, these people sought employment and an improved economic life. For example, Arab Muslims from northern Africa immigrated to France and Germany in search of employment following World War II to help rebuild Europe from the ravages of war. Likewise Mexicans had begun immigrating to the United States for employment in large numbers as early as 1910. Ethnic groups migrating to countries more prosperous than their homeland became an important aspect of the global economy by supplying needed labor. However, it also caused social problems by the resulting close contacts of ethnic groups.

Serbs, Croats, and Bosnian Muslims At the end of the twentieth century, no region of the world better illustrated ethnic conflict than that of the Balkan countries formerly united as Yugoslavia. In 1945, following World War II, the Federal Peoples Republic of Yugoslavia was established as a communist country (a nation whose government and economy are controlled by a single political party) under the control of the Soviet Union. The Peoples Republic of Yugoslavia included six states: Bosnia-Herzegovina, whose population included the ethnic groups of Bosnian Muslims, Serbs, and Croatians; Croatia, whose majority population was Croatian; Serbia, predominantly populated by Serbs with Albanians in its southern region known as Kosovo; Slovenia, with its population overwhelmingly Slovene; Montenegro, predominately Montenegrin; and, Macedonia, dominated by the Macedonians. In 1990, with the demise of the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia began to break up. One year later the six states became five independent countries; 46

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Ethnic Prejudice

only Serbia and Montenegro remained united as one nation, called Serbia. Slovenia and Macedonia proved somewhat stable but conflict erupted among the Serbs, Bosnian Muslims, and Croats of Serbia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, and Croatia. The resulting ethnic war was the bloodiest in Europe since World War II. The people known as Serbs, Bosnian Muslims, and Croats belong to three distinct ethnic groups. All three speak their own dialect of the Serbo-Croatian language. Originally farmers, after World War II Serbs increasingly migrated to cities where they became wage earners. Serbs are strongly influenced by Eastern European culture. Their religion is Eastern Orthodox. Bosnian Muslims, sometimes referred to as Turks, were originally ethnically the same as Serbs but converted to the Muslim religion in the fifteenth century. Bosnian Muslims live mostly in cities and are professionals, business owners, and government workers. Croats are predominately rural farmers, but many live in cities of southern Croatia. Croats are strongly influenced by the Western European culture in literature, art, science, and education. They are geographically near the Italian cities of Genoa and Venice. Croatian culture reflects Italian culture. Croats are Roman Catholic. In the 1990s the long history of ethnic differences among Serbs, Bosnian Muslims, and Croats exploded into ethnic war over who would govern whom and what territory would be controlled. All three feared dominance by the other, which they believed would mean discrimination against and forced changes in their ethnic traditions. The war was brutal on all sides. Serbs tortured, raped, and murdered Croats and Bosnian Muslims. Croats fought back with equal brutality. Homes and businesses were looted and destroyed. Churches, museums, public buildings, and cemeteries—all symbols of ethnic identity—were destroyed. Media labeled the conflict as an ethnic cleansing. The end of the conflict came in 1995 when air forces of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) struck at Serbian artillery positions. NATO is a military defense alliance established in April 1949 among Western European and North American nations to protect each other from foreign attack. Ultimately two hundred thousand Bosnian Muslims, Croats, and Serbs were killed. Hundreds of thousands fled their homes. The world was dismayed to witness a seemingly civilized region as it transformed into a bloody ethnic battlefield. The United Nations (an international organization created to resolve conflicts in the world and Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

47

Ethnic Prejudice

Evidence of the destruction caused in Sarajevo in 1993. MR . TE UN V OET EN.

provide humanitarian aid where needed) responded by establishing the first international tribunal or court to prosecute war crimes (violating international laws of war such as mistreatment of civilians). The UN War Crime tribunal is permanently located in The Hague, Netherlands. The court began its operation in November 1993. It first indicted (formal criminal charges) a former Serbian military commander of a detention camp located in Bosnia. The commander was indicted for crimes against humanity. Serb president Slobodan Milosevic (1941–2006) was indicted in May 1999 for crimes against humanity in Kosovo. He was the first sitting head of state in history to be indicted for war crimes. Milosevic’s Bosnian Serb army commander General Ratko Mladic (1943–) was also indicted. Later indictments were issued for violating the customs or laws of war, breaches of the Geneva Convention (international law addressing humanitarian concerns) in Croatia, and genocide in Bosnia-Herzegovina. The Tribunal has indicted 161 people since it began in 1993. It planned to conclude all trials in 2008 and all appeals of its rulings by 2010. 48

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Ethnic Prejudice

Sri Lanka The Tamil-Sinhalese ethnic conflict in Sri Lanka (formerly Ceylon) has been long and bloody, lasting from the 1950s into the early twenty-first century. Sri Lanka is an island immediately off the southern tip of India. The conflict involves two ethnic populations—the Sinhalese and Sri Lankan Tamils. The Sinhalese make up approximately 75 percent of the population. They live on the central, western, and southern portions of the island where they control political and economic activities. About 75 percent of Sinhalese practice the Buddhist religion. Sinhalese speak the Sinhala language. The Sri Lanka Tamils make up approximately 11 percent of the population or 18 to 19 percent if combined with Indian Tamils brought to Sri Lanka by the British in the 1800s to work on tea plantations. The Sri Lanka Tamils live in the eastern regions and northern Jaffna peninsula. Most Tamils practice the Hindu religion. Tamils speak a dialect of Indian Tamil that is spoken in southeastern India. Sri Lanka gained its independence from Britain in 1948. Tamils, favored by the British, had long held the best jobs in the government, business, and as professionals. English was the common language in business. Sinhalese, discriminated against by the British, resented the Tamils’ preferential treatment. Because of the discriminatory treatment, the Sinhalese had considerably less wealth than the Tamils. When S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike (1916–2000) was elected prime minister of Sri Lanka in 1956 he promised he would make Sinhala the official language. He also promised the Sinhalese increased powers in line with their majority status on the island. In 1956 Bandaranaike passed the Sinhala Only Act making Sinhalese the country’s only official language. Greatly resented by the Tamils, this act put Tamils at a disadvantage to hold any government positions. Tamils began to protest the Act. The protests and counter-Sinhala protests turned violent. Between 1958 and 1973 the Sinhalese-dominated government passed more laws that further discriminated against the Tamils in education and employment opportunities. By 1976 the Tamils had made no progress in gaining political power, and they continued to be blocked from access to education and jobs. This ethnic discrimination led the Tamils to pursue separation from the Sinhalese. As so often is the case when ethnic discrimination results in violence, the youth of Sri Lanka took up the cause. Youth of the Sinhalese community organized the People’s Liberation Army. Tamil youth likewise joined in violent outbursts against Sinhalese. In 1981, Sinhalese Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

49

Ethnic Prejudice

security forces burned down the Tamil library in Jaffna and terrorized the Tamil public including bombing raids on Tamil villages. Tamil youth responded with rioting and violence. Sinhalese retaliated by burning any remaining Tamil homes and businesses in southern Sri Lanka. India tried to intervene to halt the violence and began sending troops to the island. Between 1987 and the summer of 1989, India sent a total of 80,000 troops. At the Sinhalese government’s request, Indian troops were withdrawn in late 1989 and early 1990. Talks between the Sinhalese government and Tamil leadership began, but soon broke down. Heavy fighting resumed, claiming tens of thousands of lives. While moderates within both ethnic groups were fatigued with the fighting and wished to bring it to an end, extremists on both sides prevailed, and fighting continued into the early 2000s.

Gypsies in Europe According to United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), a branch of the United Nations, ethnic prejudice and discrimination against the Roma group, commonly known as Gypsies or Travelers, is the most serious human rights problem in Europe at the start of the twenty-first century. Gypsies migrated from India to modern-day Europe in the thirteenth century. They were craftspeople, traders, and artists. Gypsies supplied farming communities with handmade tools and baskets, veterinary care, temporary labor, and, on occasion, entertainment with music and dancing. The migrating Gypsies had no ambitions to conquer territory but instead earned their living from performing odd jobs, seeking out work on a day-to-day basis. Most Europeans worked hard farming the land and did not approve of Gypsies’ nomadic lifestyle. Through the centuries Europeans looked down on Gypsies as idle, roaming people with strange value systems based on ideas about luck, superstitions, and taboos. Gradually western, central, and eastern Europeans stereotyped Gypsies as lazy, believers in the supernatural, prone to stealing, antisocial troublemakers, and even dangerous people. They were not allowed to participate in politics or to live within non-Gypsy communities. Their children were not welcomed in schools. Gypsies grew to be distrustful of non-Gypsies and tended to interact only with their own group. During the late 1930s and World War II, Gypsies, along with European Jews, were targeted for extermination in a genocide carried out by Nazi Germany. They were considered undesirable by the Germans who promoted 50

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Ethnic Prejudice

Gypsies migrated from India to modern-day Europe in the thirteenth century. They were craftspeople, traders, and artists. # CH IN A LL AN/ CO RBI S S YGM A.

racial purity. Tens of thousands of Gypsies were deliberately murdered by the Nazi military. Within the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) entire groups of Gypsies were shipped to farms and state enterprises to work in the most backbreaking jobs. Many died from exhaustion or were executed when unable to work further. Through the twentieth century police in various European cities and towns singled out Gypsies for harsh treatment, such as beatings or unwarranted jailings. Because of the distrust of Roma by the more settled populations, the Roma were forced in some areas to register with the countries through which they planned to travel. Registration gave local officials a way to keep track of them, if not punish them for being in the area. With the breakup of the USSR in 1990, Gypsy communities were repeatedly attacked by violent prejudiced groups such as Skinheads. Skinheads are young people who belong to hate groups whose purpose is to violently attack minority groups they find offensive. In the 1990s and early 2000s, entire Gypsy communities in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Serbia were brutally destroyed by such hate groups. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

51

Ethnic Prejudice

At the start of the twenty-first century the number of European Gypsies is difficult to estimate. Reliable figures are impossible since some countries do not attempt to count Gypsies. Best estimates put the population between seven and eleven million, the majority living in countries of Central and Eastern Europe. Gypsies are the European continent’s largest minority. The majority of Gypsies have little or no education. Communities do their best to keep Gypsies out. Gypsies live in substandard housing. Medical care is essentially nonexistent. Gypsies’ infant death rate is as high as 50 percent. A Gypsy’s life expectancy is below fifty years of age. UNESCO reports that up to 80 percent of Gypsies of working age in eastern European countries such as Hungary, Czech Republic, Romania, Bulgaria, and Slovakia are unemployed. As old stereotypes linger, employers are reluctant to hire Gypsies. Their trading practices of selling door to door and on the street are outlawed in most countries. Discriminatory laws against rummaging through garbage at dumps are aimed directly at Gypsies. In France 70 to 80 percent of the Gypsy population receive welfare payments that are paid only to France’s poorest people. Even in Britain the ‘‘travelers,’’ as Gypsies are still called, live in total poverty. A few nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and international groups have taken up the Gypsy cause. They push for economic and social programs to integrate Gypsies into regular societies. However, given centuries of prejudice and discrimination, the difficulties faced are extreme and Gypsies’ survival struggle goes on.

The French foreigner issue In the second half of the twentieth century, the foreigner issue surfaced in Western Europe. Following World War II, Western European nations encouraged laborers from countries in Africa and Asia to enter and work in reconstruction of their severely war-damaged cities. Between 1946 and 1974, roughly one million immigrants legally entered France from Northern Africa and Asia. France prided itself on its immigration policy based on the promise of liberty, equality, and social acceptance as long as the new immigrants adopted France’s values and culture and accepted the French way of life. To the dismay of the French, only some of these early immigrants, overwhelmingly members of the Muslim faith, attempted to assimilate (conform to the values of a new group or country, ultimately losing one’s original ethnic identity to the new culture) and become French. 52

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Ethnic Prejudice

By 1974, France had experienced a number of difficult economic years primarily due to increasing worldwide oil prices. No longer needing a foreign workforce, the government moved to limit the number of foreign laborers entering the country. However, France’s southern coastline was long and unguarded, and Northern Africa was only a short distance across the Mediterranean Sea. Workers continued to pour into France illegally, that is, they secretly came into the country without any legal documents, such as work visas. Ethnic prejudice and discrimination grew against the foreigners who declined to renounce their ethnic identity. These Muslim foreigners built mosques, shopped in their own marketplaces, ate their traditional foods, and wore their traditional clothing, including traditional head coverings for women. In 1972 the Front National (FN) anti-immigrant party organized and gained popularity. During the 1970s, 1980s, and early 1990s as French unemployment rates soared, violent attacks against the workers and their families increased. Young men and women of legal immigrant families felt betrayed and exploited by a nation that used their fathers and grandfathers to reconstruct the country following World War II, then refused them employment when France’s economy turned bad. French blamed the foreign workers and their families for taking away much-needed jobs. In reality, the workers took the lowest jobs—unpleasant, unsafe, and paying very low wages. These were jobs Frenchmen and women would not take. Nevertheless the workers became the scapegoats for the French who blamed their employment difficulties on the foreign population. The FN party kept this idea in front of the French through propaganda (information designed to sway public thought on a topic) and staging public protests. Ethnic prejudice and discrimination against the Muslim communities continued. Immigrants lived in substandard housing in growing slums, were shunned by French society, and were prohibited from applying for a long list of jobs unless they were legal French citizens. Even if they secured decent employment, on-the-job harassment was often harsh. The social aspects of Muslim and French lifestyles proved irreconcilable. Muslims viewed the French culture as offensive. For example, alcohol was banned in Muslim communities, but was a regular part of French meals. The fashion styles of French women were unacceptable to Muslims, who covered up all but the faces of their women from the public eye. By the mid-1990s, an estimated five million illegal foreign residents, predominantly from North Africa, lived in France. Most came from Algeria, Tunisia, and Morocco. When counted together, legal and illegal Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

53

Ethnic Prejudice

French Muslim women demonstrating against ban on headscarves in 2004. PAS CA L LE SEG RE TAI N/ GE TTY IMA GE S.

foreigners accounted for an estimated 25 percent of France’s 58 million residents in 1995. Further, their birthrate was high, which rapidly increased their numbers. Violence erupts In November 2005, violence erupted in Clinchy-Sous-

Bois, a suburb only a thirty-minute drive south of the Eiffel Tower, a landmark in Paris. Clinchy-Sous-Bois was a decaying suburban slum typical of the places where immigrants and their families had been isolated. They lived in housing projects of concrete block apartments with broken windows covered by plywood, obscene graffiti marking walls, and any open area littered with cans and bottles. Even though in the early 2000s France’s economy improved, overall unemployment was still 10 percent. In the housing project it was upwards of 40 percent. In addition to housing and employment issues, further discrimination resulted in poor education and abuses on Muslim religious traditions. Muslims were outraged in 2004 when France banned Islamic head scarves and other religious symbols in schools. Hopelessness and anger of Clinchy-Sous-Bois youth broke into open rioting. Young 54

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Ethnic Prejudice

people reacted by setting fire to buildings and cars they could never afford. The riots spread across France wherever there were poor Muslim communities. Ethnic conflict is likely to grow in Western Europe as Muslim immigration from North Africa, the Middle East, Eastern Europe, and Asian countries such as Pakistan continues. People from these countries do not assimilate easily into the Western European life. At the beginning of the twenty-first century, not only France, but Germany, Britain, the Netherlands, Austria, Belgium, and Sweden all reported troubling ethnic issues related to immigration of foreign workers, widespread prejudice, and discrimination against the workers.

United States The United States throughout its history has approached ethnic diversity differently from other nations. The United States is the only nation in the world founded on the belief that a mix of people from many countries would be beneficial to its well-being and prosperity. The first immigrants to America were from England and Northern and Western European nations. The dominant culture in America quickly became that of white European culture. New immigrants were welcomed and expected to adhere to America’s basic beliefs of individual rights and freedom for all. New Northern European immigrants assimilated easily, as did those from England, Germany, Netherlands, and Scandinavia. Two glaring exceptions to assimilation were blacks brought from Africa to work as slaves on Southern plantations and Native Americans who were the original or indigenous people of the land called the United States. The uniquely American idea of equality and rights for all ethnic groups did not include the blacks and Native Americans, both of whom the highly prejudiced dominant society considered uncivilized. When Southern and Eastern European immigrants began arriving in America in large numbers in the 1880s, assimilation was more difficult. The dominant Southern European ethnic group was Italian. The dominant Eastern European ethnic group was Polish. Both faced considerable discrimination in housing and employment. Both experienced poverty living in ghettos, predominantly in New York City. Assimilation took several generations because of prejudice and discrimination against these peoples. Likewise, European Jews and the Irish who fled the potato famines of the mid-nineteenth century initially experienced strong ethnic prejudice and discrimination in the United States. Gradually later in the Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

55

Ethnic Prejudice

twentieth century all were accepted into, broadened, and enriched American culture. By the twenty-first century immigrants have come to the United States from all over Europe including northern, central, and eastern European nations, and they have overall experienced little discrimination. Many retain a strong tie to their ethnic origins while at the same time becoming full citizens of the United States. Immigrants from Asia Immigration from Asia tells a different story.

Chinese and Japanese were first brought to America in the second half of the nineteenth century to work in mines of the west and to build railroad lines into the western United States. Those who remained in America after their labor was no longer needed concentrated in tight enclaves (a distinct community within a city) on the West Coast, predominantly in San Francisco. They suffered prejudicial and discriminatory treatment in all aspects of their lives. They were excellent workers who did not complain, took jobs white Americans considered beneath them, and were highly selfsufficient, rarely venturing out of their communities. For these very reasons, the public resented them. U.S. immigration laws essentially shut off immigration from Asia by the mid-1920s. During World War II, Japanese Americans were forced by the U.S. government to live in guarded camps hastily constructed in remote areas. Many citizens living along the West Coast feared sabotage and attacks along the coast like at Pearl Harbor. Prejudice and discrimination against Asian immigrants extended back to 1882 when Congress passed the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 banning Chinese immigrants from entering the United States. Not until 1965 was immigration open once again to Asians as the American public, influenced by the Civil Rights Movement of the early 1960s, had a greater sense of equal treatment of all peoples. Although arriving from all Asian countries, the largest groups came from Japan, China, the Philippines, Korea, and Vietnam. As a whole, Asian Americans by 2000 had good incomes as a large percentage of the Asian American immigrant population had graduated from college. The most serious ethnic strife for Asians existed between black Americans and Koreans and Vietnamese. Perceiving these groups take jobs and profits, black Americans resented both groups opening and operating businesses in black communities. Numerous violent incidents occurred between the groups. Immigrants from Latin America In the 1980s and 1990s, most U.S. ethnic

concerns focused on illegal immigration from Latin America. The illegal immigration problem in the United States was a major focus of ethnic conflict 56

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Ethnic Prejudice

in the 1990s and continued into the 2000s. Illegal immigrants are persons who live in a country without proper documents. They are also called illegal aliens or undocumented workers or illegals. Most illegal immigrants come into the United States in one of two ways. They secretly cross the border between the United States and Mexico or the U.S.– Canadian border. Others come with legal entry documents such as student, tourist, or business visas but then overstay the time allowed by the visa. The Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) estimated in 2000 that 60 percent of U.S. illegal immigrants came secretly over the border while 40 percent overstayed visas. About 34 percent of illegal immigrants came from Mexico and 20 percent from other Latin American countries. Americans in areas where large numbers of illegals congregated believed they took away jobs, drove down wages, and strained social services. INS estimated approximately 7 percent of illegals lived in Florida, 11 percent in New York, 14 percent in Texas, and at least 40 percent, predominantly of Mexican ethnicity, in California (see box). Immigration concerns that grew in the late nineteenth century in the United States led to creation of an agency to oversee immigration matters in 1891. The agency assigned the responsibility of immigration matters continually moved among departments until 1940 when it became a part of the U.S. Justice Department. Eventually becoming known as the Immigration and Natural Services (INS) it ceased operation in March 2003 when it was transferred to the newly established Department of Homeland Security. Its duties were distributed to several agencies including the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service and U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

Persistent and resistant to solution Ethnic prejudice, discrimination, and conflict are difficult to manage and often all but impossible to halt or resolve. They are deeply imbedded into the psyche of individuals and groups. While at different periods in history discord may subside for a time, as long as decades, it is often just below the surface and will begin again given the right situation. Peace accord (agreement) after peace accord has proven inadequate. Likewise, peacekeeping forces do not solve the problems; often, they are helpless to stop violent acts from continuing. Ethnic group loyalty is one of the strongest bonds between humans. Loyalties are passed from parents to children, generation to generation. Ethnocentric behavior, stereotyping, and scapegoating defy rational resolutions to prejudice, discrimination, and conflict. Often ethnic conflicts are perceived by groups as struggles for no less than survival of their culture. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

57

Ethnic Prejudice

California’s Propositions The 1980s and early 1990s proved to be difficult economic times for California. Politicians and the general public scapegoated illegal immigrants as the cause for some of the economic woe. The general belief was that they took jobs away from U.S. citizens and then worked for very low wages, which forced the decrease all wages. In addition, Californians believed illegals’ families put added pressure on the state’s underfunded education and healthcare systems, which drove up state taxes. Californians voted on and passed several propositions that directly discriminated against the illegal immigrants. First was Proposition 187, passed on November 8, 1994, by a 59 to 41 percent margin. It excluded illegal immigrants and their foreign-born children (any child born in the United States regardless of his/her parents status is a U.S. citizen by law) from publicly funded medical care, from attending public elementary and secondary schools, from attending

publicly funded universities, and from welfare services. The measure’s constitutionality was challenged on grounds that it dealt with immigration matters reserved to the federal government for regulation. In 1998 it was allowed by a new California government leadership to die. In November 1997, California voters again passed a proposition that discriminated against ethnic groups, Proposition 227. Passed by a 61 to 39 percent margin, Proposition 227’s key provision states that all public school children in California should be taught in English. The United States does not have an official language, rather English is merely considered the main or common language. An English-as-the-official-language movement gained momentum in the early 2000s. Since the 1980s almost half of U.S. state legislatures either by law or change in the state constitution have designated English as the official language. National legislation continues to be debated.

An end to ethnic discrimination and conflict is generally achieved only with separation of the two warring groups. Successful separatist movements result in the formation of segregated regions with local control or entirely new countries. Examples of successful separatist movements in recent history include the formation of Bosnia and Croatia from the Yugoslav Federation in the 1990s and East Timor separating from Indonesia. Even new countries are never ethnically pure, so a minority or less successful group is often suppressed to achieve peace. Suppression involves discriminatory actions, which causes resentment to grow, and the suppressed group readies itself to strike back. Areas of the world that appear especially susceptible to ongoing ethnic conflict are Eastern Europe, where ethnic groups such as the Chechen-Ingush, suppressed for decades by the USSR, struggle for independence from Russia; Africa, where hundreds of ethnic groups lay claim to various regions; and South Asia, with ongoing ethnic unrest in India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, and Myanmar. 58

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Ethnic Prejudice

Opponents of Propositions 187 and 227 contended that both were ineffective, that they targeted helpless persons such as children, that they had detrimental consequences such as children and teens of illegals on the streets because they were not allowed in school, and were highly prejudicial and discriminatory in

intent. Proponents argued that they were necessary, saved taxpayers money, improved the job situation for citizens and legal immigrants, and were not prejudicial but instead forced people to take responsibility for breaking immigration laws, including employers who hired illegal immigrants.

People protesting Proposition 187. AP I MA GES .

The United States, which prides itself on the protection of diversity and was settled by multiple waves of immigrants from the seventeenth century to present day, was one of the world’s hotbeds of immigration debate in the early 2000s. By 2006 with fears of foreign terrorist threats, the U.S. public was demanding tighter restrictions on immigration and more forceful treatment of illegal immigrants. Immigration issues came to the forefront of modernday politics. When new national legislation was proposed to increase immigration restrictions, millions of people took to the streets in protest against it. Among those favoring more restrictive immigration policies the Minutemen Project was started by private volunteers to patrol the border between the United States and Mexico to stop illegal immigration. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

59

Ethnic Prejudice

For More Information BOOKS

Fonseca, Isabel. Bury Me Standing: The Gypsies and Their Journey. New York: Knopf, 1995. Horowitz, Donald L. Ethnic Groups in Conflict. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985. Levinson, David. Ethnic Groups Worldwide: A Ready Reference Handbook. Phoenix, AZ: Oryx Press, 1998. Levinson, David. Ethnic Relations: A Cross-Cultural Encyclopedia. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO, 1994. Rudolph, Joseph R., Jr., ed. Encyclopedia of Modern Ethnic Conflicts. Westport, CN: Greenwood Press, 2003. Silverstein, Paul A., and Michael Herzfeld. Algeria in France: Transpolitics, Race, and Nation. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2004. Tanner, Marcus. Croatia: A Nation Forged in War. 2nd ed. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2001. Yang, Philip Q. Ethnic Studies: Issues and Approaches. Albany: State University of New York Press, 2000. WEB SIT ES

Human Rights Watch. http://hrw.org (accessed on November 21, 2006). United States Immigration Support. http://www.usimmigrationsupport.org/ (accessed on November 21, 2006). War Crimes Tribunal Watch. http://balkansnet.org/tribunal.html (accessed on November 21, 2006).

60

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

4

Racial Prejudice

eople throughout history have had a fascination with physical differences among humans. Usually, traits attracting the most attention are visible, such as skin color, size and form of head, hair type, nose shape, and body size. As European explorers spanned the globe in their ships in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, they observed that these physical differences were not random around the world but occurred in a certain geographic pattern, with people living in the same region sharing similar traits. This pattern resulted from groups of people living in certain regions who shared genetically distinct biological traits shaped by the environment through time. This time period also saw the rise in interest in science. Therefore, these early observations led Europeans to group people into a limited number of physical types commonly referred to as races. The number of identified races in various schemes ranged from three to over thirty. One of the first schemes to use the term ‘‘race’’ was introduced by Francois Bernier (1625–1688), a French physician, in 1684. He classified humans into four categories—Europeans (western and southern), Asians, Africans, and Lapps (the more northern inhabitants). With skin color as the emphasis, others offered the classic racial labels of white, red, black, and yellow. The idea of race increasingly appeared in Western European literature through the eighteenth century.

P

Though the term race was commonly used through the next three centuries, biologists and other scientists who studied human populations found it increasingly difficult to agree on what criteria should be used to define distinct races. The notion of race in scientific terms slowly came to an end by the twentieth century. The scientific interest shifted from an emphasis on similarities in groups to the broad diversity in human populations. Biologists considered race a useless concept since so much biological variation can be found even within a single group of people. 61

Racial Prejudice

WORDS TO KNOW assimilation: The process of conforming to the cultural values of another social group and ultimately losing one’s original ethnic identity to the new dominant culture. colonization: Large-scale immigration to a new land bringing governmental controls from the distant nation of origin.

racism: Prejudice against people of a particular physical trait, such as skin color, based on a belief that the physical trait primarily determines human behavior and individual capabilities and that leads to feelings of superiority of one race over another providing justification of dominance of one group over another.

discrimination: A major consequence of prejudice by treating differently or favoring one social group over another based on arbitrary standards or criteria.

segregation: Using laws to separate whites and blacks.

race: A socially defined group based on physical characteristics, commonly including skin color but may also include hair texture, eye shape, body build, facial features, and other biological features.

social mobility: The amount of opportunity a person has in a particular society to change his social standing from one social class to another.

Human variation The early fixation on human similarities led to the creation of stereotypes (a biased oversimplified generalization of others). The use of stereotypes served to long distract appreciation of the vast human diversity and variation found throughout the world. Though commonly sharing numerous characteristics shaped by the environment, each individual inherits a unique combination of physical traits. Clusters of these traits inspire the idea of regional populations or racial typologies. However, any one trait in a cluster—such as kind of hair—straight or curly, coarse or fine—usually can be found in other groups as well. Throughout history, human groups often migrated over large distances and inter-bred extensively with other groups with whom they came in contact. This movement contributed to very hazy genetic boundaries. Therefore, the populations of early recognizable races observed by early explorers and scientists steadily became more obscure through time and the complexities of the worldwide human population became more apparent. Even in modern times the Hispanic category used in the United States includes a broad range of people with European, African, and Native American ancestries of various combinations. Variations in skin color, general stature, hair texture, and head shape vary as much within any given group as between groups. 62

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Racial Prejudice

By the twenty-first century, scientific interest focused more on biochemical factors, such as DNA makeup and blood groups, rather than physical factors. Rather than being distinct physical groups, the perceived races were human groups with differing incidences of certain genes. People within these groups shared a common gene pool (the entire span of genetic traits of a particular group, or breeding population) and a close ancestry since they were set apart from other groups. However, migration, exploration, and colonization (one nation populating and gaining political and economic control of another, usually less developed, country and its resources) through centuries of time led to considerable genetic mixing. Despite the shift away from the idea of race by scientists, the general public continued using the concept of race in daily life. It shaped relationships and greatly influenced prejudices. Sometimes even cultural factors such as language became combined with traditional biological traits in distinguishing races. The public continued believing these physical differences were somehow related to behavioral differences and mental capabilities. These physical distinctions were used to establish a person’s place in society. Though race categories had no real scientific basis, they served a social purpose as people attempted to organize in their minds the human diversity they see around them.

Government use of race Nations continue using the concept of race when shaping social policies. For example, in the census (an official count and description of people living in a nation taken on a regular basis) it takes every ten years, the United States asks all people to classify themselves using a set of race categories—white (including Hispanic), black, American Indian, Eskimo, and Asian or Pacific Islander. Race statistics are then used to guide social policies, such determining the kinds of social services that should be made available in certain areas. In this way the government mixes inherited traits with economic and social issues. Some nations strive for what they consider to be racial purity. Germany and Japan established criteria for citizenship partly based on biological factors. For example, unlike in the United States, a person born in Japan to foreign-born parents does not automatically become a Japanese citizen. Japanese also are restricted in having dual citizenships, meaning being citizens of two nations. Because of these and other restrictions, few foreign-born people become Japanese citizens. Few people who do not have the desired physical appearances can qualify for citizenship in those Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

63

Racial Prejudice

A census taker talking to tenants. The U.S. census asks all people to classify themselves using a set of race categories. #BE TTM AN N/C OR BI S.

nations. American Indian tribes also consider the degree of full-bloodedness in determining who qualifies for tribal membership. Many tribes seek to maintain what they consider biological and cultural integrity. Of course, many societies do not use physical traits to make group distinctions. In sum, race is the sharing of common features through a shared descent. By the twenty-first century, the concern was not so much what race was, but how the concept of race was used. Usage varied from 64

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Racial Prejudice

country to country. For example, the United States considers anyone with any degree of African ancestry, black. In Latin America, a person with only partial African ancestry is considered white. Racial differences are based on cultural, social, political, and economic factors. Race is a social construction, not a biological fact. Therefore, the notion of race is very subjective based on people’s prejudices.

The blight of racism Racism is the belief that one race is naturally superior to other races. Racists believe they should enjoy some exclusive benefits because of their perceived superior genetic attributes. Racists believe that human physical traits determine intellectual capacity and behavioral characteristics. Such beliefs have major negative implications for many people. People are denied opportunities in life not because of their abilities (or lack of them), but because they are considered a member of some identifiable group. As a result, they may be denied equal access to education, housing, jobs, and even justice before the law. These prejudices are often built into the very institutions of a society. Racism equates differences in physical appearance with differences in status and power in a society. A race can exert its superiority through military conquest, colonialism, forced migration of others, and various social policies that deny others equal consideration and treatment. Racism is a certain form of ethnocentrism (judging other cultures by the standards of one’s own out of a sense of superiority). Often their group is distinguished from other groups by cultural differences, such as religion or long-held traditions. However, frequently it is based on physical appearance. Sometimes cultural and biological traits are combined in distinguishing human groups. But many times some single biological trait, such as skin color, forms the basis of distinctions and this is known as racism. Other biological traits besides skin color are sometimes used to distinguish certain groups; Jews and Irish have been the targets of racism by being identified through biological traits in a negative manner leading to oppression by dominant groups and even mass murder. Racism gives social and cultural meanings to skin color or any other trait considered important. Regions where racism has been most prevalent in the twentieth century include the United States, Western Europe, and South Africa.

History of racism Racism in the world can be traced to the colonial period of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Technologically advanced Western Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

65

Racial Prejudice

European nations were conquering and settling areas around the world already occupied by native peoples with different languages, customs, and skin color. The natives were exploited (making use of people without appropriate or just compensation) as laborers or even as slaves. At the same time, black Africans were shipped across the Atlantic Ocean for use as slaves. These colonized areas were in the New World, Africa, Asia, and the Pacific Islands. The relationship between master and slave strongly reflected paternalistic (parent-child) relations, as slaves were considered incapable of controlling themselves. In the minds of whites, what they did was for the slaves’ own good. Whites were dependent on blacks for labor, and blacks depended on whites for life’s basic necessities such as food, clothing, and housing. By 1750, all of Central and South America and half of North America were divided by European countries including Britain, France, Spain, and Portugal. Much of India and parts of Africa also became conquests of European nations. Forts for slave trading were established along the western Africa coast. Next followed colonization in Australia, New Zealand, the Pacific Islands, and China. By 1910, much of the world had been Europeanized. Europeans historically associated dark skin with evil since it was associated with traditions foreign and threatening to Western society. This perspective shaped opinions of the colonists about the native peoples they encountered during this long period of time. They considered natives less civilized and perhaps even less human. The colonists used these racist beliefs to justify exploiting the native people for labor and extracting the resource wealth of their lands. As a result, prejudice, colonialism, and slavery spread racism around the world. Colonial domination was achieved through military might and missionary activity. Colonial expansion also introduced capitalism (an economic system in which production is privately owned, financed through private investments, and the demand for goods is established through an open market system largely free of government involvement) into the New World (Western Hemisphere) that required abundant cheap labor. Colonial expansion by European nations shaped modern race relations. For example, of the twelve million people that migrated to America in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, ten million were slaves. By the late 1800s, the concept of racism fit nicely with the newly emerging ideas of biological evolution introduced by Charles Darwin (1809–1882) with his 1859 publication of The Origin of Species. 66

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Racial Prejudice

Influenced by scientific thought at the time, society in general believed the individual races represented different stages of human evolution. People of color represented early, less civilized times. Perhaps some environmental factors retarded their development. This simplified view of the human population persisted for decades. The Darwinian biological theories of evolution, including such notions as ‘‘natural selection’’ and ‘‘survival of the fittest,’’ were applied socially to justify white superiority over blacks. These two concepts meant that certain traits or characteristics were more adapted to existing environmental factors than others, and those traits would increasingly dominate through time since it made individuals with those traits more fitted to the environment. Racism greatly influenced the acceptance of newly arriving immigrants into nations. If these immigrants looked different or were culturally distinct from the societies and cultures into which they were relocating, then their acceptance was very limited. Immigration of Japanese and Chinese from Asia to the United States in the mid-nineteenth century led to fears of Yellow Peril (fear of Asian immigration into Western countries). Restrictive immigration laws first adopted in the nineteenth century became even more restrictive in the 1920s. Similarly the Australian government restricted the immigration of Asians to Australia for many years.

Racism in Britain A long-standing belief around the world has been that Britain is a racially pure nation, inhabited almost exclusively by white-skinned people. However, that perception is far from the truth. Blacks have likely lived in England for over two thousand years. By the eighteenth century, black slavery played a major role in the English economy; slaves were found in its many colonies worldwide. Great Britain took a leading role in the international slave trade (see box). Its commercial ships journeyed from Africa loaded with slaves who were traded for sugar in the Caribbean, then sailed to the plantations (a large farm that owned one hundred or more slaves) of North America where the sugar was traded for rum and other goods which were then shipped back to Africa for more slaves. Some of the black Africans were also shipped to Britain where they became household servants. Expansion of the British Empire was largely fueled by a belief in the racial inferiority of people of color, a key example of ethnocentrism. For example, for several centuries, Europeans portrayed their expansion as Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

67

Racial Prejudice

A slave ship. TH E LI BR ARY OF CO NGR ES S.

discoveries of new lands even though others who looked and behaved differently had long inhabited the lands. These explorers—and the colonists and missionaries who followed—believed they were bringing civilization to these societies previously unknown to the more modern world. British racial prejudices were largely played out in its colonies. Native populations were subjected to British rule, and slavery became a key part of agricultural economies. Slavery also occurred in Britain itself, but on a much lesser scale. Farms were smaller because the soils and climate of Britain were less supportive of agriculture. Under pressure, particularly from religious groups, slavery was abolished within Britain in 1772 as some ten thousand slaves were freed. Britain discontinued its involvement 68

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Racial Prejudice

International Slave Trade Use of African slave labor by European colonization began in the mid-sixteenth century when black Africans were brought to Brazil to work on Spanish sugar plantations. The uprooted African populations brought long distances from homelands and families were considered a more reliable slave workforce than local indigenous peoples who could more readily escape and receive local support. Until the 1730s the Spanish, Dutch, and Portuguese were the main slave traders. However, with the growth of the British Empire, the British became heavily involved. Between 1700 and 1810 the British alone transported 3.4 million black Africans across the Atlantic Ocean. Liverpool merchants financed British slave trade. As many fifteen million slaves in total were transported to the Americas. Most were

shipped in the eighteenth century before the international slave trade was officially banned in the United States and Britain. Over ten million Africans were forcibly moved to North America. Another two million died on the way on the crowded and filthy ships. Most slaves were people taken from the west coast of Africa, where people were adapted to tropical conditions. This was useful for plantation work in Brazil, the Caribbean, and the southern part of North America. Growth of the Atlantic slave trade gave rise to a unique form of racism— black slavery—that contrasted to earlier slavery among indigenous groups. The intense racism associated with slavery would long outlive slavery itself. Governmental laws and social traditions grew through time based on racial prejudice.

in the international slave trade by 1807, and in 1833 slavery ended in British territories, leading to the freedom of around eight hundred thousand slaves. The former slaves continued as impoverished fieldworkers.

Black immigration begins into Britain Following World War II (1939–45), the British colonies gained independence and became part of the British Commonwealth. Freedom from European colonialism often took their regions from direct domination to status as a Third World country. Third World countries are those countries with little industrial development. They always lag behind the more fully industrialized nations economically and as a result remain disadvantaged. Such countries in the twenty-first century include the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Angola, Nepal, Afghanistan, and Yemen. Many blacks from the former British colonies of the New Commonwealth, including areas of the Caribbean, Africa, and India, migrated (move from one country to another) to Britain to find jobs in the postwar economic boom. Parts of Britain had been severely damaged Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

69

Racial Prejudice

by the war and much rebuilding was needed. As a result, the major issues of race relations shifted from the former colonies to Britain itself. The migrants were begrudgingly welcomed because of the need for abundant cheap labor to perform unskilled jobs that carried little status. The Nationality Act of 1948 helped ease the hurdles of migration by making all people of the British Commonwealth countries British citizens, including blacks and South Asians who began arriving in large numbers seeking jobs. Restriction to these menial jobs only served to support colonial stereotypes of blacks held by Britons. Little in the way of educational opportunities, housing, and welfare assistance was provided to assist settlement. When the economic boom began to decline in the late 1950s as rebuilding from the war wound down, prejudice and discrimination escalated. The immigrants were viewed as competitors for the few jobs available. Racial violence first broke out in the Notting Hill district of London in 1958. Calls for new immigration restrictions mounted. Meanwhile, the immigrants remained limited to low-status jobs, earning much less than white British workers. Parliament (the British legislative branch of government) passed the Commonwealth Immigrants Act of 1962, which increased restrictions by requiring immigrants to have written government approval before leaving for Britain. The racial bias of the anti-immigration movement was highlighted by the lack of restrictions placed on Irish immigrants. Immigration restrictions on people of color, such as from Pakistan, the Caribbean islands, and India, were extended and repeatedly strengthened by additional British legislation through the remainder of the century. While the rights of blacks were increasingly limited, police surveillance of minorities increased in search of illegal immigrants.

A weak commitment to ending prejudice These strict immigration laws outweighed the weaker anti-discrimination measures passed by Parliament beginning in 1965 to supposedly ensure equality. In 1965 Parliament passed the Race Relations Bill that prohibited racial discrimination in public places, such as restaurants, hotels, entertainment places, and transportation. However, enforcement of British anti-discrimination laws received little emphasis. The act established the Race Relations Board to resolve complaints of discrimination by minorities. The Board, though, had little authority to enforce solutions as there remained little sympathy for the problems of immigrants. Fearful that race riots might spread in Britain as in America in the late 70

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Racial Prejudice

1960s, Parliament passed the Race Relations Act in 1968. The act included bans on discrimination in employment and housing. However, the power of the Board was not expanded reflecting the weak national commitment to actually solving problems of discrimination. With studies conducted in the 1970s showing little improvement in the living standards of Britain’s minorities, Parliament passed a new Race Relations Act in 1976 that created the Commission for Racial Equality. Though having investigative powers unlike the previous Board, the CRE proved little more effective than its predecessor given the strong antiimmigration feelings in the country, particularly toward people of color.

Racial violence erupts Resentment among the racial minorities regarding the slow response to racial prejudice and discrimination grew through the 1970s. By the early 1980s, black youth began to strike back with violence. In the summer of 1981, a wave of violence starting in the south London area of Brixton spread throughout several other communities, including Leeds, Edinburgh, and Leicester. Minority youth including blacks and Asians clashed with police in reaction to charges of racial harassment by police authorities. The riot began as white policemen were taking a black knifing victim to a hospital for care; however, it was driven by harassment just in general. Many white youth also joined minority gangs in these clashes. Over three thousand youth were arrested during the riots. Besides the increasing distrust between minorities and police, unemployment, especially high among youth, also played a key role in the political grievances of the youth. Police were the chief targets of the violence in most cases. Though the violence was suppressed by police, resentments still simmered. In 1983, the Greater London Council adopted plans to address racism in the city including declaring London an AntiRacist Zone. The ordinance enforced anti-discrimination laws. After two years of uneasy quiet, violence erupted again in 1985 primarily between black youth and police over ongoing harassment. This time the riot was triggered again in Brixton of South London by police accidentally shooting a black mother of six, a Jamaican immigrant, while searching in her home for her son suspected of a firearms offense. Riots spread to the Tottenham district of North London and became known as the Broadwater Farm Riot. During this second wave of violence some rioters were armed and one police officer was killed. Approximately 220 police were injured. Three blacks were convicted of murder for the policeman’s death and sentenced to life in prison. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

71

Racial Prejudice

Although racial tensions remained high in the twentieth century, some economic advances did occur for minorities in Britain. By the late 1980s, Asian and Caribbean entrepreneurs (those who take a financial risk in starting new businesses) became successful small business owners. By 1993, about 7 percent of this population was involved in minority-owned businesses. Many were businesses catering to minorities, such as restaurants and general goods stores. Entrance by minorities into management positions at larger businesses remained out of reach because of racism. The obscure (not clearly evident) nature of the black presence in Britain owes largely to de facto (accepted as a standard, but not reinforced by law) racial segregation. British leaders long believed that the white British culture should be dominant. Therefore black Britons lacked equal opportunity for education and business. Continuing into the twenty-first century they lived in poor communities separated from white society.

Indigenous Australians When British explorer Captain James Cook (1728–1779) arrived on the shores of Australia in 1770, the vast continent was inhabited by a diversity of indigenous (first or earliest-known inhabitants) peoples. Historians estimate they numbered in the hundreds of thousands. Many different languages and social customs existed across the continent in the numerous groups. Typical of other early explorers, Cook ignored the natives’ attachment to their traditional homeland and claimed the eastern half of Australia as a British possession. British colonists began arriving in 1788. They referred to the natives collectively as Australian Aborigines. As ranching and mining activities of the new settlers spread, the indigenous population was decimated by new diseases brought by the invading colonists. The new diseases for which they had no natural resistance included chickenpox, smallpox, influenza, and measles. They also suffered from the loss of their most productive lands and traditional food resources, resulting alcohol abuse of liquor acquired or traded from settlers, and hostile interaction between natives and settlers that occurred sporadically across the frontier (the edge of more substantial settlement). Those who lived along the more fertile coastal areas where Europeans first settled were affected first. Some groups disappeared altogether while others were absorbed into colonial settlements. Some 90 percent of the aboriginal population was ultimately lost. Although the British government controlled activities in the Australian colonies, control of the natives was left to the colonists. Given their racial 72

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Racial Prejudice

prejudices, this led to strict racial controls. A series of Aboriginal Acts limited the freedoms of the natives, such as freedom of movement and freedom to practice certain cultural traditions. By the twentieth century, most remaining indigenous Australians lived in remote desert areas or in impoverished neighborhoods on the fringes of European settlements. Many adapted to European ways of life, working as ranch hands or laborers. Often they would not be paid in money but instead given food, clothing, and other of life’s necessities. Many living in the deserts kept their traditional ways of life and fought further expansion of European settlements inland. Out of hundreds of the separate original indigenous languages, only about two hundred survived. In the early twentieth century, the Aborigine population began to rebound as its resistance to diseases increased. The birthrate of indigenous Australians increased as their population grew once again. However, the racial segregation of indigenous peoples from mainstream society and discrimination regarding educational and job opportunities kept them impoverished. Life expectancy was twenty years less than the average Australian citizen. The native population suffered higher rates of unemployment, more health problems, and greater poverty than the general population. Indigenous people were more likely to be imprisoned or to commit suicide. They were frequently called the derogatory term Abos. Progress toward inclusion in the dominant white society and equality came slowly, later in the century. The first Aborigine to become an Australian citizen was Albert Namatjira (1902–1959) in 1957. Aborigines finally gained the right to vote in national elections in 1962 and in all state elections by 1965. In 1967, indigenous people were finally included in the national census. From the early 1970s into the twenty-first century, many indigenous Australian community organizations were formed to exert greater independence from Australian government control. Some even fought to establish a separate, independent country. The Northern Territorial Lands Rights Act in 1976 and other legislation did give some land back, though most of it was arid desert difficult for farming and sustaining life. In 1992, indigenous Australians won a favorable decision in the Australian High Court. The Court ruled that indigenous people had valid claims to lands they had lost and were due payment for those losses. However, they lost in obtaining an amendment to the Australian constitution that would recognize the original occupation of Australia by Aborigines. Therefore, their gains were limited to individual claims rather than larger claims as a group. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

73

Racial Prejudice

A series of Aboriginal Acts limited the freedoms of the natives, such as freedom of movement and freedom to practice certain cultural traditions. # BET TMA NN /CO RB IS .

In June 2001, the Australian Bureau of Statistics estimated that there were over 458,000 indigenous peoples, or about 2.4 percent of the total Australian population. Despite their gains, natives still suffered from marginalization (actions to exclude a particular group from fully participating in the benefits of society). Though the indigenous Australians gave up on establishing a new country, social services provided to them were reformed. For example, social programs designed to aid the indigenous peoples were originally handled separately from the rest of Australian government services by The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission. However, in 2004 the Australian government abolished the commission and began providing assistance directly through the agencies that serve the general population in order to provide assistance in a more effective, direct way. In addition, the government established the Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination within the Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs 74

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Racial Prejudice

to coordinate the various programs for indigenous peoples. Even the term Aborigine began to fall out of favor with increasing preference for Indigenous Australian.

Racism in Europe For decades after World War II, the strict oppressive Communist (political and economic system where a single political party controls all aspects of citizens’ lives and private ownership of property is banned) governments in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union suppressed most expressions of racism and other forms of ethnocentrism. Following the collapse of those governments in 1990 and 1991, racism in Europe intensified dramatically. In the former communist countries of Eastern Europe— such as Hungary, Romania, Poland, and Czechoslovakia—ethnic prejudices exploded as nationalist movements (organized efforts to establish or aggressively maintain a particular nation) grew. This trend saw the greatest violence in the former Yugoslavia as ethnic cleansing savagely occurred (see Yugoslavia chapter 15). In Western Europe, racism was focused largely against foreigners of color. Beginning in the mid-1980s, right-wing political parties began gaining greater support largely through their anti-immigration positions. Racist movements increased their political clout. A key target of the racist trends were black Muslims who immigrated from North Africa to France, Germany, and other European countries. Since the early 1970s, European officials had signed agreements with Arab League nations (an international organization of predominantly Arab countries established for economic and social cooperation) allowing for massive Muslim immigration into Europe. Two radically opposing worldviews came into direct conflict and set the stage for strong racial prejudices. One part of society was rooted deeply in Western European social traditions, the other in Islamic beliefs. These differences not only involved religious practices, but such aspects as gender roles in society. Little assimilation (absorbing the culture of the majority group so that cultural trait differences disappear) resulted from the influx of immigrants. Muslim immigrants were among the poorest in France’s population. They lived in poverty in many areas including suburbs of Paris, such as the Seine-SaintDenis region north of the city. The large immigrant Muslim population was frustrated from the poverty, unemployment, and racial discrimination they experienced. Whereas the unemployment rate was around 10 percent for the nation in general, it was as high as 20 percent in many of these Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

75

Racial Prejudice

impoverished communities. Not only were there no jobs for youth, but no job centers for training, either. Many employers would not hire a youth who came from these Muslim communities not only because of lack of training but primarily because he was Muslim. Attacks against foreigners, led by neofascist (strongly racist beliefs) groups, escalated. Often this violence was in the name of nationalism (see chapter 9, Nationalism). Campaigns were formed by private organizations to make countries such as France and Germany free of foreigners. Though largely unsuccessful, they did succeed in fanning anti-immigration sentiments. Race relations in France reached a boiling point in late 2005 when riots spread throughout France. They were initially triggered by the deaths of two Muslim youths who were accidentally killed while running from police. Following their deaths, roaming gangs of angry youths burned thousands of cars and many buildings throughout the nation. Local community leaders called for fundamental changes, including an end to discrimination and greater employment opportunities. After much heated debate during 2006 among France’s parliament and leaders of the immigrant populations, a youth job plan was adopted to help train immigrant youths for the French job market.

Racism in America Racism in the United States progressed through several distinct periods since its colonial days and independence from Great Britain in the late 1700s. Slavery of blacks and destruction of Native American societies marked much of the nineteenth century. Slavery shaped racial prejudices and race relations long after it was outlawed as a formal institution. The end of slavery with the American Civil War (1861–65) led to segregationist Jim Crow laws in the United States beginning in the 1890s enforcing public segregation through much of the twentieth century (see Jim Crow chapter 17). Native Americans remained largely out of sight on the reservations for decades (see Native Americans chapter 18). The immigration of peoples from East Asia and Mexico through the early twentieth century led to strong anti-immigrant feelings and highly restrictive immigration laws (see Hispanic chapter 21). When the U.S. economy slumped badly during the Great Depression (1929–41) blacks, Hispanics, and other racial minorities suffered even more than whites from loss of jobs and income. To see their way through this difficult period, blacks formed cooperative organizations such as the Colored Merchants Association in New York City. They would buy food and 76

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Racial Prejudice

The end of slavery led to segregationist Jim Crow laws in the United States beginning in the 1890s and enforcing public segregation through much of the twentieth century. # BE TTM AN N/C OR BI S.

goods in large volumes to keep the prices as low as possible for purchase by minority families. Other efforts included ‘‘Jobs for Negroes,’’ which promoted the boycotting of stores selling goods primarily to blacks but having mostly white employees. By the late 1960s, the Jim Crow era of legally enforced racial segregation had come to a close with passage of the civil rights legislation banning racial discrimination in public places and opening up job opportunities. In addition, affirmative action programs (social programs designed to provide opportunities in education and employment long denied to minorities due to discriminatory social customs of the past) began opening up opportunities for racial minorities for education and jobs. Despite these advances, racial prejudice remained high as racist roots ran too deep for elimination by government laws and programs. The National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders established by Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

77

Racial Prejudice

President Lyndon Johnson (1908–1973; served 1963–69) following the 1967 race riots in America reported that two societies were forming in the United States based on skin color. Despite important progress and contributions of black Americans to U.S. society, social equality had yet to be achieved, and affirmative action policies of the 1960s came under increasing fire. In 1978, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that racial quotas (setting the numbers of various minorities that must be admitted to a school) could not be used in admitting students to institutions of higher learning. In addition, the federal government under Republican president Ronald Reagan (1911–2004; served 1981–89) was less aggressive in seeking settlements for job discrimination complaints by minorities. Implementing traditional Republican Party goals of smaller government, the Reagan administration also reduced federal welfare and housing programs originally designed to aid recovery from previous longstanding Jim Crow policies. As a result inner-city housing became more crowded and dangerous and homeless families became a more common sight on the streets. Throughout the 1980s, America’s black population saw little economic improvement. In 1988, one-third of the nation’s blacks still had incomes below the government’s poverty line and 45 percent of black children lived in poverty. Blacks also had an unemployment rate twice that of whites. The standard of living (ability to afford the minimum of life’s necessities and comforts) for blacks was far behind whites. Given the poverty and concentration of black populations in high-crime rate areas, as late as 2000 almost 48 percent of murder victims in the nation were black even though black Americans comprised just 12 percent of the population. Statistics showed little improvement for blacks in America since the late 1960s. Housing integration also showed few gains despite the federal housing policies since the 1960s of the new U.S. Housing and Urban Development (HUD) agency created to promote more low-income housing in place of slums. The legacy of Jim Crow was still strong. Black Americans continued fighting an uphill battle for upward social mobility (a person’s opportunity to change his social standing). In the twenty-first century, race still influenced almost every aspect of American culture. Prejudice against poor women of color labeled as ‘‘welfare mothers’’ and stereotyped as lazy and immoral and not deserving of government assistance contributed to a major change in American social welfare policy in the 1990s. Institutional racism replaced legally enforced racist policies. Institutionalized racism is concealed in the procedures of industry, 78

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Racial Prejudice

schools, and other social institutions. It may not even be intentional. For example, banks may have tight credit policies for minorities for home and business loans based on attitudes and beliefs that minorities will not make good on the loan; job benefits may be restricted for minorities; and standardized school and academic tests may be based on the cultural norms of the dominant white society.

Race and policing In the late twentieth century, numerous complaints were made of harsh policing activities against minorities in the United States, Britain, Australia, France, and Germany. Charges involved aggressive tactics by police while making traffic stops, searches, and arrests, as well as detainee treatment in custody and use of excessive force in general. Minority anger against the justice systems persistently simmered just below the surface. For example, when a Miami, Florida, court acquitted (found not guilty) four police officers in 1980 in the beating death of a black businessman, violence erupted. Blacks attacked whites on the streets, sometimes dragging them from cars. Eighteen people died and hundreds of millions of dollars of damage occurred before police could regain control of the area. A 1983 British study indicated young black males were much more likely to be stopped and interrogated than white youth. The same tendency was noted in the United States as well. Police departments responded that their ‘‘war on crime’’ frequently led them to minority areas where crime rates were high. Other complaints, aside from aggressive searches, involved intensive policing of minority neighborhoods, immigration raids, and general harassment. Studies such as the 1968 report by U.S. National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders consistently showed that black youth were becoming alienated from legal authorities in many countries. This alienation led to riots in Britain in 1981 and 1985, in which black youth attacked police. The 1968 U.S. report stated that the police represented white racism and repression to the black communities. To calm the situation, black leaders called for better police training, including race relations courses, more minorities on the police forces, and stronger disciplinary measures for racist behavior displayed by law authorities. In the 1980s complaints from black communities also resulted from the seeming lack of police response to calls for help from within minority areas. Black leaders charged that meeting the needs of minorities was a low police Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

79

Racial Prejudice

Police officers beating Rodney King in Los Angeles in 1992. A P IM AGE S.

priority. Some crime-ridden neighborhoods felt abandoned. Some charged that when police did respond the minority victims were treated as if they were the criminals. Charges of lack of protection grew in France and Germany as violent right-wing attacks on minorities increased in the 1990s. The intensity of black anger toward authorities was well demonstrated in 1992 in Los Angeles. An amateur photographer captured on videotape the beating of Rodney King by Los Angeles police officers in 1991 during a routine traffic stop. Before the end of the day, the footage was released to all major networks and viewed by millions of Americans. The excessive violence used by four police officers on the tape shocked the nation. Acquittal in late April 1992 of the police officers who had been charged with assaulting King led to rioting in Los Angeles and an outpouring of anger against the criminal justice system by blacks. Many expressed a loss of faith in the justice system. The riots resulted in fortyfour deaths and two thousand injured. Eleven hundred arrests were made. In the spring of 2000, the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights in the United States released a report titled Justice On Trial: Racial Disparities in the 80

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Racial Prejudice

Racial Profiling In the late twentieth century, a new form of racial discrimination by government authorities came to the public’s attention; it is known as racial profiling. Studies conducted in the 1990s and early 2000s showed that minorities were much more likely to be targeted by police out of suspicion and searched than whites in proportion to their presence in the local population. The studies showed that blacks were more likely than whites to be searched during routine traffic stops as well. Racial profiling occurs when police decide to stop a motorist or pedestrian based largely on that person’s assumed race or ethnicity. Profiling is a policing strategy long used to focus attention on certain suspicious behaviors or circumstances likely to have criminal connections based on past

crime patterns. Sometimes these patterns are only perceived, shaped by prejudices, and not well documented. Racial profiling in the United States grew out of the War on Drugs declared by President Ronald Reagan in the 1980s. The War on Drugs involved more aggressive policing in drug enforcement, particularly aimed at drug trafficking on the streets. This brought police more often into residential areas containing a large proportion of minorities. Profiling was considered a tool to increase the efficiency of the policing. Accusations of discriminatory racial profiling escalated through the 1990s. The phrase ‘‘driving while black’’ captured the black community’s frustration with alleged police harassment.

American Criminal Justice System. The report indicated that people of color in America were treated more harshly by police and the criminal justice system than whites. At the same time a Justice Department study of the juvenile justice system reached the same conclusion regarding treatment of black youth. Racial profiling attracted considerable attention in both studies (see box). Many law authorities again responded that impoverished communities experience intensified levels of criminal behavior, and minorities make up the majority of those communities. However, the Justice Department study also showed that minority juveniles were twice as likely to be sentenced to prison as whites for similar crimes. Another study by the Border Action Network in 2004 also indicated that minorities were far more likely to be searched by U.S. Customs than whites. The studies highlighted that when minorities were targeted for traffic stops and searches, the police were no more likely to find incidence of lawbreaking than by stopping whites. Therefore, targeting minorities resulted in more minority arrests simply because they were stopped more often, not because there was a greater chance of uncovering unlawful activity. This prevalence of arrests, convictions, and sentencing of minorities further promoted racial stereotypes and prejudices. The practice of targeting blacks by law officers contributed in large part to continued poor relations between police and black populations. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

81

Racial Prejudice

For More Information BOOKS

Chessum, Lorna. From Immigrants to Ethnic Minority: Making a Black Community in Britain. Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2000. Hirschmann, Kris. Racial Profiling. New York: Greenhaven Press, 2006. Jones-Brown, Delores. Race, Crime, and Punishment. Philadelphia: Chelsea House, 2000. MacMaster, Neil. Racism in Europe, 1870–2000. New York: Palgrave, 2001. Molnar, Stephen. Human Variation: Races, Types, and Ethnic Groups. 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1992. Monague, Ashley. Man’s Most Dangerous Myth: The Fallacy of Race. 6th ed. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press, 1997. Solomos, John. Race and Racism in Britain. 3rd ed. New York: Macmillan Palgrave, 2003. WEB SIT ES

‘‘Arrest the Racism: Racial Profiling in America.’’ American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). http://www.aclu.org/racialjustice/racialprofiling/index.html (accessed on November 21, 2006). ‘‘Slavery and the Making of America.’’ Public Broadcasting System. http:// www.pbs.org/wnet/slavery/ (accessed on November 21, 2006).

82

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

5

Religious Prejudice

ne night in June 1942, fourteen-year-old Samuel Goetz (1928–) watched in disbelief as his parents were taken forcefully from their home at gunpoint by men, German special agents, he had never seen. The Goetz family members were Jews living in Tarnow, Poland. For the previous few months, Sam and his friends watched as the life they had always known changed dramatically. As Jewish children, they no longer could attend school. Parks, movie theaters, skating rinks, and entire parts of their town were closed to Jews. Sam would never see his parents again. He too was soon taken from Tarnow and ended up in a concentration camp, Ebensee, in the Austrian Alps. Goetz survived and later moved to the United States where he earned a doctorate in optometry and became outspoken on the fate millions of European Jews faced during that earlier time.

O

By the year 2005, a Shiı´te Muslim family from Tarmiya, Iraq, had not left their home for a month. They could no longer go to market or take their children to the medical clinic. Tarmiya, a city north of Baghdad, is a predominantly Sunni Muslim town. Shiı´te and Sunni are two opposing branches of the religion known as Islam. The followers of Islam are called Muslims. The Tarmiya family felt unsafe just opening their front door or standing in their yard. Sunnis had recently lobbed mortar shells at neighbors’ houses where two of the family’s Shiı´te religious leaders lived. Graffiti-covered rock walls, telling all Shiı´tes to get out of Tarmiya. Both the Shiı´te Muslim family from Iraq and the Goetzes from Poland were victims of religious prejudice. Prejudice is a negative attitude, emotion, or behavior towards individuals based on a prejudgment about those individuals without having any prior knowledge or experience. Religious prejudice means negative attitudes or behavior between people of different religious groups because of their differing religious beliefs. 83

Religious Prejudice

WORDS TO KNOW anti-Semitism: Policy unfavorable to the Jewish people; hatred and discrimination against Jews. fundamentalist movement: A movement stressing strict adherence to a basic set of religious beliefs and seeking to replace a secular government with a sectarian one.

secular government: A government run by political leaders rather than by leaders of a certain religion. sectarian government: A government run by religious leaders of one particular religion.

Different religions have different beliefs, practices, and leadership structure. In many regions of the world, religion is the defining characteristic of a people. People tend to elevate their religion as the one and only true belief system or faith. This absolute conviction of superiority over all other religions can be dangerous. When for whatever reason a people of one religion become adversaries with people of a different belief system, prejudice and discrimination (treating some differently than others or favoring one social group over another based on prejudices) always occur. Opponents are usually labeled as heathens or infidels, both meaning ‘ unbelievers.’’ Severe conflict resulting in violence can occur. World history is full of holy wars that were fought in the name of one’s religion and God, all of which resulted in horrific death and destruction. During the twentieth century, just as in every century of human history, religious prejudice, discrimination, and conflict were prevalent (widespread). Religious prejudice has led to discrimination, including oppression of religious practices, refusal to hire persons of the opposing religious beliefs, limiting educational opportunities of children, and banning social interaction between various religions. At its worst, religious prejudice has led to armed conflicts resulting in destruction of homes, religious sites, even entire villages, and the death of millions of people. Some long-standing conflicts explained in this chapter are: Islam’s Sunni Muslims versus Shiı´te Muslims; Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs of India; and Buddhist Tibetan suppression within the People’s Republic of China. The most merciless loss of life to religious prejudice in the twentieth century occurred in Europe in the 1930s and 1940s. Six million European Jews were murdered by Germany’s Nazi army simply because they were Jews. Hatred of Jews is called anti-Semitism. Anti-Semitism involves not only religious prejudice but also racial prejudice as well. 84

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Religious Prejudice

Major World Religions With more than two billion adherents, Christianity is the world’s largest religion. The two major branches of Christianity are Catholicism and Protestantism. Believers within the Christian religion are called Christians.

350 million devotees. Sikhism, another religion originating in India, was founded as an alternative to Hinduism and Buddhism. Sikhism has approximately 21 million followers. Many gods are worshipped in the Indian religions.

The second largest religion, with more than one billion adherents, is Islam, followers of the Prophet Muhammad who lived in present-day Saudi Arabia in the seventh century. Those faithful to the Islamic religion are called Muslims. Both Christians and Muslims believe in one Supreme Being, God or Allah.

Judaism is the religion of Jewish people. Worldwide, the Jewish population is about fifteen million. There are a number of movements within Judaism, such as Reform, which is progressive and eliminates some ancient traditions, and Orthodox, which retains ancient practices. A considerable number of Jews are secular (not involved in the formal practice of Judaism) but nevertheless maintain their identity as Jews. Like Christians and Muslims, Jews are monotheistic, believing in only one God.

The third and fourth largest religions both originated in India. Hinduism claims more than eight hundred million adherents; Buddhism, more than

Another form of religious prejudice resulting in conflict is religious fundamentalist movements (movements that stress strict adherence to a basic set of religious beliefs). The goal of fundamentalist movements is to replace governments run by politicians with ones led by religious leaders governed under religious law. The foremost example of such a movement in the second half of the twentieth century progressing into the twentyfirst century is Islamic fundamentalism. Islamic fundamentalists opposed the presence of influences from any other religion within their own societies, which has led to justifying terrorist attacks against Western societies. Although religious prejudice often begins conflicts, such conflicts frequently involve other issues such as economic strife and political unrest. A prime example is the conflict between Catholics and Protestants in the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. Long under political rule by Protestants, Catholics rebelled against what they considered not only political but economic discrimination as well, as Protestants also had cornered the better job opportunities. A bloody campaign lasted from 1964 through the mid-1990s aimed at driving the Protestants out of Northern Ireland. Thousands were left dead until a truce finally resulted. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

85

Religious Prejudice

Iraq–Sunni versus Shiı´ tes The second largest and fastest-growing religion of the world is Islam. Islam means recognition of and total submission to the one and only God known as Allah. A follower of the Islam religion is called a Muslim. Muslims believe the angel Gabriel related the words of the Qura´n, Islam’s sacred book, to Prophet Muhammad (570–632), who lived in presentday Saudi Arabia. All Muslims consider the Qura´n the one true account of God’s words to man. They believe the Qura´n is the communication that reveals God’s will for man and provides a prescription for the way to live one’s life. Muhammad, the messenger of God’s words, is thought to have lived a perfect, sinless life in accordance with God’s will. Stories of Muhammad’s life and his sayings are collected in a multi-volume set of books known as the Sunna, which means ‘‘way of the prophet.’’ Each account in the Sunna is called a hadith, or tradition. The Sunna helps Muslims better understand how they are to live out God’s will. Although Islam originated in the Middle East, by the twenty-first century it had spread to many parts of the world and had roughly 1.3 billion followers. Large concentrations of Muslims live not only in the Middle East but in Northern Africa and Central and Southern Asia, especially Pakistan, Indonesia, Bangladesh, and India. There are two main branches of Islam, Sunni and Shı´a, the latter whose followers are called Shiı´tes. Worldwide the overwhelming majority of Muslims are Sunni, between 85 to 90 percent. However, in the Middle East countries of Iraq and Iran, Shiı´tes are in the majority. In Iraq, where 97 percent of the people are Muslim, between 60 to 65 percent of Muslims are Shiı´tes and 32 to 37 percent Sunni. In Iran, where 98 percent of the people are Muslim, 89 percent belong to the Shiı´te sect and 9 percent are Sunni. Shia´ Islam has been the official religion of Iran since the sixteenth century. The Sunnis and Shiı´tes originally split over who should rightfully succeed (take the position of) Muhammad upon this death in 632 CE . Sunni followed Abu Bakr (c. 573–634), Muhammad’s closest companion. Others believed Muhammad had chosen his son-in-law Ali to succeed him. Ali’s followers became the Party of Ali, or in the Arabic language, Shia´t Ali. Shia´ Muslims or Shiı´tes derived their name from Shia´t Ali. Further, the Shiı´tes reject the hadiths found in the Sunna. They claim the Sunni hadiths are biased against and discredit Shia´ Islam. 86

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Religious Prejudice

Throughout much of the twentieth century, Iraq was ruled by Sunni politicians who kept the Iraqi population under tight control with their military-based security forces. Sunni Saddam Hussein (1937–2006) took over leadership in 1979. Hussein took a leading role in the overthrow of Shiı´te leaders by the Baath political party in 1968. For his efforts he was appointed vice president of Iraq until 1979, when he became president following the resignation of the existing president. He brutally discriminated against the majority Shiı´tes, most of who lived in central and southeastern Iraq. Hussein’s Sunni security forces murdered tens of thousands of Shiı´tes. Hussein gave favors to Sunni, making many of them wealthy landholders of the lush farming areas near Baghdad. Sunni lived predominantly in and around Baghdad. Some Shiı´tes came north to work on the land but lived in poverty and constant fear of Hussein’s security forces. When the United States forces invaded Iraq in spring 2003 and drove Hussein from power, religious hatred between Shiı´tes and Sunni resurfaced after being suppressed under Hussein’s rule. After decades of oppression, Shiı´tes began to assert themselves. By late 2005, two and a half years into the invasion, deep divides that had long split Iraq society were violently bursting into full view. Shiı´tes in predominantly Sunni neighborhoods and Sunni in predominantly Shiı´te towns and neighborhoods lived with constant threats. Everyday life in Iraq became Shiı´te against Sunni. Despite the urging of restraint by some Shiı´te and Sunni leaders, Sunni Arabs were striking viciously against Shiı´te neighbors. In revenge, Shiı´te death squads were openly hunting down Sunni. Shiı´tedominated government was making constant arrests in Sunni neighborhoods. Expressions of prejudice were found scribbled on walls and in leaflets spread about towns. By late 2005, it was apparent to local officials, nongovernmental organizations, and military officials that Baghdad and approximately twenty towns around Baghdad were segregating into Sunni-only and Shiı´te-only enclaves. Those Shiı´tes who lived in predominantly Sunni towns such as Samarra, Tarmiya, Fallujah, and Abu Ghraib Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Saddam Hussein’s Sunni security forces murdered tens of thousands of Shiı´tes. # R EU TER S/ COR BI S.

87

Religious Prejudice

were packing and moving into Shiı´te neighborhoods in Baghdad and to Shiı´te towns south of Baghdad. Similarly, Sunni living in predominantly Shiı´te towns south of Baghdad were moving to towns to the north and to Sunni areas in Baghdad. Once relocated, families were more at ease but bitterness and hatred between Sunni and Shiı´te was deeply rooted. Many Iraqi leaders feared once U.S. occupation forces left, the country would erupt in civil war; however, religious strife was approaching civil war even with U.S. forces still occupying Iraq in late 2006.

Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs in India India, located in Southwest Asia, is made up of a highly diverse population with practicing members of most of the world’s largest religions. Of India’s approximately one billion people in 2005, about 80 percent practice Hinduism. Hinduism is the world’s third largest religion with over 800 million adherents. Hinduism began in India approximately 2,500 BCE . Hinduism grew from a collection of practices and traditions that vary from village to village and region to region. Unlike Islam, which recognizes only one God, Hinduism has a number of deities (gods) who may be local deities of a particular community or even personal deities of individuals. They may be images of just about any aspect of life, but all are representative of a high god that is contained in everything worldly. Most Hindus believe in reincarnation, the concept that one’s soul lives many lifetimes in order to grow and evolve. Actions of the former life determine what type of new life the soul will choose. Approximately 13 percent of India’s population is Muslim. Islam came to India around the thirteenth century from Central Asia. Some Indians converted from Hinduism to Islam but most remained Hindu. Sikhs make up 1.9 percent of India’s population and number approximately 21 million. Most Sikhs live in Punjab, located in northwest India. Guru Nanak (1469– 1539), born in Punjab to Hindu parents, established Sikhism as an alternative to Hinduism and Islam when he became displeased with both. Nanak was considered missing and dead; however, he soon reappeared preaching a new faith based on a single god. His following steadily grew. Britain took control of India in 1858 and held it as a colony until 1947. By the start of the twentieth century all Indians, both Hindu and Muslim, had become disillusioned with British rule. They believed British policies impeded their civil rights. For example, the British denied Indians trial by jury. 88

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Religious Prejudice

Members of the Sikh community present a portrait of Guru Nanak to the Indian prime minister. AF P/G ET TY I MA GES .

Adding to the tumultuous atmosphere, the majority Hindus and minority Muslims held prejudicial views of each other and clashed constantly. Muslims formed the Muslim League in 1906 to develop better job and educational opportunities for Muslims within India. Muslims feared the predominantly Hindu Indian National Congress, which had been established in 1885 to seek independence for India from British colonial rule. They believed as the Congress grew more powerful Muslims would be discriminated against in politics, employment, and education. When India began talks with the British government for independence from Britain in 1946, approximately 200 million Muslims, the largest minority in India, lived in the country’s northwestern regions. Violent riots broke out as Muslims demanded their own nation. Britain agreed that the only solution was to divide India into two countries, India and Pakistan. India would be predominantly Hindu; Pakistan was established as an Islamic nation. In August 1947, Hindus and Pakistanis Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

89

Religious Prejudice

gained their independence. Muslims moved from India to Pakistan. Likewise, Hindus and Sikhs migrated out of Pakistan into India. An estimated ten million people moved from one country to the other. Nevertheless, many Muslims because of family ties and businesses continued to live in northern India. Although Muslims account for only 13 percent of the Indian population in the twenty-first century, in numbers they are over 100 million strong. In everyday life, Muslims and Hindus interact daily, but each harbors prejudicial attitudes toward the other. Since the 1980s, these views of one another escalated in India into riots, destruction of religious sites, and murders. In 2002 over 1,500 Muslims were reportedly killed in riots in Gujarat, a state of India. Although the Indian government had always been secular (led by politicians, not religious leaders), a Hindu fundamentalist (or, as called in India, a Hindu nationalist) movement developed. The political party, Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), pursued Hindu nationalism. It continued pursuing a goal into the twenty-first century to replace the secular Indian government with a Hindu government, but seeing little success in achieving that goal. Prejudice and fear resulted in riots and the destruction of the Babri mosque (house of worship) in Ayodhya, India, by Hindu militants in 1992. Hindus claimed the mosque was built on the site of the birthplace of Hindu god Rama. That same year, youthful Hindu activists caused major damage to Muslim businesses and residences located in the city of Bombay. The Hindu nationalism movement lost momentum in the early twenty-first century as the Indian government actively sought to find solutions to control the religious-based violence. Kashmir The British partition in 1947 did not include Kashmir, an area of 85,806 square miles located between India and Pakistan. Local princes ruled Kashmir. Islamic Pakistan attempted to claim Kashmir, which had a predominantly (approximately 77 percent) Muslim population and invaded the area in 1947. The Kashmir leader, called a maharaja, happened to be Hindu and tried to align with India for protection from Pakistan. After two bloody years of fighting between India and Pakistan for control of Kashmir, the United Nations succeeded in a ceasefire and established a boundary dividing Kashmir. The northwestern third of Kashmir was placed under Pakistani oversight. The remainder of Kashmir was under Indian control. 90

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Religious Prejudice

Throughout the second half of the twentieth century, Pakistan and India continued to struggle over Kashmir. Three wars (1948, 1965, and 1971) and countless incidents claimed thousands of lives on both sides. Muslim Kashmiris continued to attempt to separate Kashmir from India. Some wanted an independent nation, others desired to unite with Muslim Pakistan. By the late 1980s, Islamic insurgents in Pakistan lent significant support to the efforts of Kashmir Muslims to separate from India. Pakistan continued to claim that all of Kashmir should be part of Pakistan. Muslims accused the Hindus of torture, murder, and destruction of Muslim property, including mosques. In 2004, India and Pakistan began a tenuous ceasefire though political disputes on the boundary persisted. Bus service across the border was reestablished in 2005 reconnecting families and others living on the two sides. In 2006, the Indian-controlled Kashmir is called Jammu and Kashmir; the Pakistancontrolled area is called Azad Kashmir and Northern Areas. Sikhs Religious prejudice was also apparent in the Indian state of Punjab. Sikhs make up about 60 percent of Punjab’s population. Sikh leaders stressed the uniqueness of their people recognized by their religious practices, beliefs, and characteristic dress. Sikhs long held concerns about Hindu discrimination in employment and Hindu repression of Sikh religious traditions. Many Sikhs hoped to establish an independent nation, called Khalistan, to be free of Hindu discrimination and repression. Violence erupted in the early 1980s when militant Sikhs carried out terrorist acts, killing several Indian leaders. As a result, the Indian army moved into Punjab in mid-1984 and occupied the Golden Temple, the Sikh religious center. On October 31, Indian prime minister Indira Gandhi (1917–1984), daughter of famous peace activist Mahatma Gandhi, was assassinated by her Sikh bodyguards.

Between 1984 and 1987, violence in Punjab orchestrated by Sikh separatists (those desiring to separate from India) led to thousands of deaths; the majority of victims were innocent Sikh civilians. In 1987, the Indian government established military rule (all civil laws are suspended and the military directs everyday life) to stop the violence. Sikhs claimed extensive human rights violations, such as harassment and rape of women, torture and murder of Sikhs, and imprisonment of Sikhs without cause. Although the Indian government publicly denied such claims, officials continued to resist investigations by human rights groups. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

91

Religious Prejudice

The Sikh religious center, the Golden Temple in Amritsar, India. # BL AI NE HA RR IN GTO N II I/ CO RBI S.

Tibetans within the Peoples Republic of China Tibet, a vast mountainous region covering 470,600 square miles, lies in southwestern China. Its average elevation is 16,000 feet, and the world’s highest mountain, Mt. Everest (29,028 feet), is located on its southern border with Nepal. In addition to Nepal, Tibet is bordered on the south by India and Bhutan. The Tibetan population numbers between four and five million, with approximately half living in Tibet and the other half in neighboring Chinese provinces. About one hundred thousand live in India as well as a few thousand in Nepal and Bhutan. Although China has claimed control over Tibet for more than a thousand years, historians recognize China’s sovereignty (a nation free to make its own political decisions) only since the early 1700s. Tibetans are devoutly religious. During the seventh, eighth, and ninth centuries, Tibet was a dominant power in central Asia. During this time, Buddhism became the religion of Tibetans. Buddhism, with over 350 million adherents, was the world’s fourth largest religion at the start of the twentyfirst century. It was founded by Siddhartha Guatama (563–483 BCE ). 92

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Religious Prejudice

Tibetan monks in India. R. F OT OME DI A PV T. L TD.

Siddhartha is known by the name Buddha, which means ‘ enlightened one.’’ Buddhism teaches that everything is constantly subject to change and suffering. The only way to escape suffering is to stop craving material things of the world and live a virtuous life defined by such principles as doing no harm to living things; never stealing, lying, bragging, using drugs or alcohol; and by husbands and wives remaining faithful to one another. Tibetan Buddhism is a branch of Buddhism known as Lamaism. Its leading sect is called Yellow Hat and is led by the Dalai Lama. At first the Dalai Lama was the spiritual leader of just part of Tibet. However, in 1642 the Dalai Lama became recognized as the spiritual leader of all of Tibet following victory by Mongol invaders who were devoted to the Dalai Lama. Tibetans believe that when the Dalai Lama dies, his spirit enters the body of a baby boy who becomes the new Dalai Lama. The fourteenth Dalai Lama was installed in 1940 at the age of seven. Such a young Dalai Lama led people through personal advisors. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

93

Religious Prejudice

Although Tibet had been part of China since the 1700s, during the first half of the twentieth century China’s weak central government was in a constant state of upheaval following a revolution that toppled the longstanding dynasty (ruling power passed through families for generations) form of governments with powerful emperors and began slowly establishing a more modern democratic (leaders selected by the people) form of government. Tibet was left alone to rule itself. In 1949, the Communists took control of China and in 1950 the Chinese People’s Liberation Army pushed into Tibet, overpowering Tibetan resistance. Tibetans were forced to sign the 17-Point Agreement for the Peaceful Liberation of Tibet that recognized Tibet as a part of China. Supposedly under the terms of the agreement the Dalai Lama’s government would continue to administer under a regional self-governing arrangement called autonomous rule. However, the Chinese Communist central government soon tightened control of Tibet. China’s government discriminated against Tibetans by pushing them out of their jobs and replacing them with Chinese workers. China’s government declared China as officially atheist (worshipping no god or gods). Religion was forbidden. By prohibiting religious worship, control of the region would be easier. Tibetan uprisings (a revolt) protesting Chinese control and discrimination began in the mid-1950s, ultimately leading to the loss of Tibet’s capital city of Lhasa in 1959. The Dalai Lama and tens of thousands of Tibetans fled to India where they continued to live in exile in the early twenty-first century. In 1966, Mao Zedong (1893–1976), chairman of the Chinese Communist Party, began the Chinese Cultural Revolution with the intention to make all people within China’s borders adhere to the Communists’ strict central control. At the time, upwards of 20 percent of all Tibetan males were Buddhist monks even though the Chinese communists did not allow religious practices. The Revolution aimed to destroy once and for all old traditions and ways of thinking including religious traditions. Considerable oppression resulted through the following decades. Between 1966 and 1979, the Chinese systematically destroyed Tibetan monasteries, places of Buddhist worship and teaching. By 1980, only a handful of approximately four thousand remained. The Chinese suppressed all other aspects of Tibetan culture. Chairman Mao died in 1976 and the new Communist chairman Deng Xiaoping (1904–1997) loosened somewhat the harsh control over Tibet. In 1979, he allowed a tour of Tibet by an official delegation of 94

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Religious Prejudice

In 1642 the Dalai Lama became recognized as the spiritual leader of all of Tibet. AP IM AGE S.

Tibetans living outside of China. The government was shocked at the outpouring of tens of thousands of Chinese Tibetans asking of the Dalai Lama’s well-being, a clear indication that Tibetan Buddhism had secretly endured. From his exile in India, the Dalai Lama continued to push for autonomous control of Tibet throughout the 1980s, although he compromised his stance by saying Tibet could remain a part of China. Within Tibet, the Tibetan people—including Buddhist monks— protested against continuing Chinese discrimination and control. The Chinese government declared martial law (military control) in 1989 to quell the protests even though they were peaceful, as the Dalai Lama had Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

95

Religious Prejudice

instructed. When martial law was lifted a year later, thousands more Tibetan refugees made their way to India and Nepal. The Dalai Lama received an international peace award, the 1989 Nobel Peace Prize, for his opposition to violence in his quest for Tibetan self-rule. At the start of the twenty-first century, the Dalai Lama continued his call for Tibetan self-governance and religious freedom.But the Chinese government held firm in its refusal, insisting all regional provinces including Tibet must adhere to central Chinese authority. Display of the Dalai Lama’s photographs continued to be forbidden. Information available over the Internet became an example of Tibetan Buddhist oppression in 2006. The U.S.–owned Internet search engine (a website that facilitates Internet searches for other websites that address particular topics) Google began operating in China, but only information on Web sites acceptable to the Chinese government were allowed to be included. In the United States, typing ‘‘Dalai Lama’’ into Google reveals biographical sites. The same search in China reveals only Chinese Web sites critical of the Dalai Lama.

Anti-Semitism Anti-Semitism is hatred of Jewish people for the sole reason that they are Jews. The Jewish religion is called Judaism. Those who harbor antiSemitic hatred use it to justify discrimination against and persecution of Jews. Although the actual term did not come into use until the late nineteenth century, the concept of anti-Semitism is rooted in religious differences with Christianity. Christians hold Jews responsible for the death of Jesus Christ, whom they view as the son of God. Anti-Semitic persecution of Jews takes the form of economic, educational, social, and political discrimination. Throughout much of history, European Jews have experienced economic discrimination: being barred from certain well-paying professions, being more heavily taxed than non-Jews, being turned down for employment merely for being Jewish. Jewish stores were frequently the targets of vandalism and graffiti. Educational institutions often limited Jewish enrollment or outright prohibited Jewish attendance. Socially, Jews were not welcomed in non-Jewish social activities. As early as the Middle Ages and as late as the 1930s and 1940s in Nazi Germany, which was controlled by the highly prejudiced Nazi Party, Jews were sometimes required to wear certain types of clothing, such as hats and coats, or markers on clothing, such as yellow star patches, to identify them as Jews. 96

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Religious Prejudice

Politically, for two thousand years Jews have been made the scapegoats for ills in a society. Scapegoating is blaming others for one’s own problems even though the others have no responsibility for the situation. Political leaders have used Jews as scapegoats, blaming them for economic or social troubles of their country. In the 1870s and 1880s, a new form of anti-Semitism developed in Europe, a sort of racial anti-Semitism. Jews were viewed as a people sharing genetic links that kept them always of the Jewish race, even if they did not follow the Jewish faith, and always outsiders. The thinking became widespread among Europe’s leaders that Jews could never fit into or assimilate into the nations where they lived such as Germany, Austria, Hungary, Poland, and France. As a result, many Jewish families began migrating to the United States where they eventually built safe lives. Also late in the nineteenth century, many Jews actively supported the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine on the eastern shore of the Mediterranean Sea where they had resided in biblical times. The movement to relocate Jews to Palestine is known as Zionism. The first group of Jews migrated to Palestine in 1882. Anti-Semitism culminated in the Holocaust. The Holocaust was the program carried out by Nazi Germany during the late 1930s and World War II (1939–45) with the goal of eradicating Jews from the world. Jews were blamed for Germany’s defeat in World War I and were considered genetically unfit in Germany’s goal to establish a pure German race. The Holocaust led to the murder of six million European Jews in addition to another five million people with various backgrounds—Gypsies, homosexuals, Catholics, Slavs, and any other peoples considered enemies. Largely because of this genocide (deliberate killing to eliminate an entire group of people), Jewish people were allowed by the international community of nations acting through the United Nations to declare an independent nation in the Palestine region in 1948. The new nation was called Israel. Israel is located along the eastern shore of the Mediterranean Sea on a small strip of land about the size of the U.S. state of Maryland. Israel was to be a secure homeland for Jewish people. However, Palestinian Arabs had lived in Palestine since the seventh century and they were resistant to moving. Palestinian Arabs follow the Islamic religion. As the Jewish people moved into Israel, Palestinian Arabs were forced off their land. The Palestinian Arabs claimed the land was their rightful homeland. The struggle for the land through the last half of the twentieth Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

97

Religious Prejudice

Jewish immigrants arriving in Tel Aviv after the creation of the Jewish state of Israel in 1948. # B ET TMA NN /CO RB IS .

century and start of the twenty-first century was violent and cost thousands of lives. Both people believed they were entitled to the same land to the exclusion of the other. Expressions of prejudice often lead to horrific acts of violence against each other. The Palestinian Arab-Israeli struggle escalated into a battle between all countries where Islam is the predominant religion and Israel. Commonly known as the Arab-Israeli conflict, in the early 2000s the difficulties threatened the entire Middle East and greatly contributed to the spread of Islamic fundamentalism.

Religious fundamentalism A particular form of religious prejudice is known as fundamentalism. Fundamentalist movements aim to replace secular governments with 98

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Religious Prejudice

those led by religious leaders and governed by religious law. While the Hindu nationalistic movement in India during the 1980s and 1990s is an example of a religious fundamentalist movement, the major example at the beginning of the twenty-first century was the Islamic fundamentalism movement. Attention of the world was dramatically focused on the movement after September 11, 2001, when extremist Islamic fundamentalists destroyed the World Trade Center in New York City. Two fully fueled jetliners crashed into the Twin Towers, causing each tower to collapse, killing thousands of people. Also that day, planes crashed into the Pentagon in Virginia and into a field in Pennsylvania, killing hundreds. The Islamic fundamentalists were under the direction of Osama bin Laden (1957–) of Saudi Arabia, who was guiding global terrorist attacks from Afghanistan. The goal of the Islamic fundamentalist movement is to replace secular governments with Islamic-led governments that strictly uphold Islamic principles and laws based on Islamic law known as Sharia. The Islamic governments would institute fundamental Islamic values for the entire population to live by. Islamic fundamentalist groups range from the most extreme—who insist that God commands Muslims to immediately replace secular governments with Islamic government using any violence necessary—to those who work within countries to provide medical, educational, and social welfare services to all the needy. The rise of Islamic fundamentalism occurred in the mid-twentieth century. A large number of Middle Eastern and North African countries gained independence from European colonial rule shortly after World War II in the mid- and late 1940s. The majority religion of these countries was Islam. The people’s high expectations for improved political and economic systems frequently disintegrated with corruption, high unemployment, and the number of poor overwhelming social service structures. Further, efforts to westernize—imitate cultures of Western Europe and the United States—tore at Islamic family and religious values, such as wearing traditional Islamic dress, attending mosque, and not drinking alcohol. Western cultures encompass all of the world’s religions, but the predominant religion is Christianity. Christians are followers of Jesus Christ (0–22 CE ). Christianity is a religion based on the teachings of Jesus Christ. It includes Catholic, Protestant, and Eastern Orthodox churches. Muslims increasingly blamed westernization and any leader in their country who supported it as the source of the decline in importance of Islamic values. Major international events that spurred Muslims to return Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

99

Religious Prejudice

to Islamic fundamentalism were Israel’s occupation of East Jerusalem that contained the Old City that is sacred to Muslims, Christians, and Jews after the 1967 Six Day War, the 1980s Soviet war against Afghanistan, 1990s United Nations’ trade sanction against Iraq that resulted in food shortages and the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children, and the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq and subsequent occupation. Within Iraq, the U.S. invasion was portrayed as a Christian invasion of an Islamic nation, Christianity versus Islam. Islamic fundamentalists discriminate against persons adhering to any religion other than Islam, particularly Jews and Christians who are considered intruders into Muslim territory. The creation of Israel and later wars with the United States and Israel represented stark examples of intrusion to Muslims in the region. While the epicenter of Islamic fundamentalism is found in the Middle Eastern countries, Muslim fundamentalists also live in the Asian countries of Indonesia, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and India. At the beginning of the twenty-first century, three nations had Islamic sectarian (run by religious leaders) governments: Iran, Pakistan, and the Sudan in Africa. Iran changed from a secular government to an Islamic government in 1979 with the overthrow of Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi (1919–1980). Pahlavi had come to power in 1941 and been a close ally (supporter) of the United States and Western Europe. The Iranian Islamic fundamentalist movement was led by Muslim cleric (religious leader) Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini (1900–1989), who strictly ruled Iran until his death. In the early 2000s, Iran remained an Islamic state where the government was intolerant of followers of other faiths, such as Christians, Jews, and Baha’is. Baha’is make up Iran’s largest religious minority. They are forbidden to practice their faith and are discriminated against in all aspects of life.

Catholics versus the Protestants in Ireland In 1534, King Henry VIII (1491–1547) of England broke ties with the Roman Catholic Church, whose seat of power was in Rome, Italy. He established a new church, the Church of England, also known as the Anglican Church. This revolt against Catholicism resulted in the birth of Protestantism. The Church of England was a Protestant church. Protestantism differed from Catholicism in important ways. Protestants believed: that anyone could read and interpret the Bible, not just priests; that God more freely forgives individuals of their sins than Catholics believed; and churches are governed by people of the church rather than an elaborate system of priests with the ultimate authority being the pope. 100

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Religious Prejudice

Ireland, an island west of England, had been under English control since the twelfth century. Although the Irish people were Catholic, King Henry tried to force Protestantism in Ireland. Irish Catholic rebellion against Protestantism began a struggle that continued to the end of the twentieth century. During the seventeenth century, English Protestants began to colonize or settle in northeastern Ireland, particularly in the historic area known as Ulster. Through bloody military conflicts Protestants drove the Catholics from their farmland by 1650, forcing them to work the land for English landlords, who took all profits. Throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, Irish Catholics’ resistance to Protestant England grew. Catholics, in continuous rebellion, struggled for independence from England. The minority Protestants living in Northern Ireland feared Catholic domination over them and continued to support English rule. In 1949, the Republic of Ireland declared its independence from England, but six northeastern counties collectively called Northern Ireland remained under English control, separate from the Republic of Ireland. In Northern Ireland, Protestants were the majority population and Catholics the minority. This separation of the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland did not suppress the struggle between Catholics and Protestants. Catholic Republic of Ireland supported efforts to unite Northern Ireland with the Republic. Within Northern Ireland, Protestants feared and distrusted the Catholics, who likewise feared and distrusted the Protestants. The resulting prejudice against one another led to segregation in all areas of society through time. No longer was Catholic versus Protestant a strictly religious conflict, but one that included economic, educational, and social discrimination. Catholic and Protestant children attended different schools; neighborhoods were strictly Catholic or Protestant; churches arranged social activities; and even senior citizen homes were separate. Favored by the English government over the Catholics, Protestants soon became wealthy land and business owners while discrimination against Catholics held them in low-paying jobs such as laborers. Catholics had no power against the government that was dominated by wealthy Protestants. Violence erupted in the 1960s as Catholics rebelled against Protestant oppression. From 1964 through the mid-1990s, a bloody campaign to drive the Protestants out of Northern Ireland left thousands dead. Catholic militant groups Sinn Fein and the Irish Republican Army (IRA) carried out terrorist activities such as bombing police stations, army bases, buses, Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

101

Religious Prejudice

The IRA was a militant group formed in 1919 to fight for Irish independence. TH E IM AG E WO RK S, I NC .

and hotels. Sinn Fein was a political party organized in 1905 dedicated to securing Irish independence. The oldest political organization in Ireland, its roots can be traced to the Catholic underground movement of the United Irishmen in 1791.The IRA was a militant group formed in 1919 to fight for Irish independence. England sent troops to halt the violence but had little success. The violence in Northern Ireland finally ended with the Good Friday Agreement, reached in April 1998. The Agreement provided for political power to be shared between Protestants and Northern Ireland’s Catholic population. Although prejudicial feelings lingered, at the beginning of the twenty-first century Northern Ireland remained free of violent clashes.

Conflicts continue In the early twenty-first century, the only resolution among the religious conflicts discussed in this chapter was the Catholics versus Protestants in Northern Ireland. Nevertheless, long-standing prejudices sometimes stay quiet for decades, only to reemerge much later. 102

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Religious Prejudice

The Dalai Lama’s quest for an end to suppression of Buddhist Tibetans continued. Kashmir remained a disputed territory with India and Pakistan was still laying claim to it. The world waited to see if SunniShiı´te discrimination and violence would lead Iraq to a civil war. Islamic fundamentalism continued to reject the values of the western, predominantly Christian nations. The Arab-Israeli conflict perpetuated extreme Islamic anti-Semitism into the twenty-first century. Anti-Semitism had also reappeared in Eastern European nations such as Poland and Hungary as political leaders again used Jews as scapegoats for their country’s ills.

For More Information B O O KS

Gerner, Deborah J. One Land, Two Peoples: The Conflict over Palestine. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1994. Partridge, Christopher, ed. New Religions: A Guide, New Religious Movements, Sects and Alternative Spiritualities. New York: Oxford University Press, 2004. Perlmutter, Philip. Divided We Fall: A History of Ethnic, Religious, and Racial Prejudice in America. Ames: Iowa State University Press, 1992. Rudolph, Joseph R., ed. Encyclopedia of Modern Ethnic Conflicts. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2003. Williams, Robin M., Jr. The War Within: Peoples and States in Conflict. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2003. PE RIODIC AL S

Di Giovanni, Janine. ‘‘Reaching For Power.’’ National Geographic, June 2004, pp. 2–35. Tavernise, Sabrina. ‘‘Sectarian Hatred Pulls Apart Iraq’s Mixed Towns.’’ New York Times, November 20, 2005. WEB SIT ES

‘‘Islam: Empire of Faith.’’ Public Broadcasting System. http://www.pbs.org/ empires/islam/ (accessed on November 21, 2006). The 1939 Club. http://www.1939club.com (accessed on November 21, 2006). ‘‘World Factbook.’’ Central Intelligence Agency. https://www.cia.gov/cia/ publications/factbook/docs/profileguide.html (accessed on November 21, 2006).

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

103

6

Social Class Prejudice

etween the ages of three and five, people begin to categorize their personal experiences, including information about the people they meet and learn about. For example, some of the first categories of people children learn in the United States involve color of skin and gender. Prejudices may soon develop targeted toward these categories of people based on what children learn from parents, friends, and others they come into contact with through places such as church, school, and day care. It is not until later in a child’s development that he begins to distinguish other people according to their personal wealth and social standing in the community. However, as described by Gordon W. Allport in his landmark book, The Nature of Prejudice, it is likely that prejudices based on these social categories will be an important part of the person’s beliefs and behavior the rest of his life.

B

Social class A social class is a group of people in a society who share a similar social and economic status. Class differences normally involve inequalities and prejudices between members of the different groups, such as between executive corporate officers and wage earners in factories. Life chances at education and jobs are highly influenced by the class a person is born into; the higher one’s social status, the better his chances for a solid education and meaningful career. The term ‘‘social class’’ was not widely used until the early nineteenth century. Until then the idea of rank (how one person is socially compared to another) was used to describe how societies structured themselves. By the 1770s, the idea of social class emerged as industrialization began to grow, in the British textile mills. Industrialization was the period (1878– 1900) in America in which the nation’s economy changed from one based on agriculture to one of industry and business. Machines located in 105

Social Class Prejudice

WORDS TO KNOW capitalism: Economic system in which production is privately owned, financed through private investments, and the demand for goods is established through an open market system largely free of government involvement and governed by competition among private businesses.

social class: Groups of people sharing similar wealth and social standing.

industrialization: The establishment of an economic and social system characterized by large industries, machine production, and the concentration of workers in urban areas.

social mobility: The amount of opportunity a person has in a particular society to change his social standing from one social class to another.

social status: A person’s social standing in a society determined primarily through the prestige of his occupation, a family name, education, or profession.

factories powered by steam or moving water rather than human or animal power were used to produce goods in large quantities. Previously, goods were made one at a time by craftsmen in their home shops. At the same time, cross-country transportation in the form of rapidly expanding railroad systems played a key role in the spread of industrialization in America in the late nineteenth century. Goods could be transported inexpensively in large quantities. Industrialization spread across Europe and North America in combination with the spread of capitalism. The new expanding factories needed capital (money) to begin operation. Capitalism is an economic system in which production is privately owned and financed, and the demand for goods is established through an open market system largely free of government involvement. The foundation of capitalism is competition among the private businesses. The growth of capitalism along with industrialization created a new group: the urban (city) working class who depended on the wages paid by the wealthy factory owners known as industrialists. Lifestyles of the workers and industrialists contrasted sharply with owners living in roomy large houses on country estates and workers living in crowded city residential areas near the factories. By the late nineteenth century social classes had taken shape with the upper class including industrialists and investors known as financiers, and the working class comprised of wage-earning laborers. By the mid-twentieth century, a third class developed. Known as the middle class, it included business managers and other professionals. 106

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Social Class Prejudice

The appearance of social classes Prior to the seventeenth century, a feudal system consisting of peasants, or farmers, working for large landowners, or lords, existed in Europe. The growth of industry and related capitalist economic systems by the nineteenth century introduced the emergence of wage earners working for wealthy commercial and industrial capitalists (those who invest funds into private businesses seeking profits). The class of peasants became a class of laborers. The upper class owned capital and the factories and the working class depended on wages paid by the new businesses. The upper class received their income primarily from investments, such as real estate and business growth. This urban working class of laborers grew rapidly in cities where newly established factories became concentrated into industrial centers influenced by convenient transportation networks, such as roads and railroads, and sources of energy to run the factories, such as hydropower from dams on rivers. As the growth of industrialization and capitalist economies swept the Western world of Britain, Europe, and the United States in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, societies naturally experienced major changes. Industrialization included an unequal distribution of power and wealth, which in turn shaped life chances and prejudices. Opportunities for higher education, occupational development, and financial betterment often dictated to which class a person would be limited. The opportunity to move up from one social class to another was still possible, but not without great individual effort often helped with some good fortune.

German philosopher Karl Marx greatly influenced the study of social classes throughout the twentieth century by more fully exploring the potential rise of prejudices and conflict between social classes and the possible consequences. GE TTY IM AGE S.

Social class theory As social classes in Western society began to develop,

they attracted the interest of political philosophers. Building on the earlier ideas of English philosopher John Locke (1632–1704) were French philosophers Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–1778) and Henri de Saint-Simon (1760–1825). They explored the inequalities and prejudices that developed along with these social classes. Still later came German philosopher Karl Marx (1818–1883), who greatly influenced the study of social classes throughout the twentieth century by more fully exploring the potential rise of prejudices Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

107

Social Class Prejudice

and conflict between social classes and the possible consequences. Many scholars in the past such as Marx believed economics was the dominant factor in establishing social classes. Marx wrote that those who controlled the means of economic production and distribution in a society and the capital for investment constituted the dominant (or upper) class. To sustain industrial production and profits, this dominant class exploited the lower class for its labor by imposing low wages, long hours, and unsafe working conditions. Therefore, these different classes performed different functions to economically sustain a society. Individuals learned their place in the production system by their class membership.

Virginian James Madison was the principal author of the U.S. Constitution, creating a new national government. # C OR BI S.

The resulting theories asserted that the newly formed industrial societies produced very distinctive social classes. The dominant class controlled industrial production, wealth of a nation, the flow of ideas or information through media, and formation of government policies. A working class provided labor and services. Marx believed that prejudices between the two classes would ultimately lead to conflict between them. Later scholars added other dimensions to the formation of classes besides economics. For example, German economist Max Weber (1864–1920) included nationalism (a strong belief that a particular nation is superior to other nations) and religious prejudice.

Social status Within social classes are found social status groups whose members gained their standing primarily through the prestige of their occupation, family name, or even by living on a certain street that represented a wealthy neighborhood or area. Wealth is a secondary factor but often contributes to the higher social status. Social status groups are common in most societies, including undeveloped countries where social classes are less well established. In societies of industrially undeveloped countries clans and other types of social groups that were based on an individual social ranking formed the basis for people to have social status, either high or low. Their economies remained based on agriculture. Royal clans ranked at the top of these societies. Social status of an individual in the twenty-first century was established in various ways: at birth based on family relations and wealth; 108

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Social Class Prejudice

Social Class Bias and the Founding Fathers In the United States, the Founding Fathers who created the U.S. form of government in 1787 were already very aware of social classes. They were also influenced by the thoughts of Locke and others regarding social class development. Many of the Founders were wealthy plantation owners and businessmen. In the summer of 1787 the Founders gathered at the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia to create a new U.S. Constitution. Virginian James Madison (1751–1836) was the principal author of the historic document creating a new national government. To promote adoption of the Constitution, Madison and others wrote a series of essays in 1787 and 1788, known as the Federalist Papers. In one of the essays, Madison noted that social classes were created by an unequal distribution of property among citizens. This inequity leads to differing political interests. Knowing that,

Madison and others wrote into the Constitution safeguards for the upper class to maintain political and economic control. They were greatly concerned because the working class and poor vastly outnumbered the wealthy. For this reason, they feared a true democracy in which the majority rules. The Founding Fathers believed only men of property should be able to vote in elections, and they could only vote directly for members of the U.S. House of Representatives. The individual state legislatures would elect U.S. senators for their states. An electoral college composed of wealthy men chosen by the states would elect the U.S. president. Supreme Court justices were to be nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate. Through this complex system, the selection of national leadership was safely buffered from influence of the large lower classes.

through education at an elite school; attaining a respected occupation, such as a lawyer or business executive; personal accomplishments; holding important offices; or through marriage into a higher social status group. A high social status gives an individual certain rights and responsibilities in society, such as greater access to high political office. As with social classes, the difference in social status between people determines how they behave toward each other and the prejudices they likely hold toward each other. People of higher status do not generally mix with lower-status people and often are able to control other people’s activities by influencing laws and social standards. Families in particular social status groups share common levels of economic wealth, prestige, and political power. In Western industrial societies, higher social status is reflected by possession of much property and goods, by appearance and clothes, and through etiquette (manners). As is true in social classes, certain material objects become status symbols indicating the importance of a person relative to others. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

109

Social Class Prejudice

Social class prejudice The division of Western societies into separate classes became widespread by the twentieth century. Differences in social class strongly affected the way people thought about others. Social classes came to represent inequalities with broad differences in opportunity, lifestyles, material standards, working conditions, and home environment. Each social class generally held a negative stereotype (an oversimplified opinion of others that often justifies negative prejudices) of other social classes. Working class looked at upper-class citizens as not doing real work, such as making products with their own hands. Upper-class and middle-class members viewed the working class as crude, uneducated, and toiling in unpleasant work conditions. Often the higher social classes associated the lowest classes with race or nationality. This association is part of the stereotypes created by different class members. Due to prejudices, members of the lower classes become stigmatized. Of course, people placed in lower status groups can develop prejudices against those who exert dominance. Stereotypes of snobbery, not working with their own hands, and so on abound. Since the industrial era certain occupations are consistently associated with certain social classes as well as certain behavior such as taste in music, income, and overall lifestyle. An education at an elite school can establish prestige and different types of schools breed different sets of social values and perspectives, such as serving in public offices or contributing to philanthropic (donating to a cause for the good of society) causes. In this way, they can actually encourage prejudice among social classes. These perspectives, knowledge, and skills, as well as prejudices, are passed on from one generation of students to another. The elite schools tend to legitimize membership of their students in dominant social classes. Social class prejudice normally involves elitism. Elitism is the attitude that members of a certain social class have personal abilities, such as intelligence or leadership skills, that place them at the top of the social stratification. Their views are taken more seriously than others. They are considered the most fit to govern a nation. Elites hold special positions of authority and enjoy special privileges that set them apart from others in society. They are accustomed to being treated specially with favoritism. Examples of well-known elites in America include wealthy presidents, including Franklin D. Roosevelt (1882–1945; served 1933–45) and George H. W. Bush (1924–; served 1989–1993), and celebrities such as professional athletes like basketball star Michael Jordan (1963–), actor 110

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Social Class Prejudice

Tom Cruise (1962–), and singer Michael Jackson (1958–). Some people are treated with favoritism simply because they are famous; however, being famous does not automatically make a person elite.

Indian caste system Some governments, strongly influenced by the upper-class wealthy and elite, passed laws supporting the existence of social classes. As a most striking example, this included the formal establishment of social castes, or social order, in India. The ancient caste system in India is an extreme version of social class stratification and prejudice. Castes are highly stratified societies that offer very little opportunity for social mobility. Castes have existed in various societies throughout time and around the world. Other examples of caste systems in the twentieth century include apartheid in South Africa and legally enforced racial segregation in the American South. In ancient Israel castes were primarily related to religious activity and privileges. They included three levels: the Cohamin priesthood; the Levites with slightly fewer privileges than the Cohamin; and the remainder of Israelite society. The Hindu society of India was composed of four castes plus a lower social level not considered a caste. Members of this lowest level were referred to as outcastes and also Untouchables. They worked in poor sanitary conditions and were considered to be very impure. The categories of castes were called varna. These include the priestly varna (Brahman), military and government leaders (Kshatriya), main society members such as farmers, merchants, and businessmen (Vaishya), and laborers and servants (Shudra). Indian leader Mahatma Gandhi (1869–1948) tried to end caste prejudices in the early twentieth century by calling the outcastes Harijans or ‘‘people of God.’’ However, strong prejudices against them persisted as he saw little success. Within each of the varna are jati, the actual functioning social groups. These are the groups that Indians most readily identify with during their daily lives. It is within jati that people are born and marry. These locally based groups consist of people in similar occupations; they are not grouped by skin color or economic standing. Networks of similar jati extend across India. Jati groups were accepted as the main building blocks of Hindu society. With the multiple varna and more numerous jati, the social structure of India was very complex. Unlike social stratification in many Western societies including the United States, the Indian caste system was based on social status rather Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

111

Social Class Prejudice

A high caste Brahmin landowner ready to fight in the caste conflict in India. AP I MA GE S.

than economic standing. Only members of the upper castes received education. Lower caste members were forbidden to seek educations or even acquire books. Shudras also could not practice professions that would give them financial independence or any accumulation of wealth. Their role was to serve the first three castes in a sort of economic slavery. All wealth in Indian society was reserved for the top three castes. Any close contact with people of lower caste polluted the person of a higher caste. Following contact, the higher caste members had to undergo a ritual purification. At the extreme were the Harijans, who worked at 112

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Social Class Prejudice

jobs such as street sweepers who pick up the manure of cattle allowed to freely roam. They could not walk on the same streets, use the same water, or live in the same housing areas as people in other castes. They were forced to drink unsafe water, which led to disease and unhealthy lives. Persistence of caste prejudice In 1947 the Indian government passed

legislation outlawing official recognition of the caste system. It could no longer legally enforce the caste system and began prohibiting discrimination among castes. To counter the many years of prejudice, the government established an aggressive affirmative action program (programs to open up opportunities in education and employment long denied to minorities). The program opened opportunities for lower castes to attend college and obtain government jobs. Over 20 percent of higher education entries were reserved for members of the lower castes. Despite government actions, the caste system and its prejudices continued. Many Indians considered the caste system as a divinely ordained (created by God) natural order. Castes were still distinguished by degrees of purity and pollution. Marriages between members of different castes remained taboo despite the antidiscrimination laws. Each caste continued to have its own codes of conduct and unique lifestyles. The United States witnessed the same pattern of prejudice against blacks. As Jim Crow laws were repealed through the 1960s the social customs of prejudice persisted into the twenty-first century. Those seeking social reform and elimination of castes believed the Indian government was still promoting prejudice between castes even through the very programs meant to end discrimination. They claimed the Indian affirmative action policies designed to fill quotas for education and jobs actually perpetuated castes and prejudice by categorizing people into different castes. For example, the affirmative action programs set quotas for members of the ‘‘backward castes.’’ Despite the high level of quotas set, the lower castes saw little social improvement. They also enjoyed very few educational opportunities, largely due to the lack of available facilities and to the poor quality of education offered. Many teachers also remained highly prejudiced against members of lower castes. Not only do members of one social class hold prejudices against members of other social classes, but social class distinctions serve to incite prejudices based on other factors, such as race and nationality. For example, another way of identifying social groups is by skin color, a concept known as racism. Such racism serves to maintain a working class. Race in the United States serves as a key marker of social class. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

113

Social Class Prejudice

Prejudice against members of other social classes or status groups leads to fear of unwanted influences or contamination by the other groups. This fear drives social classes apart. In addition, the more dominant social class maintains the power by excluding certain people from the social class or even limiting interactions by members of the dominant class with persons in lower social classes. In this way, the dominant group limits certain economic and other opportunities available to members of other classes.

A custom of prejudice In most societies with social classes throughout the world, the classes are kept separate by both law and social custom. As described by author G. William Domhoff in his book Who Rules America? Power, Politics, and Social Change, just as racism became institutionalized through biases built into business hiring practices and bank loan procedures that limited loans to minorities, the class system became institutionalized. For example, many in the working class are unable to accumulate a savings to begin businesses, leaving them committed to low-paying wage earning jobs. Also the acquisition of bank loans for their house mortgages and student loans to educate their children keeps workers motivated to spend many hours in wage earning jobs. Through these policies workers are kept needy and dependent in order to provide the supply of labor needed in the American workplace. The national economic system of the United States poses barriers to people’s ability to accumulate property, find good paying jobs, or afford suitable housing and move up to a higher social class. Race in America is strongly associated with social class. Many racial minorities in the United States lack assets (property owned and savings). Therefore they find it difficult to obtain bank loans for home mortgages or for businesses. People living in certain neighborhoods, especially black neighborhoods, find it more difficult to obtain home improvement loans. The poor in the lower classes have to decide if their limited funds should go to food, housing, or medicine. Because of the massive scale and complexity of the problem of poverty in America, government programs established in the 1960s to reduce the high level of economic inequality failed to make housing more accessible. In addition, despite the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibiting racial discrimination in the workplace, minorities still found it more difficult to enjoy social mobility by attaining better paying jobs. Even by the early twenty-first century blacks were still less likely than whites to be hired for upper management positions. 114

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Social Class Prejudice

Social Classes in the United States At the beginning of the twenty-first century, about 1 percent of the U.S. population was categorized as members of the upper class by sociologists. They were commonly graduates of highranking universities and held top-level executive positions. Many were also heirs (receiving property or money from a deceased relative) to wealth. The upper middle class consisted of some 14 percent of the population. They were commonly college graduates, enjoyed comfortable lifestyles, and worked in management positions for larger companies. About 30 percent of the U.S. population was in the middle class. They represented lower level company managers and supervisors in white-collar jobs, farmers, selfemployed shopkeepers, or higher-paying blue collar employees. The working class also included

approximately 30 percent of the population and consisted of lower income white-collar workers and skilled blue-collar workers. The working poor constituted 13 percent of the population. They were largely service industry workers, such as sales clerks and hotel maintenance workers, and clerical staff. Many had no high school degrees. The lowest-income group identified was the underclass, composing about 12 percent of the population. This group included part-time workers and unemployed. Many relied on social services (organized assistance programs to help the needy), such as food bank programs and housing subsidies. Persistent poverty distinguished the underclass from the working class. The working poor and underclass lived in neighborhoods with high crime rates and poor health conditions.

Separation of the upper-class members in a community begins earlier than college. Boarding schools separate the youthful members of upper classes from other students in the community. Expenses charged by these private boarding schools and elite prep schools ensure the exclusion of students from lower classes and isolates the upper-class students. Students graduating from the prep schools and elite colleges learn how to carry out their responsibilities to the upper class. Following university training, they often gain positions of influence in legal and corporate institutions. As in college, where they participated in the appropriate clubs, such as prestigious fraternities, as professionals they participate in exclusive city clubs (nonprofit community organizations that promote civic responsibilities and seek solutions to social issues). When a new social group of wealth becomes set up, such as through establishment of a new technology or industry like computer software, the previously well-known elite will look at the new wealth as lacking in sophistication.

Legislation of social class prejudice Prejudice and discrimination between social classes creates a stratified (social classes arranged in an order based on their perceived degree of Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

115

Social Class Prejudice

importance) society. The social group controlling political and economic power resides at the top. Those with little political power and residing in poverty are at the lower end of the stratification. Such social stratification can and often does become legalized through laws. One example was the Jim Crow laws that maintained a separation of races in the U.S. South in the early twentieth century (see Jim Crow chapter 17). Another was the apartheid (a government-enforced policy of racial separation and discrimination) social system in South Africa in the late twentieth century (see Apartheid chapter 22). In each case, social classes determined by racial traits were created and maintained by law.

Social class in the late twentieth century Open conflict between social classes in the Western industrial societies never developed as Marx thought it would, although social class prejudices certainly did. Most violent clashes in industrial societies in the twentieth century involved striking workers and union (an organized group of workers joined together for a common purpose, such as negotiating with management for better working conditions or higher wages) members battling factory security guards and police. The bloody confrontations did not grow into general class conflict. Marx and others did not foresee the rapid global economic growth following World War II (1939–45). As peacetime jobs became plentiful for the first time since the 1920s, people were ready to use their newfound purchasing power to buy luxuries they could not afford for the past sixteen years due first to the Great Depression (a major economic crisis lasting from 1929 to 1940 leading to massive unemployment and widespread hunger) and then global war. Rising living standards (the necessities and luxuries expected by individuals of a group) and the growth of a middle class desiring a comfortable lifestyle largely forestalled social class conflicts. The distinction between social classes decreased for a time as national wealth increased in the postwar world. The social classes developed a more harmonious working relationship as the standard of living increased for the working class until the 1970s during the postwar boom. In addition the middle class provided a buffer between the upper and working classes by offering opportunities for financial improvement among working-class laborers. As a result, social mobility between classes in these public societies also improved. For those unable to benefit from the postwar economic boom, governments introduced social programs to assist the working poor and unemployed, included subsidized housing for the poor and food 116

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Social Class Prejudice

stamps to assist in the purchase of food. These programs also helped keep prospects of social class conflict at bay by providing a safety net in the form of economic assistance, or at least the appearance of a safety net, to those not benefiting directly from a healthy national economy. Despite the blurring of class distinctions, the upper class in America still held great political influence through large campaign contributions to candidates running for public office and by intensely lobbying (seeking to influence public office holders) those who won public office. Nonetheless, chances of social class conflict in the United States seemed remote into the twenty-first century. Social movements seeking change in the late twentieth century were not directly related to class prejudice but to race, women’s rights, sexual orientation, or other rights.

Social classes of Western societies Most people in Western societies of Europe and North America often identify with a particular social class through a combination of several factors including education, occupation, and wealth. Prejudices readily develop between members of different social classes. For example, prejudices of upper-class members are common against people in unskilled, often referred to as blue-collar, jobs, against those with limited education, and those who live in poverty. Other factors may include religious affiliation, speech patterns, and clothing styles. Values built around these social class distinctions perpetuate prejudice in a society. Upper classes Many members comprising the upper class in Western

societies acquire their membership by inheriting wealth and being a member of a well-to-do family. Upper class in Europe was earlier tied to nobility before the birth of the United States. A sense of unity involving a shared political power exists within any dominant social group. Members share common experiences. They acquire symbols of prestige to mark their status apart from other groups. They hold certain club memberships, have large property holdings, are educated at elite academic institutions, and learn certain behavior patterns. Upper-class members are expected to marry the right kind of person and to hold acceptable occupations. These occupations include bankers, lawyers, business executives, physicians, and financiers. Their lifestyle includes extensive cultural pursuits and leisure activities, such as attending operas and owning vacation homes. The dominant group members look upon manual labor as undignified. They live in exclusive gated communities or secure buildings and enjoy summer homes and winter retreats. Even in Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

117

Social Class Prejudice

Life within a Social Class As different levels of social classes form, a tendency grows to marry and interact with people within one’s own class rather than with people of other classes. Members of a group share certain social traditions or general conventions of behavior. People become associated with a group because of the characteristics they share with the group. They each own certain kinds of possessions and behave similarly. Certain types of vehicles even represent certain social groups, such as Lincolns and Porsches representing upper-class choices, and trucks and common sedans representing working-class transportation. Lifestyle becomes a major way to distinguish members of groups. Lifestyle is a person’s pattern of living as expressed in his behavior, opinions, and activities. All of these characteristics of a person’s daily life become considered the norm for the group they belong to. A person becomes accepted and maintains acceptance in that particular class or group. Ultimately she forms close bonds only with certain kinds of people and holds prejudices against members in other social classes. Often, this leads to the formation of stereotypes about those people.

death, social separation from other groups is maintained through burial in mausoleums (large tombs) or monuments (a building or structure built in memory of a person). The upper class exerts considerable influence on political decisions and economic policies to perpetuate their dominance in a society, such as maintaining tax laws favorable to the wealthy. Expensive jewelry, mansions, large property holdings, and luxury cars indicate the financial success and importance as a member of a high social class. The upper classes usually maintain an impressive appearance—from the way they dress to the way they conduct themselves and speak— to help sustain their dominance. The general population considers the upper class more valuable to society than other social classes—despite the fact that, by percentage, the upper class is the smallest class in American society but holds an overwhelming percentage of the nation’s wealth. They control and manage the nation’s wealth and provide the core of the nation’s leadership. Middle classes In between the upper and work-

ing classes in Western capitalist societies is the middle class, which came into being in the late nineteenth and gained prevalence in the twentieth century. The middle class included supervisors and managers in business and industry, farmers, clerical workers, self-employed shopkeepers, and skilled blue-collar workers. The higher-income workers of the middle class consisting of wealthy professions and managers in large corporations blended into the upper class. The lower income end of the middle class blended into the working class. A sharp distinction existed between upper and working class, but the addition of a third class, the middle class, caused distinctions to become more blurred. In some industrially developing regions such as East Asia, the middle class was still emerging in the twenty-first century. To be born in the middle class means a person needs a special talent or energy to increase his position into the upper class. The new middle class with its rapid growth and expanded buying power became the class that America began targeting to in terms of

118

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Social Class Prejudice

advertising and consumerism in the twentieth century. Although relatively new, this class became a major influence on U.S. society. For example, the new middle-class members began a migration from the cities to the outskirts and built suburban America. The influence of the middle class affected every aspect of America’s society. Working class Members of the working class are manual laborers in

manufacturing and other types of industries. Of the working class, special memberships used to maintain a unity include labor unions (an organized group of workers joined together to gain better working conditions). Through the unions, relations with other social classes are maintained through the quest for better work conditions. However, the decline in membership and power of labor unions in the late twentieth century took away political power and a critical form of unity from the working class. Working-class members do not normally possess expensive objects and are considered less valuable to society, maybe even disposable. Those in the lowest economic level of the working class may be even viewed as a burden on society much as the chronically unemployed underclass is viewed. The nature of working classes varies around the world; therefore, the manner in which they live, identify with one another, and the activities they participate in can be quite variable. Normally savings are not accumulated and working class families live day-to-day on tight budgets.

Perpetuating social class Like social status, membership in social classes is hereditary, meaning a person born into a certain social class is considered a member of that class at least through his early life. If the classes are largely distinguished by racial traits, the person will be assigned to that class throughout her life. Opportunities for movement upward from one class to another vary from one society to another. Limited mobility is largely owing to the barriers posed by the dominant groups to maintain their status. When interaction does occur between members of different social classes, a certain degree of deference (yielding to the other’s will) is expected of members of the lower or subordinate class to members of the upper class.

Social class in the twenty-first century In the twenty-first century, most people still recognized the social class system in some way but it was a difficult aspect of society for them to Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

119

Social Class Prejudice

actually define. Still blurring class distinctions was the middle class, bridging the gap between upper class and working class. For example, the U.S. social class system did not officially exist, but most citizens were aware of it and knew their place in it. No formal laws governed social classes even though social policies existed that worked against the lower classes, such as limitations on available bank loans and on participation in society, such as acceptance into civic organizations. Many in the upper class publicly denied the existence of social classes to help obscure the extent of their dominance of power and control. A key economic factor used by sociologists and other researchers to define social classes was the difference in their ability to save money for the future. As described by author Arthur Marwick in the book Class: Image and Reality in Britain, France, and the USA Since 1930, the three Western countries of the United States, France, and Britain provided a contrast of social class relationships toward the end of the twentieth century. Among the three nations, mobility between the social classes was greatest in the United States, less in France, and least in Britain. Of the three, Britain had maintained the most developed social class structure with a large gap remaining between middle class and working class. The largest social class gap remaining in the United States was between the upper class and middle class as the wage earning powers of the middle class dwindled. The middle class was economically merging with the working class whose wages were higher than in Britain and France. The distinction between middle and working classes was becoming much less apparent. The upper class in all three countries generally gained income from investments rather than from earned income. A smaller percentage of the French population was considered to be members in the upper class than in the other two countries where 1 percent of the population controls almost one-third of the nation’s wealth. In the United States, France, and Britain a person could often readily tell the social class of another person by viewing at a glance the neighborhood the person was from. Different areas of a city or region represented specific habitats for different social groups. Class distinctions, including differences in social habits and culture among social classes, remained greatest in Britain. Even accents revealed the social status of a person. Maintaining a position in a social class was a preoccupation of British citizens. In some countries, social classes were becoming less distinct. Social mobility between classes was increasing and fewer discriminatory laws 120

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Social Class Prejudice

supported maintenance of social classes. In the early twenty-first century, it appeared that social classes in these areas were transforming back into a continuous range of social rankings or social statuses in some countries. For example in the strongly social-democratic states of Europe such as Sweden, where wealth was more evenly distributed among the population, social class distinctions became very weakly structured. The expanding economies of Japan and other Southeastern Asian countries also lessened class distinctions in their societies.

Globalization in the twenty-first century In the late twentieth century, about 170,000 manufacturing jobs disappeared in the United States. For the sake of corporate economic efficiency, some of these jobs were outsourced to foreign countries, where labor was cheaper. Automation replaced other jobs. The transition from well-paying factory jobs protected by unions to lower-paying, parttime service industry jobs became a hallmark of the American economy in the early twenty-first century. The new minimum-wage jobs also included no benefits such as for health, retirement, vacation, or sick leave. The practice of outsourcing, which also meant hiring workers temporarily rather than through a permanent workforce, was particularly detrimental to minorities as well as women and children. Outsourcing became popular just three decades after women and minorities had gained access to better jobs in the workplace. As a result, this economic globalization began sending Western social class ideas to Third World countries that traditionally operated under different social class divisions such as social ranking based on hereditary prestige. In the United States workers began shuttling between two or three jobs daily. Temporary employment agencies became major employers, supplying workers to businesses on an as-needed basis. The wage gap between the wealthy and others grew, as did greater separation of classes. A chronically unemployed class developed, excluded from the economic mainstream. Higher rates of divorce and family instability were recorded in this underemployed class. Many other economic changes affecting the social class system were occurring in the early twenty-first century. In addition to the increasing number of minimum wage jobs, the number of self-employed shop owners also declined with the growth of large international store chains. Even doctors, academic professors, and lawyers became more like wage laborers and represented the declining upper-class professions. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

121

Social Class Prejudice

As throughout history, societies still divide their members among the social groups they create. Through time in some parts of the world the nature of such groups has transformed from social rankings based on prestige to class based on economic standing. Prejudices formed between the social groups largely determine the nature of interaction between the groups and between individuals of different groups. These classes form the basis for a society to assign political power and wealth among its members. No community of any substantial size has been able to avoid the development of social classes within its society and likely that will persist into the foreseeable future.

For More Information BOOKS

Allport, Gordon W. The Nature of Prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1979. Brantlinger, Ellen A. The Politics of Social Class in Secondary School: Views of Affluent and Impoverished Youth. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University, 1993. Devine, Fiona. Social Class in America and Britain. Edinburgh, Scotland: Edinburgh University Press, 1997. Domhoff, G. William. Who Rules America? Power, Politics, and Social Change. Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2005. Fussell, Paul. Class: A Guide Through the American Status System. New York: Summit Books, 1983. Marwick, Arthur. Class: Image and Reality in Britain, France, and the USA Since 1930. New York: Oxford University Press, 1980. Steinberg, Stephen. The Ethnic Myth: Race, Ethnicity, and Class in America. Boston: Beacon Press, 2001.

122

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

7

Gender Prejudice

ach society throughout history has distinguished differences in the social roles of its males and females. These gender role differences reflect biases, also known as prejudices (a negative attitude towards others based on a prejudgment about those individuals with no prior knowledge or experience), held by members of a society. Gender prejudice is also referred to as sexism and is based on stereotypes (an oversimplified prejudgment of others, often leading to negative prejudices) held about women and men. Stereotypes of men are usually more positive in societies than stereotypes of women as the males are considered more independent and posing greater physical stamina. Negative stereotypes of women are usually held by both men and women in a society owing to the lack of self-respect and self-confidence imparted to females by societies’ prejudices.

E

Changes in gender prejudice through time have been evident in some regions of the world. By the early twenty-first century, the differences in social roles of males and females in some societies, such as those of the United States and Europe, had narrowed. Opportunities for education and employment in addition to simply participation in society as a whole, such political activities and a broad range of social events, became more equal. However, in other societies—such as those in the Middle East— long-held prejudices remained firmly in place. Behavior based on these prejudices normally placed the female role at considerable disadvantage in terms of freedoms and civil rights. These freedoms and rights include the right to vote in elections, associate with others freely, and various legal protections. The long struggle against entrenched gender prejudices to establish social equality for women has led in many directions. Besides the right to vote (suffrage), other concerns include reproductive rights such as access to birth control and right to have abortions (to artificially terminate a 123

Gender Prejudice

WORDS TO KNOW contraception: Deliberate prevention of pregnancy. discrimination: Treating some people differently than others or favoring one social group over another based on prejudices. feminism: A belief in the social equality of women and men.

individuals with no prior knowledge or experience. reproductive rights: The right of a woman to choose whether to produce offspring or not. sexism: A form of prejudice aimed at particular genders.

gender: Behavioral traits associated with the male or female sex.

socialization: The manner through which people learn and accept roles.

prejudice: A negative attitude towards others based on a prejudgment about those

stereotypes: Oversimplified prejudgment of others.

pregnancy), freedom from domestic violence, freedom from sexual harassment in the workplace and public, and freedom from overall male dominance, a concept known as patriarchy. The struggle for equality led to the growth of feminism. Feminism is both a belief in the social equality of women including legal, political, and economic equality, and a social movement promoting feminist beliefs, known as a feminist movement. The feminist movement began as an organized movement in 1848. Many leaders of the feminist movement have been women. They view gender prejudice as much like social class prejudice (classism), and racial prejudice (racism). Sexism was just one more form of discrimination (treating some people differently than others or favoring one social group over another based on prejudices) to keep political power in the hands of only a few—primarily white males in the Western world. In many societies, the role of the male is seen as the norm (standard), and females are measured against that norm in terms of abilities. Women who behave as men, such as those who act more direct in business relations, are often viewed negatively as being overly aggressive. Men who exhibit those same behaviors are often valued as good leaders. A debate continued into the twenty-first century as to how much social and psychological differences between men and women are biologically based and how much are conditioned by society. The question of how much a person’s behavior is based on biology and how much on socialization seemed irresolvable due to the complexities of the human 124

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Gender Prejudice

body including its biochemistry. Socialization is the manner through which people learn and The Two Forms of Sexism accept roles, including those that are genderbased. Family, schools, and the media reveal to Sexism takes two forms. Hostile assertive the child the accepted norms of gender behavior, (aggressive) sexism occurs when males seek to maintain social superiority through gender dissuch as through product advertising. The family crimination and sexual harassment. This devaland church discourage unwanted behavior. ues women’s status. On the other hand, Though the child has the choice to conform or benevolent (meaning to do good) sexism occurs not, most children follow the gender roles modwhen males act in a seemingly protective eled by their parents and teachers. Recognizing manner by demanding that women focus more some differences do exist between genders, such on their reproductive and caregiving roles rather than become involved in the professional as physical strength and ability to give birth, a or business world. Both hostile and benevolent main goal of many mainstream feminists is that sexism have similar effects. They restrict a women should simply be treated the same as woman’s freedom of choice. men. Views that arbitrarily (not based on solid fact, random) separate sexes are considered sexist, such as characterizing women as the family shoppers and men as responsible for the house repairs.

Gender prejudice in early agricultural societies According to the research of physical anthropologists, those who study the physical and behavioral development of humans, the idea of male physical superiority began very early in human history. In early humans, the size difference between males and females was even more distinct than in modern humans, a trait known as sexual dimorphism. The male was the family provider and protector while the female produced and nurtured children and prepared foods for consumption. Other gender differences involving personality traits have been studied by anthropologists and psychologists, such as the male tendency to express aggression in a more physically aggressive manner than women. Society’s main expectation of women through early times remained to give birth to many children. Women at the end of the eighteenth century and beginning of the nineteenth century generally had one pregnancy every two years during childbearing age that is commonly considered to be from fifteen to forty-nine years of age. The average household included at least five children. Frequent deaths of infants and youth from illness and injury kept the family average down to that number despite the numerous pregnancies and births. The reason for the demand for many childbirths was simple. Until the nineteenth century when the Industrial Revolution (the introduction of a Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

125

Gender Prejudice

new economic and social system characterized by large industries, machine production, and the concentration of workers in urban areas) arrived, communities were economically reliant on an agricultural economy. The more children available to help with work in the fields, the better off each family would be. In addition, the high mortality rate required multiple births to ensure enough children would grow to a productive age for work. In these agricultural societies, the father was the ultimate authority figure in the home. He was expected to be the provider and family guide. Disobedience met with harsh punishment, such as whippings and beatings. During the early colonial settlement of North America, only two American colonies had outlawed wife-beating. A man beating his wife was considered bad only if it was for no reason. Wives were considered property and had few legal protections. Upon marriage, all of the wife’s property became property of her husband. The wife could not own property, sue others, or keep wages she earned. She was expected to raise her children to be morally responsible people grounded in religious faith. Religious orders and laws reinforced these roles. Families that followed these expectations were considered most godly by society. These gender roles influenced all other social values. Early gender prejudices blocked the right to education for women. Some feared too much book reading or delving into politics by a woman might lead to insanity. The woman’s psychological state of mind was considered by society in general during this time to be too fragile and protected to comprehend worldly issues and technical knowledge. A man who read and participated in politics was considered intelligent. Only men had a public life discussing politics at gathering places such as taverns, attending community meetings, and conducting business with others. The man was considered the family’s representative to the outside world. Tavern dining, where politics and commerce dominated the discussion, was strictly a man’s affair. Women attended dances in the ballrooms, but if they dined, they were restricted to a private guest room. Throughout much of history, people speaking out against these gender prejudices were on their own without the support of larger reform movements and were largely ignored.

Equality not for all In the late eighteenth century, revolutions led by those seeking a new form of personal freedom and equality erupted in North America and Europe. However, not all citizens in newly established democracies 126

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Gender Prejudice

enjoyed the full benefits of freedom. For example, the 1787 U.S. Constitution did not allow women to vote. Of the thirteen original states, only the state of New Jersey allowed women to vote. And that was possible only because of a mistake in the way the law was written. To the dismay of women in New Jersey, the law was corrected in 1807, revoking women’s suffrage and giving only men the right to vote. Across the Atlantic Ocean, individual freedoms were brought by the French Revolution in 1789 in which France’s population rebelled against the French monarchy. The French people sought personal liberties such as freedom of speech, much like the Americans had the previous decade during the American Revolution against the British monarchy. The new French legislature adopted the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen in August 1789 recognizing the freedoms of speech, press, and religion. However, the declaration only applied the rights to males failing to recognize the legal standing of women. The dawn of the industrial revolution in the early nineteenth century brought dramatic economic and social changes. The industrial revolution was a major economic change from an agricultural economy to one based on industry. No longer was the man found around the house. He was gone earning wages at a factory or business. The wife became the leader of the home. She remained at home to take care of children, cook, wash, sew, and prepare food. Women also often took in extra work, such as washing clothes, stitching cloth provided by shopkeepers, or making hats. Although these jobs did not pay much, the added income allowed a family to save a little money. Some women who lost their husbands kept boardinghouses for travelers and guests in the city or along the traveled roads. These women actually did quite well for themselves and became some of the first women entrepreneurs. Advances in the freedoms for women were very limited throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries in the Western world; by the beginning of the twentieth century, very few women had advanced educational degrees or held professional positions. In the late nineteenth century, women in France still had to cover their heads in public. In some parts of Germany, husbands could sell their wives as they could any other piece of property. In the United States and Europe, women could neither vote in political elections nor hold public office. A woman could not even conduct business without a male representing her, usually a husband or relative. Those promoting feminism, who were mostly women with some male supporters, began uniting as an organized movement in the nineteenth century. They were part of a general social reform movement that also sought freedom for black slaves in the world. The term feminism first Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

127

Gender Prejudice

came into use in 1837 in France by the famous social activist Charles Fourier (1772–1837). The beginning of an organized movement was marked by the first women’s rights convention held at Seneca Falls, New York, in July 1848. Using the Declaration of Independence as a model, early feminist Elizabeth Cady Stanton (1815–1902) drew up the Declaration of Sentiments for the meeting. The declaration contained eleven resolutions including the right to an education, the right to vote, and certain other political rights. As would be the case with the feminist movement in later years, the convention had little relevance to women of the working and lower class since the activists were primarily from upperclass and educated social groups. Working-class women were more immediately concerned with increasing wages, making a healthier workplace, and working fewer hours rather than access to education and the right to participate in politics. In fact, only men in the more privileged upper classes enjoyed many of the rights and privileges sought by the early feminists. Besides setting goals of feminism by asserting equality of women in a document adopted by the convention titled The Declaration of Sentiments modeled after the U.S. Declaration of Independence little other progress resulted as the issue of slavery in the United States dominated the next several decades until after the American Civil War (1861– 65), fought in part over the freedom of black slaves in the Southern states. In addition, the idea of feminism largely developed only in Western societies in the nineteenth century. The rest of the world was little affected.

Seeking suffrage Following the Civil War, interest in feminism grew again after attention had been shifted toward the war. This time feminist leaders adopted a narrower focus than at the earlier Seneca Falls meeting. They focused primarily on a single issue: suffrage. Stanton and activist Susan B. Anthony (1820–1906) formed the National Woman Suffrage Association (NWSA) in 1869. It was considered the more radical feminist organization at the time. Besides seeking the right to vote for women, the NWSA sought to end job discrimination against women and unequal pay between men and women for the same work as well as greater acceptance of divorce. That same year, the Wyoming Territory became one of the first governments in the world to grant equal voting rights to women. In 1893, New Zealand became the first nation to establish universal suffrage, meaning voting rights for all adults. The following year in South Australia, women gained the right to hold public office, another first in the world. 128

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Gender Prejudice

By 1910 success in gaining suffrage was seen only in limited parts of the world. To determine what needed to be done, the First International Convention for Women met in Washington, D.C., in 1902. Representatives arrived from ten nations to develop an international strategy to gain suffrage. However, the feminists did not arrive or leave with a unified perspective. This early suffrage movement was split into two factions: those who believed the right to vote was more important for women than for freed blacks, and those who believed the right for black suffrage was equally important. This difference in philosophies caused some NWSA members to split from the group and form their own organization. They rejoined in later years, but the internal strife caused by the split hampered the feminist movement as a whole at this time. In 1903, the suffrage movement in Great Britain had taken a more militant approach led by activist Emmeline Parkhurst (1858–1928). Parkhurst led boycotts and bombings that brought attention and growing support to her cause. The first European nation to not only grant suffrage but also to allow women to hold office was Finland in 1906. The following year, seventeen women were elected to Finland’s parliament (government).

Early feminists Elizabeth Cady Stanton, left, and Susan B. Anthony, founders of the National Woman Suffrage Association. # B ETT MA NN/ CO RB IS .

Women gained the right to vote in many countries during World War I (1914–18). Increasing numbers of people believed it was simply unjust to deny half the population of what were considered free societies the right to vote and influence public policy. In 1918, the British Parliament extended the right to vote to certain women in society, including those who owned homes, housewives, and those who held university degrees and were at least thirty years of age. That same year, all German women were granted the right to vote. Following the success in Britain, social activist and American Alice Paul (1885–1977) organized demonstrations and confrontations with police in the United States. She had joined the National American Woman Suffrage Association (NAWSA) upon her return to the United States and promoted aggressive tactics to win suffrage. In Washington, Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

129

Gender Prejudice

A woman suffragist picketing in front of the White House. # BE TTM AN N/C OR BI S.

D.C., on March 3, 1913, Paul led a massive parade of over eight thousand suffragists down Pennsylvania Avenue past the White House attracting over a half a million bystanders. A few days later NAWSA representatives met with U.S. president Woodrow Wilson (1856–1924; served 1913–21) to express their goals for suffrage. However, it still took several years of picketing and arrests of protesters before the president finally relented and promoted suffrage. In 1920, the United States passed the Nineteenth Amendment to the Constitution, granting women the right to vote. The 130

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Gender Prejudice

first presidential election in which women were able to vote in all states was later that fall. Republican candidate Warren G. Harding (1865–1923; served 1921–23) won the election amidst a climate of a struggling U.S. economy, labor strikes, and race riots. Much dissatisfaction with the state of the country existed at that time. Overcoming gender prejudice to gain the right to vote took even longer in other regions. Women did not gain suffrage in France until 1945, following World War II (1939–45), in recognition of their contributions to society during the war. The last Western nation to grant suffrage was Switzerland, in 1971. Among the countries not allowing women to vote in the early twenty-first century were Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Vatican City. Kuwait extended equal voting rights to women in May 2005. This change was in reaction to the push for women’s rights in the region brought on by the wars in neighboring Iraq and in Afghanistan.

Loss of support in the fight against gender prejudice Following success regarding suffrage in the early twentieth century, the feminist movements grew quiet again in the United States and Europe. The League of Women Voters, which had formed in 1920 to help women who had just gained the right to vote by educating them about the candidates and issues in the elections, led national voter registration drives in the United States. Also the Women’s Trade Union League sought protective labor laws for women. The National Woman’s Party, established in 1913 by Alice Paul to gain suffrage, now sought full equality for women through passage of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) that Paul drafted in 1923. The ERA would ban gender discrimination found in any government actions. Not all women sought full equality with men. As a result two basic factions grew. One, including first lady Eleanor Roosevelt (1884–1962), sought laws that protected women in the workplace. They preferred special protections for women, not full equality with men, which would mean no special accommodations for women, such as shorter work hours than men and safer work conditions. The other faction sought full equality with no special protections. The ERA, little changed in its simplicity from earlier years, was introduced in Congress each year beginning in 1923 until passage by Congress in 1972. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

131

Gender Prejudice

The Great Depression (1929–41; a major worldwide economic crisis causing record-high unemployment rates) and then World War II ended any feminist efforts through the 1930s and first half of the 1940s. However, the war created hundreds of thousands of job opportunities for women in such places as factories. In 1944 alone, 2.3 million were involved in the war industries; 1,900,000 of them were in factory jobs, more were overseas nursing the wounded, and others held clerical jobs. Rosie the Riveter, the famous illustration of a female factory worker, became a common image across America during the war. The employment gains, however, were short lived. Once the war ended, men returned from military duty looking for work. Women lost their jobs and returned to the home. This sudden change back to traditional gender roles greatly affected families. Many women resented the loss of employment opportunities. American society could never fully go back to the traditional prewar gender roles. As a result, the experience of working outside the home and then abruptly losing that opportunity became a major turning point in American society. The later resurgence of feminism in the 1960s would point back to the work capabilities shown by women and the unjust loss of the opportunity to use those abilities. A new fictional model of family life including gender roles was portrayed in the new entertainment medium of television following the war. Once again, what were considered ideal gender roles were based on the white middle-class experience with the husband being the breadwinner (member of the family who provides primary financial support) and the wife left to manage the household and raise the children. Single parenting was not socially acceptable. An increasingly large segment of society did not match the ideal of the new American suburban life as life in the inner cities with rising unemployment, particularly among minority males due to racial prejudices at the time, forced wives and mothers into family breadwinning roles. Others were people not conforming to heterosexual social norms who were forced to live secret personal lives in the face of sexual orientation prejudices. Gender prejudices remained a key element of U.S. society.

A second wave of feminism A new wave of feminism known as the Women’s Rights Movement was born in the 1960s in America. As with the earlier suffrage movement, the women’s rights movement of the 1960s and 1970s occurred primarily in Western societies and benefited mostly white, middle-class women. In 132

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Gender Prejudice

President John F. Kennedy meets with the Commission on the Status of Women to advise him of issues of importance to women in America. Former first lady Eleanor Roosevelt, the chairman of the Commission sits at his left. # B ET TMA NN/ CO RB IS.

1961, newly elected U.S. president John F. Kennedy (1917–1963; served 1961–63) formed the President’s Commission on the Status of Women to advise him of issues of importance to women in America. Former first lady Eleanor Roosevelt was its chairman. Though careful not to create too many waves because of the strong gender prejudices in society, the resulting commission’s 1963 report identified national gender prejudice issues affecting women. These prejudices included discrimination in the workplace, unequal pay, few support services such as childcare and special healthcare needs for women, and inadequate legal protections. Some gains were immediately made based on the study. The Equal Pay Act of 1963 addressed the problems of pay though unequal pay between men and women would remain a problem into the twenty-first century. The landmark 1964 Civil Rights Act was expanded before passage to include restrictions against employers discriminating based on gender in addition to race. Complaints of discrimination could be taken to the newly created Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

133

Gender Prejudice

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission or newly established company human resources departments for resolution. Despite these important gains, gender prejudice remained a force in American society. Through the later 1960s, the feminist movement became closely associated with the civil rights movement (aimed at ending racial discrimination) and the gay rights movement (focused on sexual orientation prejudices). Remaining issues included reproductive freedom including access to contraception (deliberately preventing pregnancy) and freedom of choice for abortion, more effective protection from rape and domestic violence by new laws against stalking and keeping abusive husbands and boyfriends away, and advancement in the workplace.

The pill Development of an oral contraception pill in the early 1960s did more to liberate women from traditional gender roles than any other advance in history. The pill contains chemicals that, when taken on a regular basis by mouth, inhibit normal fertility. Use of the contraception pill spread rapidly. Not only was taking the pill easy, it also was a more effective form of birth control than anything previously on the market. Women suddenly had greater control over their lives and freedom within relationships. They enjoyed the same sexual freedom as men for the first time in history. As a result, women became much more equal to men in social relations. No longer were sexual relations confined to marriage, nor was marriage seen as the only option to living a full life. The pill helped initiate the sexual revolution of the later 1960s. For many women sex was now a way of fulfilling a relationship, not primarily a means of reproduction. However, many other women still held tightly to their traditional values. It also contributed to a greater overall feeling of personal independence that led to other changes, such as greater promise for promotion opportunities in the workplace and a broader range of professions available since disruptions from work for childbirth and childrearing were no longer a near certainty.

NOW takes charge As a key expression of the increased boldness of feminist activities, the National Organization for Women (NOW) was formed in June 1966 at the Third National Conference of the Commission on the Status of Women. The conference was a follow-up to the earlier President’s 134

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Gender Prejudice

Organizer and first president of the National Organization for Women, Betty Friedan, second from left, marches with fellow ERA leaders in 1978. AP IMA GE S.

Commission. Organizer and first president Betty Friedan (1921–2006) attracted a strong following due to her highly influential 1963 book on feminism, The Feminine Mystique. Unlike the first wave of feminists seeking suffrage, the second wave now questioned more basic social issues, such as prejudice in accepted gender roles and the general nature of the family unit. They strove to find acceptance in society of a working wife, single parenting, and divorce. NOW, a leader of the feminist movement, was dedicated to lobbying, or urging, Congress and the state legislatures for legislation establishing equal rights for women. The key issue for NOW was the promotion of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), still not passed by Congress after almost fifty years since its introduction by Paul. Sit-ins (the act of entering an establishment such as an government agency’s headquarters and peacefully refusing to leave until the prejudicial policies are changed) and marches were frequently used to increase public awareness of gender prejudice. The movement’s goal was to ensure women’s full Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

135

Gender Prejudice

participation in society, with all the same opportunities and responsibilities as men, free from gender prejudice and discrimination. Seeing sexism related to classism and racism, the organization tackled all forms of prejudice. In the early years of NOW, lesbians felt their issues of prejudice against sexual orientation were being ignored by the organization and the women’s rights movement in general. Friedan even publicly expressed discomfort in addressing lesbian issues both personally and for fear of losing support of feminists who did not support gay rights. However, in May 1970 at NOW’s Second Congress to Unite Women, feminists leading the fight against homophobia (irrational fear of homosexuals) were able to get NOW to include their issues on their agenda. It was a major change in the course of the women’s movement. In September 1970, NOW officially recognized lesbian rights as a major concern of feminism. Through the years, NOW continued its efforts to fight gender prejudice. By the early twenty-first century, NOW had five hundred thousand members—both women and men—in the United States and 550 chapters, in all fifty states. By the 1980s, the idea grew that gender was separate from sex as promoted by feminists and gay rights activists. This notion confused gender prejudice issues. A person may appear to be one sex physically, but feel more like the other gender. Studies into hormone effects on behavior and brain structure continued into the twenty-first century. These studies also suggested other biological gender differences. For example, some researchers claimed the female brain was naturally wired for empathy (experiencing the feelings of others) while the male brain was wired for building such things as mechanical systems or electronic networks.

Reproductive rights Another key issue for the second wave of feminism was the right of a woman to have an abortion. On January 22, 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court issued the landmark decision on abortion rights in Roe v. Wade. The Court ruled that most laws against abortion, including many existing state laws, violated women’s constitutional right to privacy. Beginning with Connecticut in 1821, most states had established laws restricting abortion. At first the primary opposition to the ruling came from Catholic Church, which had always opposed birth control. Polls beginning in the 1970s showed most Americans supported abortion rights. However, as 136

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Gender Prejudice

time passed many Protestant groups began rallying against abortion rights, through the later twentieth century. The Court ruling ultimately triggered a heated national debate between those supporting the decision, labeled Pro-Choice advocates, and those opposed to abortion rights, labeled Pro-Life advocates. Supporters of Pro-Choice claimed freedom of choice was necessary for women’s equality. They claimed the individual privacy of women was more important than the collective right of the population to ban the right to have abortions. Opponents claimed that those promoting abortion rights were placing the convenience of the woman above the potential life of the fetus. They strongly believed that abortion was an act of murder and asserted that an individual’s life begins at conception (the moment a woman’s egg is successfully fertilized). Opponents also argued the legality of abortion, claiming that there was no such right to privacy written into the U.S. Constitution. They contended the Court made up a new individual right not provided in the Constitution. Pro-Life protesters picketed abortion clinics in the late twentieth century and early twenty-first century, handed out literature to women preparing to enter abortion clinics, and even physically blocked entrances to abortion clinics. The more radical opponents bombed clinics where abortions occurred and shot to death doctors who performed them. Demonstrators also gathered each year on January 22, the anniversary of the Roe decision, on the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court Building to protest the ruling. The abortion controversy greatly influenced U.S. Supreme Court nominations into the twenty-first century. Beginning with Republican president Ronald Reagan (1911–2004; served 1981–89), a potential candidate’s position on abortion rights was a major factor in the outcome of the selection process. Through the 1970s in reaction to the Roe decision, states began strengthening their anti-abortion laws. Some passed laws requiring parental or spousal notification and consent, banned state funding for abortions, and prohibited late-term abortions (abortions in the last few months of pregnancy) when the fetus was more fully formed and capable of surviving out of the womb. In November 2003 Congress passed a law banning use of federal funds for abortions. U.S.–funded clinics in Third World countries were even shut down if they shared information with women about the option of abortion. The Court struck down many of the laws, but those restricting use of public funds survived legal challenges. In an Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

137

Gender Prejudice

odd twist, the woman seeking an abortion who triggered the Roe case, Norma McCovey (1947–), became a spokeswoman for Pro-Life advocates seeking repeal of the Roe decision. She had never actually had the abortion she had been seeking at the time of her case, and by 1995 she adopted an anti-abortion position upon converting to Christianity. In the 1992 case of Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the Court had an opportunity to reverse the Roe decision. However, much to the dismay of Pro-Lifers, it upheld the 1972 decision in a five-to-four vote among the nine justices. In February 2006, the South Dakota legislature passed a bill that made the performing of all abortions a felony crime. Doctors who perform abortions could face up to five years in prison. The only exception to this law was the situation where a woman’s life was endangered because of her pregnancy. Pro-Life advocates hoped the new law would inspire a legal case that would lead the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn the Roe decision. Opponents placed the South Dakota bill on the November 2006 election’s ballot and the public voted to rescind the law by a 56 percent majority.

Equal Rights Amendment Congress finally adopted the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) that would guarantee equal rights under the law in March 1972. The state legislatures were then asked to ratify (approve) the amendment as required for the bill to become part of the U.S. Constitution. At least thirty-eight of the fifty states needed to ratify the ERA for it to become part of the Constitution. States were given seven years to consider ratification. Debate was hot as opponents claimed the ERA would forever change gender roles in traditional American society. Fear of same-sex marriages was another concern. Others argued that as time passed, many of the goals of the ERA had already been achieved through court decisions applying the 1964 Civil Rights Act and other laws to individual cases that involved gender discrimination. By March 1979, thirty-five states had ratified the amendment. Adoption fell short. Though the deadline had passed, supporters of the proposed amendment argued that ratification of the amendment would still be valid in later years. As late as 2005, ratification proposals had been submitted again in the Florida and Illinois legislatures with little success. Since 1879 twenty states had adopted various forms of equal rights amendments prohibiting sexual discrimination into their state constitutions. 138

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Gender Prejudice

Affirmative action In 1965, on the heels of passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, U.S. president Lyndon Johnson (1908–1973; served 1963–69) signed a presidential order establishing an affirmative action program. The goal of affirmative action was to correct for past governmental and social injustices driven by prejudice. At first applied to federal government and public universities, the program was later expanded to include companies that received federal contracts and their labor unions. The program was designed to improve the status of minorities and women who had been historically discriminated against by increasing opportunities in education and jobs and, ultimately, their participation in society in general. Agencies, businesses, and colleges were required to develop affirmative action plans, including timetables to achieve full participation by women and racial minorities in their organizations. The program worked on a quota basis, meaning that businesses and schools would set goals to achieve certain percentages of different minorities and ethnic groups. Although originally driven by the need to provide assistance to African Americans, the order also addressed gender prejudice. Because social barriers had been in place so long for these groups, simply ending discrimination based on race and gender was not enough. Much progress needed to be made before social equality was truly achieved. Similarly, affirmative action programs adopted in other countries have focused more on ethnic and race organizations rather than gender. Much of the affirmative action activity in the United States focused on entrance into universities. Gender began to be considered by universities when assessing an applicant’s test scores and grades. For example, if two applicants, one male and one female, with identical credentials applied to a school and only one could be accepted, the female would get preferential consideration over the male. This process was particularly important in cases where women were applying for entrance into engineering and physical science programs, areas of study historically limited to males. By the late 1970s, affirmative action became increasingly controversial. Critics claimed it was discriminatory against those job or college applicants who were not minorities yet had better qualifications. They argued the goals of affirmative action in terms of increasing social equality were sufficiently being met by changes in society in general through the years, such as increased percentages of women employed in businesses Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

139

Gender Prejudice

and more job promotions awarded to women. However, the U.S. Supreme Court in 1978 and again in 2003 upheld the legal validity of affirmative action at universities but left the door open to alternate programs that could achieve the same goals. The Court ruled the increased diversity of students was beneficial to all students. Some states, such as California, banned affirmative action programs in state agencies in 1996. California, Florida, and Texas adopted alternative programs to affirmative action in their public universities. Another major effect of the second wave of feminism in regard to educational opportunities was that many male-only universities became coeducational (accepting both male and female students). In the late 1960s and early 1970s, all Ivy League schools became coed including Yale, Columbia, and Harvard. Some women-only colleges also opened their doors to men, including Radcliff, Vassar, and Sarah Lawrence.

Glass ceilings, sports fields, and changes in religion A major issue of the second wave of feminism that extended into the twentyfirst century was not only job opportunities, but discrimination against job advancement based on sex. The term ‘ glass ceiling’’ came into use in the mid1980s in reference to the seemingly invisible and unspoken prejudicial barriers to promotion of women became popular in reference to invisible barriers hindering the promotion of women into upper management positions in corporations and other organizations. These barriers existed despite anti-discrimination policies of the organizations. White heterosexual men maintained dominance in these organizational circles. When promotions of women did occur, concerns existed that these advancements were more for public relations than for recognition of actual merit of the individuals. The U.S. Department of Labor created the Glass Ceiling Commission in 1991. It released a series of reports investigating gender prejudice in the workplace. A 2003 report stated that less than 9 percent of the senior managers were women in America’s top corporations. Gender prejudices were still well entrenched into the twenty-first century. Additional changes in education came with passage of a national education bill in 1972 that contained a section that has been commonly referred to as Title IX. The law essentially banned sex discrimination in public schools. Academic advancements due to Title IX were significant. In 1994, women earned 43 percent of all law degrees, up from 7 percent in 1972. Title IX also affected the sports world in America. The act called for equality in sports 140

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Gender Prejudice

Title IX provided a major boost to women’s opportunities to participate in sports across the nation and led to the expansion of women’s professional sports leagues. A P IM AG ES .

opportunities at schools that received federal funding, such as research grants. The act affected most universities in America. There was to be equal opportunity for women and men to receive athletic scholarships to colleges. The act was later expanded to prohibit gender discrimination in all U.S. educational institutions. The impact of Title IX led to controversy into the twenty-first century. Some men’s sports programs were cut back or eliminated, such as wrestling and baseball programs at some schools, in order to divert limited sports budgets to support the new women’s programs. Nonetheless, Title IX provided a major boost to women’s opportunities to participate in sports Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

141

Gender Prejudice

across the nation. Not only could young women now pursue their interests and apply their skills in athletic competition at the college level as never before, it even led to the popularity and expansion of women’s professional sports leagues, such as professional basketball and soccer. Effects of increased gender equality were evident in religious organizations as well. Women became ordained (given priestly authority) as clergy and rabbis in Protestantism and Judaism. New statements of belief bringing women into a more active church role were developed for religions, and women contributed to that development. One of the more resistant religions to gender equality was Catholicism. Though centuries of women had been nuns and held other positions of influence as lay members (religious persons who are not clergy), they were still not accepted as priests or in other clergy positions based on interpretations of the bible.

Gender prejudice and language A society’s language often reflects its prejudices and social perspectives, such as chairman instead of chairwoman or reference to the dawn of man instead of beginnings of the human species. With the growth of the second wave of the feminist movement in Western society, changes to the English language occurred. Feminists and others argued that introducing a gender-neutral language would lead to a decrease in gender prejudice and an increase in equal treatment of the sexes. Feminists further argued that traditional language did not even recognize the presence of females in society. The language itself perpetuated a maledominated society and gender prejudices against females. Non-sexist terms such as Ms. replaced Mrs. or Miss, previously used to reflect the marital status of the women. Ms. would be more equal to Mr., which had been traditionally used for men but does not indicate marital status. Feminists argued that a woman should be known for who she was, not by her marital status. The emphasis on such changes in language was reflected by a new magazine, focused on second-wave feminism issues and founded in 1972 by Gloria Steinem (1934–). Ms. Magazine became the voice of a population traditionally silenced. Often in the English language, if the gender of a person is not known, the person is referred to as ‘ he.’’ The word ‘ man’’ was originally considered to be a gender-neutral word (not indicative of being male or female). This was the case not only in English but other languages deriving from Latin, such as French, Italian, and Spanish. There existed no other term for when gender is not known. Feminists pressed for changes from ‘ he’’ to ‘ he or she’’ 142

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Gender Prejudice

or ‘ he/she’’ but like other suggested changes in language to avoid gender bias, this at times proved awkward when used while speaking. Efforts to make language fully free of gender bias realized some success. Schools, businesses, and publishers made many changes in their writing guides to avoid gender-oriented terms. New laws reinforced using gender-neutral terms for job advertisements. For example, a chairman became a chairperson or simply ‘‘chair.’’ Some languages, such as Chinese, are not as gender oriented as English, and the bias is not as evident. However, with the increasing use of the English language in the growing global economies, gender issues related to the English language persisted into the twenty-first century. Other languages, such as French, German, and Spanish, are much more gender-oriented than English and less easily changed into a gender-neutral form. However, the issue of language was less important in those countries than it was in America.

End of the second wave By the late twentieth century, women’s rights if not actual gender equality in the West had become generally accepted as a part of society. At the same time, some feminist leaders became more radical in seeking social change, often taking an anti-male stand on issues. They claimed that attaining greater equality was not possible without major changes in society. According to the more radical feminists, the institution of marriage itself was a hindrance to equality due to the traditional male dominance roles found in traditional marriages. The basic power structures in society naturally tilted the level of influence to males’ advantage. Though more gains were needed to attain more fully a status of equality between men and women, the successes gained and the more radical positions held by some activists led to public dismay with the second wave of feminism. Feminism declined as a distinct movement. Gender prejudice issues were too complex for a broad agreement among women. For example, though most who consider themselves feminist identified with the pro-choice side of the reproductive rights debate, others such as Feminists for Life opposed abortion. Despite the relatively broad acceptance of gender equality in society, strong opposition to gender equality persisted in some areas of Western societies into the early twenty-first century. Opponents, primarily those with strong religious leanings, charged that feminists were destroying traditional social roles that defined early society based on natural differences. They argued that children needed traditional masculine fathers and feminine Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

143

Gender Prejudice

Muslim leaders largely disapproved of Western feminism, which was contrary to accepted Islamic beliefs and threatened male dominance in society. AP I MA GE S.

mothers to become better adjusted to society. They believed nontraditional gender roles displayed by parents and others harmed children by taking away their self-identity as male or female and confusing their social responsibilities. The opponents also saw feminism as a threat to sustaining Western society birth rates. They feared the ultimate end to Western society as they knew it by a significant decline in population. Immigrants from societies that did not accept feminism were gaining in political power as their numbers grew in 144

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Gender Prejudice

comparison to the white middle-class segment of society. This trend was viewed as a threat to the dominance of white society in America. Nonetheless, major gains in the Western world by the second wave of feminism were many. They included establishment of low-cost health centers for women, rape crisis centers, and women’s studies programs in universities. Other advances included the rewriting of children’s books to eliminate gender stereotypes. Job opportunities as construction workers, airline pilots, business executives, and military enlistees and officers opened up for women. Women astronauts in space programs became widely accepted and admired as role models for female youth. In the early twenty-first century, feminism focused on the plight of racial minority women in Western societies and women in non-Western societies, such as the Islamic countries of the Middle East. Muslim leaders largely disapproved of Western feminism, which was contrary to accepted Islamic beliefs and threatened male dominance in society. In these situations, the factors of race, ethnicity, religion, and social class became major barriers to fighting gender prejudice. Nonetheless, such discriminatory practices as female genital mutilation, child infanticide (a tradition in some cultures of selectively killing newborn infants, such as killing female infants while keeping males), and mass rape used as a weapon during wars came into focus.

Gender roles In most societies, gender is the most basic way to divide labor and assign social responsibilities. The responsibilities are known as gender roles. Often gender prejudice largely determines the expectations people place on gender roles in a society. The long-term consistency was the changes through the twentieth century in gender prejudice in Western society including gains in access to education and job opportunities by woman. The gender roles that emerged in Western society in the 1820s with industrialization still represented the cornerstone of Western society home life in the early twenty-first century. Women were still expected to raise children, maintain the family home, and prepare food. Males were largely responsible for the family’s income and protection. These social expectations largely directed the behavior of males and females from an early age. Children learned of their gender role from the gender prejudices held by their family and friends. The gender behavior rules were later in life reinforced by schools and churches. As described by many social researchers including Marlene LeGates in her 2001 book In Their Time: A History of Feminism in Western Society, Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

145

Gender Prejudice

gender roles are socially defined, therefore they are based less on biological factors than the cultural norms of a society that include gender prejudices. Nonetheless, it is the common belief in most societies that these roles are largely dictated by biological differences. Therefore, any straying from the roles is considered deviant behavior. In the nineteenth century if a family deviated too far from their expected gender roles, they might be visited by their minister to correct their ways. In more modern times, advice books, magazines, doctors, and newspaper advice columns provided reinforcement of the social norms. Those promoting gender roles in American society have normally been males belonging to the socially dominant white classes. Any differences in the gender roles within minority groups were considered inferior because of the ethnic or racial prejudices targeted toward those groups.

Gender role changes Traditional gender roles in Western society were strongly reinforced during the post-World War II economic boom, despite the nontraditional gender roles that were proven valuable throughout World War II when women went to work on the homefront and kept the nation going. Many men could bring home a sufficient income to support a family. However, by the 1970s economic inflation (prices of goods rising faster than personal incomes) was putting pressure on most working class and middle-class families to have two wage-earners in the family. The wife who worked outside the home insured maintenance of a comfortable middle-class standard of living. According to Hurst, in 1955, only 16 percent of mothers with children under six years of age worked. That percent jumped dramatically to 57 percent in 1987. Gender prejudices toward the working woman changed also. According to Hurst, in 1937, 82 percent of the public opposed the idea of married women working outside the home. In 1972, 68 percent were in favor of the idea. Yet traditional gender roles persisted. Even with both the wife and husband working, the husband was expected to be more involved with his work and the wife more involved with the home and children. The wife still managed the home life. If children were sick, it was the wife who was expected to stay home from her job. Studies indicated the husband’s involvement in housework rose from 20 percent in 1965 to just 30 percent in 1981, despite the fact that almost 60 percent of American women were working outside the home. A backlash led some women to denounce the working woman’s lifestyle and take care of home life once again on a full-time basis. 146

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Gender Prejudice

Change in gender prejudice and gender roles was reflected in study topics of sociologists in the late twentieth century. Sociologists shifted their focus toward the diversity of gender role situations within a society, particularly among ethnic groups and working-class families, rather than studying the model gender role norms of the white middle and upper social classes. This broadened focus showed the diverse adaptiveness of humans, both women and men, and that various roles can be fully effective in leading productive and nurturing lives. For some, greater gender equality in Western society also brought confusion in gender role and identity when trying to conform to the new and old traditional norms at the same time, such as where new norms were being practiced in areas when the old norms still prevailed. Despite increased expectations that women should balance a professional career with raising children and taking care of home, few social services were available, such as state-sponsored childcare facilities. The expense of private childcare often ate into a large portion of that second income. Some freedoms did increase, such as a greater acceptance of women giving birth to children outside of marriage arrangements. Women were no longer bound to enter economically doomed marriages with unemployed males.

The third wave of feminism A third wave of feminism developed in the early 1990s. The earlier second wave in the 1960s and 1970s primarily involved educated, middle-class white women. For many women, especially women of color, other social issues besides those focused on by feminists were more crucial to their survival and well-being. African American women faced racism issues in addition to gender prejudice. They believed white women were as much responsible for racial and other forms of prejudice against them as white men. In addition to women of color, the third wave of feminism also included lesbians and other women who did not conform to the values of white, middle-class, heterosexual women of the earlier first and second waves of feminism. A brief period of expressing commonalities occurred in the 1970s. Earlier in 1973, black feminists formed the National Black Feminist Organization and held its first conference in New York City in 1973. Though clearly recognizing the different experiences of black women and white women in America, participants in that conference decided there were sufficient common goals with white feminists, such as violence, Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

147

Gender Prejudice

abortion, daycare, and job maternity leave, to justify support for the main feminist movement. The two groups worked well together through much of the 1970s, but not without infighting. In 1980, women from around the world met in Copenhagen, Denmark, at the World Conference on Women. It was the second of a series of world conferences held by the United Nations since 1975 addressing greater equality and opportunities for women. The 1980 conference was marked by disagreements over what the priorities should be for women in the more oppressive societies of the world. Women from underdeveloped countries accused Western white women of trying to decide what their priorities for feminist action should be to fight gender prejudice.

Clarence Thomas testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee in 1991. A P IM AG ES.

A continuing lack of agreement between women activists around the world surfaced again at the 1994 International Conference on Population and Development held in Cairo, Egypt. Third World women protested at the conference that white Western feminists were focused on contraception and abortion, whereas their own concerns were aimed at poverty, hunger, and war. Though there was an understanding of those concerns, white feminists believed those were larger issues extending beyond feminists. As feminism spread to other continents, Western feminists were shocked to learn of the conditions that women endured while living within various societies of Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Women had to wear veils in public, live in forced marriages (marriages arranged by families with no choice allowed by the bride and groom), and suffer genital mutilation practices. In some societies, such as that of China, female babies were deliberately killed, a concept called infanticide. Females were less valued in that society where males traditionally added to the family income. Similar beliefs in the lesser value of women permeated Muslim societies. For example, the pronounced gender prejudice was highlighted by the rise of the Taliban to power in Afghanistan in 1991. Taliban leaders placed many restrictions on women in Afghan society, such as banning education for girls.

148

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Gender Prejudice

The Clarence Thomas Senate Hearings In July 1991, U.S. president George H. W. Bush (1924–; served 1989–93) nominated black justice Clarence Thomas (1948–) to the U.S. Supreme Court. He had been serving on the U.S. Court of Appeals in the District of Columbia for a short time. Thomas became only the second African American to sit on the nation’s highest court, replacing the first African American Supreme Court justice, the retiring Thurgood Marshall (1908–1993). Thomas was no stranger to controversy. After serving as chairman of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) from 1982 to 1990, Thomas had faced a contentious nomination as judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. In reaction to his Supreme Court nomination, the American Bar Association, a national organization of lawyers, rated him lower than most recent nominees to the Court. Many pro-choice feminists supporting reproductive rights feared Thomas held a bias against the Roe v. Wade ruling that recognized the right of a woman to abort (end) her

pregnancy, especially given his opposition to affirmative action programs. However, a surprise allegation was made during the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings when Anita Hill (1956–), an African American law professor from Oklahoma and former employee of Thomas at the EEOC, testified that Thomas had sexually harassed her a decade earlier. The widely followed hearings greatly increased public awareness about the problem of sexual harassment in the workplace. The hearings also in part gave birth to the third wave of feminism. The new feminists were repelled as much by Hill’s passive vulnerability by not legally fighting back at the time of the alleged sexist behaviors by Thomas’s alleged actions. In regard to Thomas’s nomination, the Committee found insufficient evidence of Hill’s allegations and confirmed his nomination in October 1991. Charges of gender prejudice had their effect. The Senate vote for confirmation of Thomas’s appointment, fifty-two to forty-eight, was the closest margin of victory for a Court nominee in the twentieth century.

Western white feminists began to address these issues of devaluing females often associated with Third World (nations lagging in economic development) nations. However, women in the underdeveloped countries saw white societies from a negative perspective. Often the lives of native women had been much better before the arrival of white colonialists decades or centuries earlier. They considered the source of their problems of poverty and prejudice to be the spread of Western white societies, including the women within them. Gradually throughout the late 1990s and early twenty-first century, some gains were made, such as elimination of female genital mutilation in many African countries and education for women in the urban areas of Afghanistan. Conditions still remained far different than in the West, where change in gender prejudice was seen in most parts of society. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

149

Gender Prejudice

The third wave of feminism that more prominently included women of color adopted the term womanism. To them, feminism was a term that had come to represent primarily white women’s concerns. Womanism brought recognition to the working women of various racial and social class backgrounds. These women worked not by choice but out of pressing economic need. Black women in the United States contended that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 had primarily brought social equality to black men, not black women. Social scientists and historians found support for this perspective. Through the progress made against gender prejudice, young girls in parts of the world could more realistically dream of becoming politicians, professional athletes, scientists, and engineers in the early twenty-first century. Still, Western societies remained divided into male and female categories, with different acceptable behaviors associated with each. Consequences still occurred for deviating from the expected norm.

For More Information BOOKS

Flexner, Eleanor, and Ellen Fitzpatrick. Century of Struggle: The Woman’s Rights Movement in the United States. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press, 1996. Friedan, Betty. The Feminine Mystique. New York: Norton, 1963. Reprint, 2001. Greer, Germaine. The Female Eunuch. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2001. Hull, N. E. H., and Peter C. Hoffer. Roe v. Wade: The Abortion Rights Controversy in American History. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2001. LeGates, Marlene. In Their Time: A History of Feminism in Western Society. New York: Routledge, 2001. Millett, Kate. Sexual Politics. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2000. WEB SIT ES

National Organization for Women (NOW). http://www.now.org (accessed on November 21, 2006).

150

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

8

Sexual Orientation Prejudice

ontinuing into the twenty-first century, sexual orientation prejudice was a major social issue. One of the most controversial topics of debate in American politics and culture was the question of marriage between two people of the same sex, commonly referred to as same-sex marriage. Some believed that marriage between homosexuals (persons who participate in sexual intercourse with, or are sexually attracted to, persons of the same gender) is morally wrong and defies longstanding traditions of what constitutes a family within society—namely that marriage is defined as a union between one man and one woman for the purposes of stability and raising children.

C

Others thought that an official acknowledgment of a loving relationship between two adult people—even if they are of the same sex—was a natural human and civil right. They argued that local, state, and federal governments should lawfully recognize the public commitment between all couples, no matter their sexual preference. To do otherwise, it was argued, was a form of homophobia (an irrational prejudice toward homosexuality) and discrimination. The question of gay marriage divided America, and debates over the issue were often intensely heated. The issue was a major factor in the 2004 presidential election, perhaps tipping the vote to Republican George W. Bush (1946–; served 2001–) as politically and socially conservative groups rallied against the prospect of various states legalizing same-sex marriages at the time. This chapter explores sexual orientation prejudice by examining not only the contentious debate over same-sex marriage in particular, but the struggle for acceptance and equal protection under the law in general that homosexuals have endured for decades. Discrimination against gays, also referred to as homosexuals, in the workplace, in the law, and in the culture at large has motivated advocacy groups and individuals alike. They took action and attempted to help carve out a place within society for those who feel marginalized and shunned because of their sexuality. 151

Sexual Orientation Prejudice

WORDS TO KNOW bisexual: A person who participates in both heterosexual and homosexual relationships. gay: A term relating to homosexuals. hate crimes: Violent crimes motivated by prejudice and bigotry. heterosexual: A person who participates in sexual intercourse with, or is sexually attracted to, a person of the opposite gender. homophobia: Irrational fear of homosexuality or homosexual individuals.

homosexual: A person who participates in sexual intercourse with, or is sexually attracted to, an individual of the same gender. lesbian: A female homosexual person. sodomy: A term to commonly describe homosexual intercourse but also refers to rape of women as well. transgender: A person who appears as a member of the opposite gender.

The difficult issues facing supporters and opponents of gay rights are examined, as well as the impact the gay rights movement and lifestyle has had on American popular culture.

Beginnings of the fight for gay rights Throughout history, written law has banned homosexual relationships. Many nations declared sexual intercourse between persons of the same gender illegal and, in many cases, punishable by death. The common term for the act of homosexual intercourse between two males is sodomy, derived from the biblical city of Sodom. According to most interpretations of the Bible, God destroyed Sodom for a multitude of sins, many of which were sexual in nature. Many who object to homosexual activity point to biblical passages and the teachings of many different religions to confirm and support their arguments that homosexuality is a sin against God. While British social reformer Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832) is widely credited with writing the first defense of reforming such sodomy laws in Western society, his groundbreaking essay was not published until over a century after his death because publishers felt the public would find it morally offensive. In 1791, France became the first nation to overturn laws prohibiting homosexuality in the wake of the French Revolution (1789–1799), which emphasized individual freedoms including sexual orientation. Yet homosexuality was largely seen as socially unacceptable in Europe and most of the world well into the twentieth century. 152

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Sexual Orientation Prejudice

German writer and activist Karl Heinrich Ulrichs (1825–1895) is generally viewed as the leading pioneer of the gay rights movement. In 1862 Ulrichs publicly declared himself a homosexual and published books about same-sex romantic relationships. His writings inspired social reformers across Europe to follow Ulrichs’s example. Author and playwright Oscar Wilde (1854–1900) was considered perhaps the most influential member of a secret society of homosexuals in Great Britain called The Order of Chaeronea, which campaigned for the legalization of homosexuality. In 1898, German doctor and scholar Magnus Hirschfeld (1868–1935) formed a group called the Scientific-Humanitarian Committee. The organization’s purpose was to oppose and protest the German law known as Paragraph 15, which outlawed sexual intercourse between men. In 1919, Hirschfeld founded the Institute for Sexology in Berlin, Germany. It conducted research championing sexual reform, education, and women’s rights. However, in 1933 Nazi Germans burned his books claiming they were inappropriate for the German society they were seeking to establish.

Gay persecution Gays and lesbians were a prime target of German dictator Adolf Hitler (1889–1945) and his Nazi (National Socialist Germany Workers’ Party) regime’s goals of purification of the nation’s population. The Nazis castrated (removal of testicles to make infertile) hundreds of gay men. Homosexual women were not targeted since they were not considered a threat to reproduce. It is estimated that the Nazis sent between ten and fifteen thousand homosexual men to concentration camps to be tortured and killed. Within the camps themselves, homosexuals were made to wear pink triangles on their clothing. The patches provided Nazi soldiers a target to use in practice firing their guns. Often, homosexuals were beaten by fellow prisoners and forced into hard labor to the point of exhaustion and death. While the frequency of violence against homosexuals never again reached the proportions of the Nazi concentration camps, violent crimes against gays continued to be a problem into the twenty-first century. In 2004, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) reported that just over 15 percent of hate crimes committed in the United States were based upon the perceived sexual orientation of victims. Crimes that are deemed inspired by hate often carry additional penalties. Around the world in the early twenty-first century, many countries still considered homosexuality a crime that was punishable by death. Islamic Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

153

Sexual Orientation Prejudice

The murder of Matthew Shepard in 1998 rallied thousands in protest against violence targeting homosexuals. # L IS S STE VE /C ORB IS SY GM A.

fundamentalists largely led these countries, which included Iran, Yemen, the United Arab Emirates, and Sudan. The Taliban regime that controlled Afghanistan through the 1990s was notorious for murdering homosexuals until it were overthrown in late 2001 by U.S. forces in the war against world terrorism. The Taliban were accused of harboring terrorist organizations responsible for the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United States.

Attacks targeting homosexuals Attacks against homosexuals came against the famous and the unknown. In a 1979 spree allegedly inspired by an anti-gay minister, five teenage boys attacked celebrated playwright Tennessee Williams (1911–1983) in Key West, Florida. He escaped with minor injuries. The torturous murder of Wyoming college student Matthew Shepard (1976–1998) in 1998 rallied thousands in protest against violence targeting homosexuals and sexual orientation prejudice in general. 154

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Sexual Orientation Prejudice

In 2000, a man named Ronald Gay entered a tavern frequented by homosexuals and began shooting a loaded gun. He killed one man and injured six others. Gay said that he had become agitated over what his surname had come to represent and that he had been told by God to kill gays and lesbians. Gay bars were frequent targets of anti-gay violence. Some attacks against homosexuals did not come in the form of violence, but through the spoken or written word referred to as hate speech (a verbal or written attack against a person or group because of their sexual orientation intended to cause anger). The use of slurs against gays was a common form of hate speech. On many occasions, spokesmen for religious or political causes explicitly or indirectly placed blame on homosexuals for certain catastrophic events. For instance, Reverend Jerry Falwell (1933–) pointed a finger at homosexuals as well as politically liberal groups who he saw as working to secularize (remove religious symbols from public life) the United States. He charged they were helping create a climate that allowed the terrorist attack against the United States on September 11, 2001, to occur. In this vein, a popular anti-gay sign that often appeared in an attempt to counter gay pride parades and other gatherings read ‘‘God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve.’’

Gay rights movement Many homosexual advocacy groups organized in the Western world after World War II (1939–45), since homosexuals were specifically targeted as victims throughout the war. These groups used the term homophile as opposed to homosexual because it emphasizes love over sex in relationships, and provided a strategy of working for reform within political institutions rather than protesting from the outside. In the United States, a gay rights march was held outside Independence Hall in Philadelphia in 1965. Many historians and observers regard the event as the beginning of the modern gay rights movement. Use of the term gay to describe homosexuals became common in the 1960s when groups such as the Gay Liberation Front and Gay Activists Alliance were formed. Use of the term gay was meant to verbally counter heterosexual norms referred to as straitlaced and the elimination of any labels that discriminated between heterosexual and homosexual lifestyles. From the 1970s onward, gay rights movements began mimicking the language of the American civil rights movement. They portrayed homosexuals as a minority group in search of equal rights and equal protection in the law, employment, and society in general. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

155

Sexual Orientation Prejudice

The Lavender Menace Groups that wish to create social change often resort to grassroots efforts (locally organized groups) and protest marches or rallies to get their point across. Within the gay community, one of the most effective means of change came about during the 1970s because of a group calling themselves the Lavender Menace. In 1970, a loosely organized group of lesbians in the New York City area were extremely frustrated with the leadership of the women’s rights movement. The president of the National Organization of Women (NOW), Betty Friedan (1921–2006), publicly declared that the movement would be hampered if organizations like NOW were seen as allied with lesbians. Friedan and others worried that such an association would make it easier for opponents to dismiss their efforts. In 1969, Friedan likened the threat she believed lesbians posed as a ‘‘lavender menace.’’ Rita Mae Brown (1944–), a lesbian writer who worked for NOW, angrily resigned her position after Friedan’s remarks and suggested action. When Brown and her colleagues noted that the opening session of the Second Congress to Unite Women, scheduled for May 1, 1970, did not include any openly gay lesbians on the program, they decided to insert themselves into the proceedings. A member of the Lavender Menace switched out the lights in the auditorium and cut the sound off of the microphone on the main stage. When the lights came back on, it was discovered that members of Lavender Menace had filled the aisles. The members distributed copies of the Menace manifesto, titled ‘‘The Woman-Identified Woman.’’ Members of the

group spoke about lesbian issues and were invited to conduct workshops during the next day’s activities of the Second Congress. The group’s manifesto attempted to answer the question ‘‘What is a lesbian?’’ The paper explained that a male-dominated culture had succeeded in dividing heterosexuals and homosexuals and that lesbians sought to unite women in a common cause that was not based on how men defined them. Following the stunt and resulting participation in the Second Congress, lesbians began to enjoy more influence within the women’s rights movement. Those involved in Lavender Menace decided to form a more formal organization and named it ‘‘Radicalesbians.’’ At its 1971 national conference of NOW, the group that a year earlier had attempted to keep lesbians away from the women’s movement, adopted a resolution recognizing lesbianism and the importance of lesbians within the feminist movement. There is little doubt that such a resolution would not have been considered were it not for Lavender Menace. Despite its rapid achievement, the group was short-lived. The Radicalesbians began to disdain participation by anyone who was not a lesbian, including heterosexual women who were sympathetic to their cause. Many influential members dropped off the membership rolls, and Radicalesbians disbanded in late 1971. However, the influence that Lavender Menace had on the feminist movement as a whole remains a watershed moment for lesbian activism.

As AIDS (Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome; a condition of immune deficiency associated with infection of the immune system cells) became more prevalent in the 1980s, the gay rights movement shifted its 156

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Sexual Orientation Prejudice

Many advocacy groups sponsored large gay pride parades and rallies throughout the United States and around the world. MS . CAT HY CA DE .

focus to unite all variants of homosexuality. Many groups that in the past would have described themselves as gay rights advocates began using words such as lesbian (a female homosexual), bisexual (a person who participates in both heterosexual and homosexual relationships), and transgender (a person who appears as a member of the gender opposite from what he or she is biologically) in their descriptions. Gay rights groups became well organized. Some groups, such as the Human Rights Campaign, operated in Washington, D.C. They effectively made their voices heard in the halls of Congress. Many advocacy groups sponsored large gay pride parades and rallies throughout the United States and around the world. At these events, the symbol for gay pride, an upside-down triangle featuring the colors of the rainbow, was prominently displayed, as were rainbow flags. The colors of the rainbow represented the diversity of the gay community. These groups also worked within the legal world to secure equal rights and protection for homosexuals. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

157

Sexual Orientation Prejudice

The legal fight against sexual orientation discrimination Various rulings issued by the U.S. Supreme Court since the 1950s affected homosexual citizens and the gay rights movement. In 1956, the Court ruled that homosexual publications were not, as a rule, obscene, and were protected by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Yet four years later, the Court ruled that legislation barring homosexual immigrants was constitutional. Congress later repealed the law in 1990 due to its difficulty in enforcement and continued questionable legality. In 1976, the Court upheld a Virginia state law outlawing sodomy (a term to describe homosexual intercourse). These sex laws proved to be nearly impossible to uphold or enforce unless they were violated in public places. Court rulings on sexual orientation discrimination issues continued into the late twentieth century and early twenty-first century. In 1983 the Court refused to hear the appeal of a court decision in which an Oklahoma appeals court ruled unconstitutional a state law giving public school boards authority to dismiss homosexual teachers. The Court’s action in essence upheld the Oklahoma court’s ruling. Later the Court ruled that sexual harassment laws applied to harassment of same-sex couples. In 2001, the Court stated that the Boy Scouts of America are not required to follow state anti-discrimination laws regarding sexual orientation. They were free to exclude gays from membership.

The right to a homosexual lifestyle The cases before the Supreme Court that gathered the most publicity and legal attention, however, centered around the issue of privacy. Many questioned whether the U.S. Constitution protected the right of individuals to engage in homosexual activity. In 1986, the U.S. Supreme Court announced its decision in the case Bowers v. Hardwick. A police officer in Georgia entered the residence of Michael Hardwick to serve a court summons and found Hardwick engaged in sexual activity with another man. The officer had been allowed to enter the apartment by a guest of Hardwick’s and noticed the sexual activity through a partially opened door. The police arrested Hardwick for violating the state of Georgia’s sodomy laws; however, charges were never pressed against Hardwick. Nonetheless, Hardwick sued the state’s attorney general over the arrest. The case was appealed to the Supreme Court. 158

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Sexual Orientation Prejudice

The Court stated in a five to four ruling that the Constitution did not protect homosexual activity. Individual states were free to pass laws forbidding such activity. Chief Justice Warren E. Burger (1907–1995) wrote in a concurring opinion that to hold that the Constitution protected homosexual activity was to ignore centuries of moral teachings. Opponents of sodomy laws and those who saw private activity by homosexuals as falling under the due process clause (legal protections through established formal procedures) of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution adamantly objected to the ruling. Associate Justice Harry Blackmun (1908–1999) criticized the majority opinion of the Court for focusing only on the issue of homosexual activity and not considering the right to privacy by itself. Blackmun wrote in his dissenting opinion that sexual intimacy was central to human relationships, family life, community welfare, development of human personality, and to the human experience in general.

The Lawrence decision The legal standards changed when the sodomy laws that were upheld by the Court in Bowers were later struck down by the Georgia Supreme Court in 1998. Five years later the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated all remaining state sodomy laws as they applied to homosexual activity in the case of Lawrence v. Texas. It was yet to be determined if remaining state laws banning heterosexual sodomy would also be affected by the Lawrence decision. In Lawrence, the Court voted six to three to rule unconstitutional a Texas state law criminalizing homosexual sodomy. The decision overturned the Bowers ruling. Consensual (both persons involved giving approval) sexual contact and activity was now a part of the liberty protected by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. In writing the majority opinion in Lawrence, Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy (1936–) stated that the Bowers ruling was clearly not correct at the time when it was decided. Therefore, it should not remain a precedent (establishing a rule to be followed in making future decisions) for future court decisions. Gay rights advocates celebrated the decision for not only overturning Bowers, but for the hope it gave in paving the way for further legal advancements concerning issues such as same-sex marriage and the legal equating of heterosexual and homosexual intercourse. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

159

Sexual Orientation Prejudice

Associate Justice Antonin Scalia (1936–) dissented (officially disagreed) from the majority opinion for a variety of reasons. For one, he wondered whether lower court decisions that had been based on Bowers could now be called into doubt. Justice Scalia wrote that it was his view that the Supreme Court had become a part of the gay rights movement. This went against the Court’s role as a neutral mediator of disputes in the law, regardless of one’s personal feelings on issues of homosexuality and morality. The Court’s rulings and opinions in these two cases shed much light on the conflict within the nation regarding gay rights and the law. Should the U.S. Congress pass legislation defining marriage as a union between one man and one woman, the law will most likely be tested in the federal courts and perhaps reach the Supreme Court. Gay rights activists would no doubt point to Lawrence to support same-sex marriage despite clear language within the decision that the case did not address the formal recognition of homosexual relationships.

Same-sex marriage Both sides of the same-sex marriage debate fiercely argued their points at every available occasion in the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries. These arguments were offered in the nation’s courts, presidential debate lecterns, cable news programs, and newspapers and magazines. The arguments Because marriage is officially recognized and regulated by state governments and can be performed in courthouses rather than churches, much of the debate was about the definition of marriage as defined by government. However, many religious organizations and individuals argued that the government cannot automatically bestow rights upon nontraditional forms of marriage. They feared that moral and religious decay would rapidly intensify should same-sex marriage be permitted. Proponents of same-sex marriage wished not only to publicly declare a commitment to a life-partner as heterosexuals do, they also wished to receive the many legal benefits enjoyed by married couples. In most states, married couples were granted the ability to acquire healthcare coverage from private companies, to bring a foreign citizen into the United States, and to benefit from a partner’s last will and testament. Same-sex marriage proponents argued that laws prohibiting marriage between homosexuals were discriminatory because homosexual couples could not enjoy the same marriage benefits as heterosexual couples. Therefore, they argued, that laws not recognizing same-sex marriages were unconstitutional. 160

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Sexual Orientation Prejudice

Protestors in favor of and against same-sex marriages. A P I MAG ES .

The Defense of Marriage Act, passed by Congress and signed into law by President Bill Clinton (1946–; served 1993–2001) in 1996, denied same-sex couples federal benefits. Some of these benefits include: Social Security pensions; survivor benefits for federal employees; relocation assistance for federal civil service employees; Medicaid (government health care benefits for the poor and disabled) coverage; next-of-kin status for emergency medical situations; domestic violence protection orders; inheritance of property; and, joint adoption and foster care benefits. Various states that banned same-sex marriage also denied same-sex couples certain benefits that are available to heterosexual married couples, such as survivor benefits in case of the death of one partner or freedom from medical privacy laws in which one partner has limited access to medical information of the other at time of sickness or injury. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

161

Sexual Orientation Prejudice

Many opponents of same-sex marriage based their arguments on religious grounds. As previously mentioned, the book of Genesis described the excesses, or overindulgence, in the city of Sodom as well as the city of Gomorrah. Many religious leaders and conservatives point to passages in the book of Leviticus that prescribe punishment for homosexual activity. Critics of these arguments charged that the passages were taken out of context to promote a particular agenda. Nonetheless, many same-sex marriage opponents viewed the Bible as a higher law to be obeyed at the peril of culture and civilization. Indeed, many religious figures stated that should marriage be redefined as something other than a union between one man and one woman, the rate of homosexuality would increase and the traditional nuclear family would be threatened with extinction. Some pointed to declining heterosexual marriage rates in countries such as Denmark, Sweden, and Norway, which allowed homosexual marriage, as proof that the traditional family would erode should the United States allow same-sex marriage. These arguments stated that traditional marriage between a man and woman has been the basis of civilized culture all over the world for thousands of years. A fact that often gets lost in the upheaval is that religious organizations are by no means uniform when it comes to opposition to the question of same-sex marriage. While many organized religions explicitly prohibit homosexual acts and, of course, marriage between those of the same gender, others perform same-sex weddings. Some churches regard any legal prohibitions against same-sex weddings as an infringement on the freedom of religious expression. Another cornerstone of the argument against same-sex marriage is that the main purpose of marriage is to procreate (to produce offspring). Obviously, a same-sex marriage makes this impossible. Because one of the outcomes of marriage is, in theory, to perpetuate the species, marriage between a man and a woman is seen as a legal support of this biological goal of marriage. The benefits the law and the states bestow upon married couples encourage stability and the population growth. Many same-sex advocates pointed out that states do not prohibit heterosexual marriages in which one or both persons in the marriage may be unable to reproduce. Nor do states outlaw marriages when a woman is past childbearing age. In addition, same-sex couples often use modern technology and surrogate mothers (women serving in the place of others to give birth through artificial means of establishing the pregnancy) to 162

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Sexual Orientation Prejudice

Some churches regard any legal prohibitions against same-sex weddings as an infringement on the freedom of religious expression. A P IM AG ES.

bear children on their behalf. Also, some referred to laws that give tax credits for children regardless of marital status, such as single-parent families. Same-sex marriage supporters also argue that allowing gay couples the option would encourage social stability and the raising of families. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

163

Sexual Orientation Prejudice

Perhaps more options would open up for children who are available for adoption. However, many health and child welfare organizations disagreed with that assessment based on bureaucratic reasons and their concerns that effects upon children raised in a home with parents of the same sex are largely unknown. However, studies have shown that children raised in families of same-sex couples fare no worse than those in traditional families. Some lawmakers argued that permitting same-sex marriage in the United States would start a slippery slope of nontraditional marriage, such as marriage between family members, known as incest, or polygamous (having more than one spouse at a time) marriages. Advocates of same-sex marriage argued that such consequences have not come to pass in countries that allowed gay marriage, such as the Netherlands. In the United States, over 1,100 laws take the marital status of individuals into account, such as inheritance laws and next of kin notification in case of death or serious injury. Supporters of same-sex marriage claimed that the denial of marriage by the government is a direct violation of due process, as provided in the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. These arguments about same-sex marriage were on prominent display in the nation’s courtrooms in the early twenty-first century. Constitutional questions Issues of great controversy in U.S. history have

often been subject to the ultimate constitutional test—amending the text of the Constitution itself. The same-sex marriage issue was no different. Because some individual states have passed legislation permitting samesex marriage, many politicians and interest groups opposed to gay marriage worked to introduce a constitutional amendment banning homosexuals from legally recognized marriage. Each of the individual states governed civil marriage according to the individual state’s laws and regulations. A constitutional amendment would, in effect, federalize marriage laws. By 2006 Massachusetts was the only state permitting same-sex marriage. In 2003, Republican U.S. representative Marilyn Musgrave (1949–) of Colorado introduced the Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA) bill that would ban same-sex marriages. U.S. senator Wayne Allard (1943–), another Republican from Colorado, sponsored the legislation in the U.S. Senate. While neither the House nor the Senate had approved FMA by the constitutionally required two-thirds majority vote, Allard reintroduced FMA in the Senate in 2005. In June 2006 the proposed amendment failed to pass on a Senate vote. 164

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Sexual Orientation Prejudice

The language of the FMA bill explicitly defined marriage as a union between one man and one woman. It prohibited the individual states from allowing same-sex marriages. In states that had already passed legislation or state constitutional amendments permitting same-sex marriages, the laws would be null and void and the marriages performed under those laws automatically dissolved. The 2004 presidential election and the FMA Because the votes in the

House and Senate on the first FMA proposal came in 2004, the issue became an important part of that year’s presidential campaign between the incumbent, Republican George W. Bush, and his Democratic rival, U.S. senator John Kerry (1943–) of Massachusetts. In the Senate that year, the FMA bill was subjected to a filibuster (a parliamentary procedure used to delay legislative business by talking at the podium about any chosen subject). When the Senate voted to end debate and proceed with a vote, senators defeated the motion. No actual vote on FMA occurred. Senator Kerry and his vice presidential running mate, U.S. senator John Edwards (1953–) of North Carolina, however, stayed on the campaign trail rather than travel to Washington, D.C., to cast votes against FMA and create an opportunity for President Bush to appeal even more to conservative voters. Perhaps the most famous incident during the 2004 presidential campaign regarding the issue of same-sex marriage occurred during a debate between Kerry and Bush. Senator Kerry mentioned that Mary Cheney (1969–), a daughter of U.S. vice president Richard Cheney (1941–), was a homosexual and insisted that it was a natural part of her personality rather than a conscious decision. Kerry’s comment earned him a strong rebuke from the Cheney family. Kerry opposed the particulars of the FMA. However, he also personally opposed same-sex marriage in general, favoring civil unions (legal partnerships) instead. President Bush supported the FMA but stated that he did not object to civil unions should the FMA be defeated. While some, including most vociferously the many evangelical (teaching a close personal relationship with God through rigorous faith in written passages of the Bible) Christian organizations that are politically active, attributed President Bush’s reelection in 2004 to his stances on issues such as the FMA, the Republican Party was divided on the question of civil unions. However, less than 20 percent of Republicans supported same-sex marriage. Two states that President Bush did not win in 2004, Michigan and Oregon, passed state constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriage. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

165

Sexual Orientation Prejudice

Civil unions are legal partnerships between two people and confer many of the legal benefits of marriage. States and jurisdictions vary on those rights, however, and supporters of same-sex marriage argued that civil unions created a situation that was unequal from marriage. Opponents of civil unions said that they were merely the introduction of same-sex marriage, only by a different name. In the early twenty-first century, civil unions were legal within the United States in Vermont, California, and Connecticut. More Americans supported civil unions, more so than same-sex marriages. Legal scholars were divided on the question, but many believed that FMA would also prohibit civil unions.

Sexual orientation and the culture During the late twentieth century, many organizations that promoted and worked to ensure the participation of homosexuals in all facets of life including employment, government, education, and entertainment gained prominence. Groups such as Human Rights Campaign and Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation maintained a significant presence in Washington, D.C., and in state capitals. Human Rights Campaign, for example, had over 600,000 members. Such groups had formal legislative strategies, regular staff, and financial donors that made them a considerable force in politics. Advocacy groups attempted to garner equal rights for homosexuals, lesbians, and individuals who identify themselves as transgender. In addition to lobbying, or petitioning, elected officials, such groups produced and distributed public service announcements, created educational programs, and backed political candidates who supported the cause of equality for homosexuals. Many groups provided legal counseling, legal aid, and assistance to those who felt they had been the victims of hiring discrimination, passed over for job promotion, or fired because of their sexual orientation. Gay rights and support groups also made strides in demystifying AIDS. When the epidemic first came to prominence in the collective conscience in the mid-1980s, it was viewed as a gay disease. Many of those afflicted were indeed homosexuals. However, public awareness and education, much of it funded and created by advocacy groups and grassroots organizations, created a change in perception. When prominent heterosexual athletes like Earvin ‘‘Magic’’ Johnson (1959–) and Arthur Ashe (1943–1993), and children like Ryan White (1971–1990) of Kokomo, Indiana, contracted the disease, most realized that it could strike anyone. 166

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Sexual Orientation Prejudice

One area of progress advocacy groups had made was in altering the language of nondiscriminatory policies in workplaces and places of higher education. In addition to the inclusion of homosexuals as those protected in nondiscriminatory policy wording, many institutions were adding other categories as well. For instance, in 2006, Harvard University announced that it would add gender identity to its nondiscrimination policy. Corporations also followed suit. In 1997, only one company listed in the Fortune 500 (a ranking of the top five hundred companies based on their income published by Fortune magazine) officially protected transgender employees. Eighty-two of the five hundred companies listed protected such employees on the job in 2006. Another area of progress to which advocacy groups pointed was health benefits awarded to employees and their domestic partners. In 1990, fewer than two dozen employers in the United States offered some sort of benefits that were equal to spouse benefits. The number has steadily climbed since then. The number of employers offering domestic partner benefits increased by 2006. According to a 2006 report by the Human Rights Campaign, as of March 1, 2006, 49 percent of Fortune 500 largest companies offered domestic partner benefits. Corporations sometimes found themselves in the middle of controversy regarding marketing campaigns. In 2005, the Ford Motor Company pulled advertising from several gay magazines, most notably The Advocate, a leading national newsmagazine in the United States for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender persons. Ford claimed that the move was a result of a general loss of revenue and the difficulties facing the auto industry. Several gay advocate organizations met with Ford, which reversed course and promised to continue supporting several events within the gay community. Several anti-gay organizations expressed their displeasure with Ford for continuing to advertise in magazines that they said promoted a homosexual agenda.

The entertainment world The latter half of the twentieth century saw a gradual increase in the inclusion of openly gay characters, especially in television. Comedienne and actress Ellen DeGeneres (1958–) sparked controversy in 1997 by announcing that she was a lesbian. DeGeneres appeared on the cover of Time magazine over the headline ‘‘Yep, I’m Gay.’’ As a result, she became the first gay performer to play a gay character on a hit television show. However, a media storm was ignited. Religious and conservative groups Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

167

Sexual Orientation Prejudice

protested, and ABC soon cancelled her Ellen program. This action led to accusations of homophobia by gay advocacy leaders.

Comedienne, actress, and gay rights advocate Ellen DeGeneres. A P IM AG ES.

Despite the protests and objections of many viewers, gay characters became much more commonplace as the twentieth century gave way to the twenty-first. In 1998, NBC debuted a comedy titled Will & Grace, that featured a gay male character as the lead and one as the supporting actor. Other weekly series, such as Spin City and Mad About You, featured prominent gay characters. Queer Eye for the Straight Guy featured a group of homosexual men improving the fashion sensibilities of heterosexual men. It debuted in 2003 to high ratings and critical acclaim and inspired several spin-off series in other countries. Movies, such as Brokeback Mountain, released in 2005 and winner of the Academy Award for best movie of the year, heightened awareness of the difficult conflicts faced by homosexuals. The movie Transamerica, also released in 2005, featured a lead character struggling with gender identity. It was nominated for numerous awards. For as much success as the gay community had in making their presence felt in the entertainment industry, stereotypes and gay-bashing were still prominent. Many criticized rap artists for violent lyrics directed against homosexuals. One popular rapper in particular, Eminem, also known as Marshall Mathers (1972–), was criticized by the gay community for what were seen as a significant amount of homophobic lyrics in many of his albums. Some of his lyrics were so controversial and offensive to listeners that the mother of Matthew Shepard (1976–1998), the murdered gay Wyoming college student, recorded a public service announcement speaking out against homophobia.

Sexual orientation prejudice persists While much progress was made in countering the sexual orientation prejudice against homosexuals and the stigma attached to same-sex affection, gay rights advocates argued that much more could be done to equalize society than has occurred. The same-sex marriage debate was a 168

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Sexual Orientation Prejudice

major front in the battle for equality. The June 2006 vote in the U.S. Senate may further define the arguments. Nevertheless, the last half of the twentieth century and the beginning of the twenty-first century saw a drastic increase in the rights of homosexuals and an appreciation for their talents and contributions to society.

For More Information B O O KS

Brown, Mildred, and Chloe Ann Rounsley. True Selves: Understanding Transsexualism: For Families, Friends, Coworkers and Helping Professionals. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2003. Cheney, Mary. Now It’s My Turn. New York: Threshold, 2006. Gagnon, Robert A., and Dan O. Via. Homosexuality and the Bible: Two Views. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003. Gerstmann, Evan. Same-Sex Marriage and the Constitution. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003. Hirsch, H. N. The Future of Gay Rights in America. New York: Routledge, 2005. Richards, David A. J. The Case for Gay Rights. Lawrence: University of Kansas Press, 2005. Sullivan, Andrew. Same-Sex Marriage: Pro and Con. New York: Vintage, 2004. Wolfson, Evan. Why Marriage Matters: America, Equality and Gay People’s Right to Marry. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2004. WEB SIT ES

Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation. http://www.glaad.org (accessed on November 29, 2006). ‘‘Lesbian, Gay and Transgender Rights.’’ Human Rights Watch. http://hrw.org/ doc/?t=lgbt (accessed on November 29, 2006). ‘‘Marriage/Relationship Recognition.’’ Human Rights Campaign.http://hrc.org/ Template.cfm?Section=Center&Template=/TaggedPage/TaggedPageDisplay. cfm &TPLID=63&ContentID=17353 (accessed on November 29, 2006). ‘‘Youth and Schools Programs.’’ Parents, Family and Friends of Lesbians and Gays. http://www.pflag.org/Youth_and_Schools.youth_schools.0.html (accessed on November 29, 2006).

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

169

9

Nationalism

ationalism is the belief that a particular nation and its culture, people, and values are superior to those of other nations and thus that one’s own nation will benefit from acting independently, rather then in coordination with other nations. It can also include the belief that a certain large social grouping of people deserves to have its own independent nation. Nationalists are those people who identify, perhaps strongly, with a particular nation. Through nationalism, people show a strong loyalty and devotion to their existing nation or desired future nation that exceeds most other concerns. Nationalism influences people on a day-to-day basis and shapes their lives in various ways. Nationalism is often most strongly felt by groups that are seeking to establish a new nation. Nationalist movements are efforts to establish or actively maintain a particular nation. By the late twentieth century, most people in the world lived in a nation of some sort.

N

Nationalists promote self-governance (freedom from foreign political control) of their nation to maintain independence from other nations. Nationalism often makes use of stereotypes (an oversimplified opinion of others based on limited information or exaggerated perceptions) to create and maintain a unity of prejudice against people of other nationalities for nationalism requires distinctions between supporting a particular nation and not other nations as much. The stereotypes are frequently negative and may result in members of other nations becoming labeled as an enemy. People who share common nationalistic attitudes often share some combination of a common language, culture, religion, or other social values. Often, new nations are established based on a certain ethnicity of the people or some other form of common identity such as religious affiliation. By the late twentieth century, ethnicity had become increasingly important over all other factors. As a result, just as people are born into a particular ethnic group, they are similarly born into a nation or group seeking a nation. Therefore membership in a nation is often hereditary rather than chosen. 171

Nationalism

WORDS TO KNOW irredentism: To gain territories considered previous parts of the national homeland. nation-state: A politically independent country. nationalism: The belief that a particular nation and its culture, people, and values are superior to those of other nations and thus that one’s own nation will benefit from acting independently, rather than in coordination with other nations.

nationalist movement: Organized efforts to establish or aggressively maintain a particular nation. separatism: The desire of a group of citizens to separate from the state in which they live to form a new, independent state.

To remain cohesive and distinguish themselves from members of other nations, national symbols are adopted, a national culture is promoted, and folklore and mythology is created to justify the nation’s existence and feelings of superiority. In addition national music, literature, sports, and foods are identified to help establish or maintain a national identity. Some nationalists may even promote a national religion and discourage the practice of other religions. Just as nationalism has greatly affected the course of world history throughout the past several centuries, it still has the capability to influence what can happen. Nationalism can lead to separatism (seeking to form a new nation from one currently existing), irredentism (reclaiming a lost homeland), or militarism (forceful expansion of a nation). Nationalism can stir intense emotions, and extreme forms of nationalism can lead to extensive violence, even ethnic cleansing (a planned attempt to eliminate a whole targeted ethnic group of people by killing all members).

Prejudice and nationalism Nationalism involves development of a specific group identity usually based on a common origin or ethnicity of the people. This identity distinguishes the group from other groups in its search for political sovereignty, or independence. The loyalty to a person’s own nation takes priority over loyalty to any other political organization. Nationalism is captured by such phrases as a national identity, collective mentality, national spirit, and national character. Nationalism causes a suspicion of others and less cooperation with people of other ethnic or religious affiliations, even prejudice and discrimination. Eventually, this distrust and its resulting stereotypes can and do lead to violent conflict. 172

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Nationalism

Nationalism takes several forms. Civil nationalism is where ethnicity is not a dominant factor. Ethnic nationalism is when the group shares a common language, origin, and tradition. Citizens of the United States and Western European countries tend more toward civic nationalism because of their lengthy history of immigration and the resulting human diversity in society. Central and eastern European countries are driven more by ethnic nationalism because nations tended to form in regions dominated by particular ethnic populations. Germany was a leading example of ethnic nationalism after 1871, when the nation was formed from the many Germanic tribes.

The rise of nationalism Until the seventeenth century, most people’s loyalties were local in focus. People commonly gave their allegiance to city-states (independent state consisting of a city and its surrounding territory), feudal lords (wealthy who owned and leased large tracts of land), royal dynasties, or religious movements. The nation-state (a politically independent country) did not exist. For much of history, powerful empires did dominate large parts of the world, but they controlled and oppressed people. They did not incite emotional loyalties. These included the Ancient Greek Civilization two to three thousand years ago and the Roman Empire (31 BCE –1453 CE ) followed by the Holy Roman Empire (843–1806). During the Middle Ages (500–1500), religion—not national governments—was seen as the great unifier of vast human populations. By the sixteenth century, feudal lords gave way to European monarchs, or royals, whose rule spanned larger territories. Under monarchs, states became more centralized. Life and education became secular (led by politicians, not religious leaders). However, these monarchies were still not modern nations. For example, the boundaries of these territories steadily changed as marriages among royalty occurred and deaths happened. The beginning of nation-states came with the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648. The treaty, consisting actually of a series of treaties, ended thirty years of war in Europe between the Holy Roman Empire and peoples of various German groups in France, Spain, and Sweden. The treaty had far-reaching effects in separating the Netherlands from Spain, gaining lands for Sweden, establishing independence for Switzerland, securing greater independence for hundreds of small German states known as tribes, and breaking the broad, sweeping power of the Holy Roman Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

173

Nationalism

Empire. No longer were there expansive empires that for centuries had dominated large regions in Europe, the Americas, and Asia. The highest and broadest level of government was now the nation-state. The treaty also began the practice of nations officially recognizing each other as selfruling. A major implication of this change was that issues of governments and states would now trigger wars rather than religious disputes. Over the next three centuries, the nation became the focal point of political loyalties, education systems, and public life in general.

The shaping of a new world Another major driving force in the creation of nations was the rise of industrialization and spread of capitalism beginning in the late eighteenth century. These two forces led to economic systems needing state support and oversight. Industrialization was the change in economic focus from one rooted in agriculture to one based on industry and production. Capitalism is an economic system in which production is privately owned, financed through private investments, and the demand for goods is established through an open market system largely free of government involvement with prices of goods and services set by competition between private businesses. Industrialization first began in the textile mills of Britain in the late 1700s. As a result, British nationalism coincided with the emergence of a middle class of merchants (people who buy and sell goods for a profit). As economies grew with industrialization, those regions with sufficient economic and political power established national identities. Whereas earlier empires stressed a broad unity, nationhood focused more on differences in peoples and competition over land and resources. The rise of capitalism in support of industrialization and invention of the steam-powered printing press in 1812 set the stage for the growth and spread of these nationalistic prejudices. Thanks to the new powered printing presses, newspapers, pamphlets, and books suddenly had much greater distribution to transmit ideas, including political propaganda (information designed to promote a certain cause), and build a broader social unity. Along with nationalism came prejudices against people of other nations. As time passed, these differences grew more pronounced. The prejudices led to territorial conflicts in Europe, such as the Crimean War (1854–56) between Russia and an alliance of France, Britain, and others, and the FrancoPrussian War (1870–71) between France and Prussia. These wars and others during the nineteenth century focused on settling boundary disputes and control over territories among European nations. 174

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Nationalism

The spread of nationalism The American and French revolutions in the late eighteenth century also served to bring nationalism to the forefront. America’s Declaration of Independence in 1776 was one of the world’s first formal political expressions of nationalism. While nationalistic movements were making historic changes on the European continent, the British colonies in North America broke away from monarchial rule of Britain to form their own nation. They formed the United States, a nation created more for civic, or public, than ethnic (a group recognized by certain traits such as a unique culture, common national origin or ancestral history, or certain physical traits) reasons. Unlike many new nations, people in the United States became members of the new nation more by choice than by birth as Europeans had sailed across the Atlantic Ocean to enjoy religious freedoms and other civil liberties. From there nationalism moved throughout the Americas, becoming a major political force during the nineteenth century in Latin America, which includes the Western Hemisphere south of the United States. All Latin American countries except for Puerto Rico and Cuba gained independence from Spanish colonial rule by 1825 and established sovereign nations. As the ideas of nationalism spread around the globe, nationalistic movements developed. Nationalist movements began in the late nineteenth century in Central and Eastern Europe. Some took the form of separatist movements whose members were eager to break away from large empires or monarchial rule, such as the Austro-Hungarian Empire (1867–1916) and the Ottoman Empire (1299–1922). Other nationalistic efforts sought to combine small territories into larger political and economic regions, as happened in Germany and Italy. For example, the population of Germany was originally organized into hundreds of small tribal governments. It was not until 1871 that nationalism led to their combining into a single nation-state. By the twentieth century, Europe was well divided into nations. In the early twentieth century, World War I (1914–18) led to the formation of new nations in Central and Eastern Europe, free from rule of larger empires. The Versailles Treaty ended the war and encouraged the creation of nations by establishing nationhood as a step toward participating in the newly established League of Nations, an international organization created to resolve future international conflicts. Some new nations, including Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia, were multiethnic since their national boundaries included multiple ethnic territories. Other new nation-states had less diversity since they were formed corresponding to Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

175

Nationalism

previous ethnic territories. These nations included Austria, Hungary, Poland, and Romania. Nationalism also appeared after World War I in Turkey, Egypt, India, and China. In Japan, a nationalist movement led to imperialism (the practice of one country exerting its power over other nations or territories), an extreme form of nationalism.

Post–World War II World War II (1939–45) centered on the fight by the Allied powers led by the United States and Britain to maintain democracies in the face of the military expansion of German and Japanese dictatorships. Following the war the world was ready to shed the weight of colonial rule by Western powers on distant peoples. This growing worldwide desire to end colonialism led to the formation of more nations. The end of European colonial rule led to the birth of new nations in Africa. Turkey, France, Spain, and Britain had controlled various Arab territories since the colonial period. They had routinely enforced use of their own languages in place of Arabic. Following World War II, a process of Arabization took place that included an emphasis of Arabic to increase Arab identity. Other nations peacefully achieved political independence from the British Empire after the war, including Burma, Malaysia, India, Pakistan, and Ghana. In India, a strong nationalist movement grew in popularity among India’s large population prior to the war in the 1930s. The population wanted to end British rule of India and gain independence. Indian nationalism was based on the practice of the Hindu religion. Hinduism began in India over two thousand years ago as a collection of practices and traditions that varied from village to village and region to region. Unlike Islam and Christianity, which recognize only one God, Hinduism has a number of deities (gods) who may be local deities of a particular community or even personal deities of individuals. They may be images of just about any aspect of life, but all are representative of a high god that is contained in everything worldly. Following World War II, independence was achieved following much rioting by Indians and Indian resistance to support of Britain during the war. British forces had lost their appetite to continue repression of Indian populations following the lengthy and costly war with Germany. Other nationalistic movements continued to fight bitterly against French rule into the 1950s including Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Tunisia, and Algeria. Nationalism also mixed with religious prejudice to produce dramatic events. One of the dominant nationalist struggles in the twentieth century 176

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Nationalism

Sir Winston Churchill (left), sitting with Franklin D. Roosevelt (center) and Joseph Stalin (right), were key representatives of the WWII Allied Forces. CO URT ES Y OF THE L IB RA RY O F CO NG RES S.

occurred in the Middle East between the newly established nation of Israel in 1948, and its neighbors, such as Egypt and Syria and the displaced Palestinian populations. Of similar nature and also triggered in the late 1940s was the struggle between Muslim Pakistan and Hindu India over the control of the Kashmir region, an agriculturally fertile land, located between them. The number of nations in the world grew steadily throughout the twentieth century. When the United Nations formed in 1945 as a world body to resolve international disputes, only fifty-one nations were members. By 1980, more than one hundred new nations had formed and joined the UN, increasing the membership to over 150. Most of these new nations were in Africa and Asia. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

177

Nationalism

Racism and Nationalism Almost all forms of strong nationalism include some degree of racism. Racial prejudices are aimed either at adjacent (immediately neighboring) nations or ethnic groups within a nation who do not conform to nationalists’ goals and values. Racism was also a strong element of nationalism as Britain established its worldwide empire through colonizing parts of the Americas, Asia, Australia, and Africa between the seventeenth and nineteenth centuries. The racism reached its peak in colonial control of countries in the late nineteenth century. The racism was strongly reflected in subjugating indigenous populations to work in oppressive conditions, even slavery, in order to extract natural resources for British economic gain. Racism was also central to all policies

of Nazi Germany in the 1930s and 1940s, including the Holocaust in which millions of European Jews and other social groups were exterminated in gas chambers. Racism continued to influence nationalism in the late twentieth century during the breakup of Yugoslavia. Ethnic cleansing, an extreme form of nationalism, became a major element of nationalistic movements to create separate governments out of the former Yugoslavia. A similar occurrence happened eighty years earlier when the Ottoman Empire (1299–1922) exterminated Armenians, an ethnic minority in Turkey, in 1915. This reflected the nineteenth century trend in European nationalistic movements that did not usually allow for multiracial or ethnic nations.

The worldwide consequences of nationalism had declined during the 1970s and 1980s, only to grow again as a dominant world cause of international conflict. A wave of nationalistic movements and their related prejudices swept the globe in 1990 and 1991 with the fall of the Soviet Union and Communist governments of Eastern Europe. As a result the Baltic states of Lithuania, Estonia, and Latvia were formed. Events in Yugoslavia (see chapter 15) in the 1990s caused dramatic changes in southeastern Europe as the country split into several new nations. Ethnic struggles for political independence led to considerable strife, cruelty, and bloodshed as nationalistic movements sought to expel ethnic groups, such as Albanians from the Kosovo region of Serbia. Organized by existing governments, mass murders called genocide—or ethnic cleansing—resulted from the nationalistic movements. International intervention in the form of North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) forces finally stopped the killing and restored order in 1999. NATO is a military defense alliance established in April 1949 among Western European and North American nations. An end result was the creation of new countries including Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia, and Montenegro. In the case of Bosnia-Herzegovina, it was also further divided into separate ethnic regions. Nationalism became a prime 178

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Nationalism

factor in international war crimes involving primarily the Serbian government but with accusations against others such as Bosnia as well. After 2001, nationalistic conflicts were overshadowed by another broad international conflict considered to be more of a clash of civilizations. This clash involved the Western Judeo-Christian world of the United States, Western Europe, and Israel and the Islamic states of Iraq, Iran, Syria, and Jordan, played out in the form of ongoing war and terrorist actions.

The process of nationalism In a relatively brief time since nationalism became a common factor in world events in the late eighteenth century, it became one of the most influential social factors in human history entering the twenty-first century. Nationalistic prejudice led to wars and even genocide including the Holocaust in World War II when Nazi Germany sought to exterminate all European Jews as well as other selected groups. Some eleven million people were murdered including six million Jews. The result was death of millions and the redrawing of political boundaries throughout the world. A dominant belief behind the broad nationalism movements of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries was that the world is naturally divided into a number of distinct nations that form the basis for government institutions and laws. In the extreme view of this belief in a national setting, neo-fascist movements (belief in strong authoritarian government system such as dictatorships) associated nationalism with racism. A prime impact on the development of nationalism was the growth of industrialization and the related spread of capitalistic economies, which spurred competition for valuable national resources and cheap labor sources. Certain conditions must be present in order for nationalism to develop. The building blocks of strong nationalism include a clearly defined homeland, hostile groups located nearby, stories of past conflicts and battles, sharing a distinct language different from other nearby spoken languages, special social and ethnic customs, and records of historical existence. In the presence of these circumstances, prejudice against other nationalities is able to fester and grow. For example, formation of nations has often led to restrictions on the use of minority languages, usually characterized as low-status languages. Forms of nationalism include cultural; ethnic, such as the breakup of Yugoslavia into Serbia and Montenegro, Croatia, and Bosnia-Herzegovina; Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

179

Nationalism

or civic, such as the United States built around a strict capitalist economy. An example of cultural nationalism occurs in China. Though China is composed of many minorities, it exists as a nation-state primarily through a shared Asian culture. A cultural nationalism based on religious distinction surfaced in Northern Ireland in the 1920s. Religious affiliation was the basis of group identities, Catholicism with North Ireland and Protestantism with England. Religion was the basis of nationalistic prejudices, though the primary issues of conflict were more economic in nature. Protestants in British-ruled Northern Ireland dominated the economy leaving only low-paying jobs and unemployment for the Catholic minority. Even where violent conflict between nationalistic factions does not surface, nationalism plays a key role in the formation of political parties and social movements. Nationalist political parties emphasize national symbols such as flags and slogans. Strong nationalists adopt political positions rejecting foreign influences and emphasizing creation and maintenance of a distinct national identity. They are often culturally conservative and xenophobic (abnormal fear of people who are different). Nationalists normally favor strong anti-immigration laws and in extreme situations can lead to ethnic cleansing (a planned attempt to eliminate a whole ethnic group of people) to make a nation ethnically pure. There is sometimes desire to gain territories considered previous parts of the national homeland, a process known as irredentism. Nationalism brings a sense of pride in belonging to a group, especially by being associated with the successes of that group. It can create a sense of belonging. For that reason, prejudices can quickly develop against others who potentially pose some threat to the group’s values or homeland. This shared sense of threat strengthens the feelings of nationalism. For example, the terrorist attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001, which killed about three thousand people, launched a strong wave of nationalism in the country. The nationalistic feelings were intense enough that many Americans supported federal anti-terrorist legislation known as the USA Patriot Act passed in October 2001, which eased some protective restrictions on police powers. The nationalistic feelings also stirred strong support for wars in Afghanistan that started in 2002 and in Iraq beginning in 2003. Citizens who did not support the invasion of Iraq were considered unpatriotic. Prejudices between those favoring aggressive military actions and those opposed to war led to conflict, much as in the Vietnam War (1954–75) era of the 180

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Nationalism

President George W. Bush comforts a fireman after the terrorist attacks in New York City in 2001. AP I MA GES .

1960s and 1970s when many Americans opposed U.S. involvement in Indochina wars. Some even used the term nationalism in a derogatory manner, including Europeans who came to believe the U.S. wave of nationalism after the September 2001 was excessive. Nationalism even divided the U.S. population in the early twenty-first century over the invasion of Iraq by the United States in 2003. Those who speak out against U.S. president George W. Bush (1946–; served 2001–) and his foreign policies were labeled unpatriotic and their protests nearly criminal because the nation had troops fighting overseas. A climate of fear crept across the country as the government introduced secret surveillance programs to monitor those not supportive. A more extreme form of nationalism is fascism. Fascism is a political system in which a strong central government, usually run by a dictator, or tyrannical ruler, promotes a strong sense of nationalism and often racism. This system allows no opposition to its beliefs, and values the nation as priority over the individual. Fascism in Italy in the 1930s combined strong forms of ethnic nationalism and civic nationalism. An Italian pride grew that had not existed to such an extent for centuries. Nazism in Germany during the same time period under German dictator Adolf Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

181

Nationalism

Hitler (1889–1945) reflected a similar blend of nationalism, but escalated even further into imperialism (gaining control over other countries). To prove their dominance, the Germans successfully gained new territories that had no historic German presence. Fascism has many different faces. The many differences between Italian Fascism and German Nazism included Hitler wanting to build Germany into a classless society based on ethnic unity and purity yet Mussolini went to great lengths to preserve a class system because he believed it was the foundation of a desirable culture.

Nationalism and symbols To perpetuate national loyalty to the new nation-states, new rituals are introduced upon their establishment, such as national holidays, festivals, and celebrations. Distinctive flags are created as well as national anthems and patriotic music and poetry. The use of national symbols also gives a nation-state a presence to the world. They also give something for the citizens to rally around and share in common while forming prejudices against others with different symbols. The symbols unite people by giving images and sayings representing national values, history, and goals. The symbols celebrate patriotism (allegiance to the state) and rally members of a group seeking nation status. In addition to flags and patriotic music, symbols can include a simple but distinctive combination of colors and regalia (symbols of authority) associated with the head of state. It also includes recognition of certain heroic founders of the nation, such as George Washington (1732–1799; served 1789–97), the first president of the United States, and others important to the nation’s history. Monuments in honor of important people or events are built, such as the Washington Monument built in a city named after Washington, Washington, D.C., and national plants and animals, such as the bald eagle, are identified as national emblems to represent such values as national strength and vigilance. Symbols can also include myths to inspire people. Myths are stories, either wholly fictitious or exaggerated from a real life event, that inspire patriotism and reaffirm the nation’s values. The myths establish a distinction from peoples of other nations and contribute to prejudices against people not embracing the same myths. Often certain details are left out or changed to make the stories even more inspiring. Totalitarian (those with absolute rule over a nation) dictators will carry the use of myths to extremes by giving the mythical leader superhuman qualities. In 182

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Nationalism

The Washington Monument is identified as a national emblem representing such values as national strength and vigilance. # C RA IG A URN ES S/C OR BI S.

Britain, the legend of King Arthur serves as a central mythological figure. Another is Sir Francis Drake (c. 1540–1596), a ship commander who sailed around the world and was daring in England’s battles against its enemies on the high seas. Germany adopted the folk tales of the Brothers Grimm, which created a national identity for many different German-speaking Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

183

Nationalism

peoples who previously lived in separate tribes or groups. The folk tales include such classics as Snow White, Tom Thumb, Little Red Riding Hood, and Hansel and Gretel. People from across a large region could now point to a common heritage of fabled stories. The United States reveres the Pilgrims, who sailed in 1620 to North America from Plymouth, England, on the Mayflower in search of religious freedom. George Washington became a legendary figure in both war and political leadership as a key founder of the United States. The stories frequently misrepresented or exaggerated the people or events they portrayed. For example, stories of the Pilgrims usually avoided the harsh treatment suffered by Native Americans in the region at the hands of the Pilgrims. Stories of Washington have traditionally included the myth (false story) of Washington cutting down a cherry tree as a youth and refusing to lie about it to avoid punishment from his father.

Separatism Separatism in politics means to split a territory into two or more parts, each becoming independent nations known as sovereigns. Separatists are commonly seeking political self-determination, meaning free from the rule of another nation. The term separatism can apply to colonies gaining political independence from the European countries that subjugated them. For example, through a civil nationalistic movement, the United States gained freedom from British rule in the American Revolution (1775–83). The road to separatism often involves desires for economic independence; however, it also often involves ethnic prejudices and the desire for an ethnically pure country. Separatist movements have included Basques’ desire to separate from Spain, Corsicans from France, and Flemish from Belgium. Some separatist movements are peaceful, seeking separation through legal means such as constitutional amendments. Relatively peaceful movements in 1991 led to the breakup of both Czechoslovakia and the Soviet Union. Other movements are violent, such as the Basque in France, the Sikhs in India, or the Irish in Northern Ireland. Most of these violent clashes take the form of terrorist strikes. However, the separatist movement in the Chechen Republic, a state of Russia, sought independence from Russia which led to a civil war that began in 1991 and lasted into the twenty-first century. Separatist movements in Yugoslavia in the 1990s led to ethnic cleansing and the deaths of perhaps as many as two hundred thousand people though estimates widely vary. Separatist movements can tear apart 184

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Nationalism

a society based on allegiances to one political faction or another and the prejudices that grow between the conflicting groups with one wanting to politically break away and the other wanting to maintain the established government and national boundaries.

Basque separatism Basques are an ethnic group living within Spain and the extreme region of southwestern France who long enjoyed political independence. They were given special political status by the early Spanish government in the sixteenth century. However, they lost their political independence to Spain in the nineteenth century through a series of repressive acts passed by a Spanish government driven by nationalistic prejudices. The Basque desire for reestablishment of their political independence led to the development of a separatist movement. The Basque Nationalist Party, led by Sabino Arana (1865–1903), was established in 1895 and sought a nation based on racial purity: the Basque population. The Basque nationalists considered Spaniards racially inferior because of Spain’s past mixture of ethnic groups from around the Mediterranean Sea through time. However, in 1936 the Basque politically supported the Spanish government in a Spanish civil war in hopes that their support would gain them favorable treatment toward their separatist goals. But the government fell to the revolutionaries led by General Francisco Franco (1892–1975), and the Basques suffered for many decades due to their opposition to the rebels. Basques either fled Spain or went into hiding. The Basque separatist movement began to take shape again in the 1950s, following the end of World War II. The renewed goal of the Basque was a separate nation. The Basque have used common factors such as Basque language to create the unity for nationalism among the Basque population. Basque organizations took various forms including trade unions, political parties, and militant groups. The movement became violent through militias and terrorist activities when Basques reacted to increased violent suppression by Spanish leader Franco, who ruled Spain from 1939 to 1975. One violent organization of the separatist movement was the Euskadi Ta Askatasuna, or simply ETA. However, most Basques denounced the violence of ETA and worked within the Spanish political process to gain increased recognition. The Basque nationalist movement continued into the twenty-first century. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

185

Nationalism

Women protesting against the Euskadi Ta Askatasuna, or simply ETA, a violent organization of the separatist movement. AP I MA GE S.

Indian separatism India’s history provides an excellent example of a nationalist movement designed to gain independence from colonial rule. Britain had gained control of India in 1858 through military conquest of various local rulers. By the 1910s, the Indian spiritual and political leader Mahatma Gandhi (1869–1948) preached passive resistance to British colonial policies by adopting such actions as not obeying colonial laws, boycotting (not purchasing) British goods, and establishing an economic self-sufficiency for Indian villages through agricultural improvements. Gandhi had earlier spent time in South Africa, working on behalf of minorities to end racist policies of the British rulers. Upon his later return to his homeland of India, Gandhi became the leader of a growing Indian nationalist movement and involved the struggle for independence from British rule. 186

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Nationalism

Born in India in the vaishya or business caste, Gandhi studied law in London. He soon found himself in South Africa providing legal defense for South African blacks harassed by British colonial rulers. He personally experienced the wrath of racial prejudice and injustice in South Africa from beatings and not being allowed to stay in hotels. In India, Indians were forced by British rulers to grow certain crops for cash for the British rather than growing food necessary for themselves. The British rulers were ruthless, jailing or even killing Indians who did not comply. The Indians were extremely impoverished as a result of the British policy. Upon his return to his homeland of India in 1915, Gandhi began leading efforts aimed toward improving the quality of life in Indian villages. They built public facilities, such as schools and hospitals. Gandhi was repeatedly arrested and jailed by the British for his efforts at raising the living standards of Indians and resisting British prejudice. With hundreds of thousands of Indians supporting Gandhi’s efforts, Britain began backing off its harsh colonial policies for fear of a broad uprising. Nonetheless, British oppression continued in many ways such as exclusion of Indians from government. Finally, Gandhi became convinced that it was not possible to work with the British rulers. The only hope for Indians was to gain political independence from Britain.

Indian spiritual and political leader Mahatma Gandhi. AP IM AGE S.

In 1920, the All India Home Rule League was formed with Gandhi as its president. Anti-British measures adopted by the League included a boycott of British imported goods, refusing employment by the British, and refusing to pay taxes. By 1922, British rulers cracked down on the Indian nationalist movement, including the arrest and imprisonment of Gandhi on charges of sedition (acting or speaking in a manner considered critical of the government or its officials). Gandhi served two years in jail before being released after an operation for appendicitis. For the next several years Gandhi kept to himself, avoiding conflicts between different Indian groups seeking independence. In 1929 the resistance movement was rejuvenated led by the Indian National Congress that declared its goal was independence from British Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

187

Nationalism

rule. Created earlier in 1885, the Congress primarily sought a greater role of Indians in the Globalization and Nationalism British colonial government. A key turning point in the struggle for Indian independence By the late 1990s, European leaders sought to deemphasize nationalism by creating the came in 1930 when Gandhi decided to focus European Union, an organization of European on the tax on salt that British rulers used to nations whose goal was to promote political and help support the colonial government. On economic partnerships. The European Union was March 12 Gandhi and seventy-eight others established partly in response to a globalization of began a long walk to make their own salt at world economies that was forcing greater cooperation between nations. Trade agreements such Dandi. Thousands of others joined him along as the North American Free Trade Agreement the way. The resulting massive protest march (NAFTA) and General Agreement on Tariffs and known as the Salt March covered over 240 Trade (GATT) were signed among nations to allow miles and lasted until April 6. Though the for a freer flow of goods among nations by easing march had little immediate effect, it gave the longstanding restrictions such as tariffs (taxes on goods imported from another nation). However, Indians the self-confidence and self-respect they worker reaction to these agreements led to a rise in needed to continue the fight for independence. strong nationalistic feelings among the populaFollowing the Salt March a series of protests tions. They opposed the growing international occurred throughout India leading to the arrest trade without the traditional safeguards of proof some sixty thousand Indian protesters. One tecting wages, jobs, and the environment. These trade agreements in addition to other emotional protest march ended in violence, as British issues involving nationalism, such as antitroops attacked and clubbed to death hundreds immigration sentiments, led to political parties of the unarmed protestors who refused to defend promoting nationalism in a number of nations. themselves. To avoid any escalation in violence These parties saw increasing popularity by the early twenty-first century. and large-scale confrontations, British leaders decided to negotiate a settlement in March 1931. However, the British governor to India retired soon afterwards and the new British governor began introducing oppressive measures once again through the 1930s. During World War II, Gandhi refused to support the British in their fight against the Axis powers of Germany and Japan. The Quit India campaign formed, led by Gandhi. The campaign held the position that Indians would not support the British war effort unless they were granted their independence. The campaign led to mass arrests and violence. Thousands were killed or arrested. Gandhi was arrested once again and jailed for leading opposition to British rule for another two-year term beginning in 1942. Though British forces were able to eventually suppress the Quit India movement, following the end of World War II, they finally relented and decided to grant India its independence in 1947. 188

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Nationalism

Unfortunately, independence did not bring peaceful times. The Indian nationalist movement splintered over religious prejudices between Hindus and Muslims. A war erupted in 1946 between Hindus (in India) and Muslims (in Pakistan) over the proposed partition (division) of India upon its independence which came in 1947. Against Gandhi’s wishes, India was partitioned leading to the formation of Pakistan. In trying to resolve the ongoing religious conflict peacefully, Gandhi was assassinated by a Hindu radical in January 1948. Gandhi became known as the Father of India.

Resistance to nationalism In the early twenty-first century, anti-nationalistic movements were active for various reasons. Some accused nationalism for much of the violence in the world. Others favored societies based on religious affiliation rather than the secular (nonreligious) nature of nationalities. This trend included extremist Islamic efforts to eliminate the Arabic nation-states. The key reason for the movement was that Muslims identify most with other Muslims, regardless of national association. Their inclusion as part of a large religious community is stronger than being members of individual nations. Anti-nationalism views were consistently expressed by Al-Qaeda and other Islamic terrorist organizations. Other anti-nationalists in the world accused nationalism of being the primary force that causes international conflict and war and promotes militarism. Such critics of nationalism emphasized the protection of individual freedoms over promotion of national identities. Human rights watch organizations, such as Amnesty International, blamed nationalism for triggering prejudices and discrimination including most human rights violations identified around the world. Anti-nationalists insisted people had a civic responsibility to respect and treat others fairly, regardless of their national identity. They claimed that a strong emphasis on national symbols and patriotism in the twenty-first century is reminiscent of Nazi Germany in the 1930s when German dictator Hitler stirred a strong nationalistic movement with striking symbols (such as the swastika) and large public rallies. The extreme wave of nationalism led to World War II and the deaths of millions of innocent people.

Arab anti-nationalism and the Berbers The Arab world extends over four million square miles on two continents. The area includes a large part of Northern Africa, all the nations of Algeria, Libya, Egypt, and Sudan and the Middle East of Asia and the Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

189

Nationalism

Nearly 100,000 Nazi storm troopers gathered listening to Adolf Hitler. AP I MA GES .

nations of Iraq, Syria, and Saudi Arabia. The Arab nations are ruled by kings and dominate political parties in the name of republics. In search of a unity greater than the nation-states, Arab leaders of Arabspeaking populations in the various Arabic-speaking countries formed a political organization known as the League of Arab States, or simply Arab League. The boundaries of most nations in the Arab League have arbitrary (choices made without obvious logic or reason) boundaries resulting from earlier European colonization in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. They do not correspond with geographic or ethnic differences. Since the end of World War II, approximately nineteen states promote Arabic as the official language. Most inhabitants maintain an Arab identity. They promote a pan-Arabism, a desire to politically unite all Arab populations and become free of Western influences. As a result, a key unifying feature of the many nations containing Arab populations is the Arabic language. Arabs are also members of the larger religious world of Islam. 190

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Nationalism

People celebrating the creation of the state of Israel in 1948. # BET TM ANN /C OR BIS .

Though not successful in uniting Arab nations into a single nation or empire, several Arab leaders rose in prominence in the mid-twentieth century while promoting Arab unity. They included Gamal Abdel Nasser (1918–1970) of Egypt, Ahmed Ben Bella (1918–) of Algeria, and Hafez al-Assad (1930–2000) of Syria. The Pan-Arab movement included some Arab-inhabited regions (such as Palestine in the Middle East) that were not part of the recognized states. The Jewish state of Israel, located in the midst of the Arab world, also had a large percentage of Arabic speakers. However, since establishment of Israel in 1948, many changed to speaking Hebrew in daily life. Arab leaders in the various countries promoted a pan-Arabism that discriminated against these non-Arab peoples in the region by restricting Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

191

Nationalism

their role in government. While promoting Arab identity, Arab leaders promoted prejudices against non-Arab minorities. This included the Kurds in Iraq, Iran, Turkey, and Syria who founded an ethnic nationalist movement to establish an independent Kurdistan. For most of the twentieth century, Kurdish separatism led to violent conflicts with the governments of the countries in which the Kurds lived. Conflicts arose between those promoting a pan-Arabian identity and others promoting ethnic nationalism. Another example of ethnic nationalists in the region was the Berbers, who lived in North Africa before arrival of the Arabs. Berbers still residing in the region became an ethnic minority. Due to much intermarriage, the cultural differences between Berbers and Arabs blurred through time, but Berber language persisted where large percentages of Berbers still lived, such as in Morocco and Algeria. Fear of a Berber separatist movement led to prejudice of Arab leaders against Berbers. They suppressed the use of the Berber language and restricted Berber involvement in politics. This suppression has led to potential hostile relations in such areas as the Kabylie region of Algeria. By the early twenty-first century, many Arab states maintained close relations through the Arab League. However, the national identities were growing stronger and feelings of nationalism increasing as time passed, making Arab political unity less likely.

For More Information BOOKS

Dawa, Norbu. Culture and the Politics of Third World Nationalism. New York: Routledge, 1992. Hobsbawm, E. J. Nations and Nationalism Since 1780. 2nd ed. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1992. Kedourie, Elie. Nationalism. 4th ed. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell, 1993. Maddox, Gregory, ed. African Nationalism and Revolution. New York: Garland, 1993. Manzo, Kathryn A. Creating Boundaries: The Politics of Race and Nation. Boulder, CO: L. Rienner, 1996. Ramet, Sabrina P. Balkan Babel: The Disintegration of Yugoslavia from the Death of Tito to the Fall of Milosevic. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 2002. WEB SIT ES

European Union. http://europa.eu/index_en.htm (accessed on November 21, 2006). Mahatma Gandhi. http://www.mkgandhi.org/index.htm (accessed on November 21, 2006). 192

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

10

Disability Prejudice

ll people deal with prejudice (a negative attitude towards others based on a prejudgment about those individuals based on little prior knowledge or experience). While some people are victims of prejudice, all are susceptible to developing prejudices against others. Most people hold negative attitudes either consciously or subconsciously toward persons with disabilities. These negative attitudes lead to prejudice and discrimination. People with disabilities live in every country in the world. In 2005, the United Nations (an international organization created to resolve conflicts in the world and provide humanitarian aid where needed) estimated there were 500 million disabled persons worldwide. In the United States, one in seven Americans is disabled. People with disabilities are a diverse group—the visually, hearing, and speech disabled; persons with mental retardation; persons who have lost a limb; persons with restricted mobility such as those with spinal cord injuries; persons with learning disabilities; persons with various illnesses such as muscular dystrophy, cystic fibrosis, or seizures. Muscular dystrophy is a disease that causes gradual wasting away of muscle tissue, eventually leaving a person wheelchair- or bed-bound. Cystic fibrosis is an inherited disease, whose most visible symptom is difficulty in breathing due to accumulation of mucous in the body’s airways. In the United States, as throughout the world, there has been a long history of prejudice against persons with disabilities. In his book No Pity, author Joseph P. Shapiro quotes Patrisha Wright of the Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund as saying, ‘‘All disabled people share one common experience—discrimination.’’ Prejudice and discrimination against persons with disabilities result in a lack of accessibility to economic and educational opportunities, inadequate medical care, and exclusion from social interaction. This lack of accessibility leads to poverty, social isolation, and political powerlessness.

A

193

Disability Prejudice

Special Olympics Eunice Kennedy Shriver (1921–), the fifth of nine children born to Joseph P. Kennedy and Rose Fitzgerald, has been an advocate for the rights of persons with mental retardation her entire adult life. The sister of Democratic U.S. president John F. Kennedy (1917–1963; served 1961–63), Shriver founded Special Olympics in December 1968. Special Olympics is dedicated to empowering persons with mental retardation through sports training and competition based on the worldwide Olympic spirit. Very successful and greatly enjoyed by people with mental retardation, Special Olympics are held in local communities throughout the United States and over 150 countries. Over 1.3 million disabled children and adults have participated.

The Special Olympics games in Alaska. AP I MA GES .

Disability prejudice is not widely understood, even among political, legal, and social institutions that are depended upon to put anti-discrimination laws in place. Most individuals who take time to educate themselves about the persistent prejudice against persons with disabilities are themselves disabled or have a disabled relative or friend. Non-disabled people commonly stereotype disabled persons as sick, dumb, repulsive, or even violent. Society’s fears about disabilities are often just as handicapping to an individual as his or her actual disability. Social, educational, and economic opportunities are denied disabled individuals because of society’s concerns, fears, embarrassments, and even pity. Throughout the second half of the twentieth century, persons with disabilities and their families became increasingly less tolerant of prejudice and discrimination after witnessing gains made by other social groups against prejudice, such as racial minorities and women. In the United States, frustration gave rise to the disability rights movement. The movement included persons with various disabilities, but their fundamental demands were the same—an end to discrimination, civil rights for persons with disabilities, and a chance to participate fully in society. The new activism resulted in legislation to prevent discrimination against persons 194

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Disability Prejudice

with disabilities. The three core laws enacted by Congress are Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1974 that in 1990 was renamed the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990. Taken together, Section 504, IDEA, and ADA give persons with disabilities legal access to life activities that are available to non-disabled Americans.

Disability categories The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) defines disability, in Section 3, as ‘‘physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of the major life activities of such individual.’’ As written, the ADA can be somewhat hard to understand as to exactly what can be considered a disability. For example, obesity is not considered a disabling condition. However, individuals who are obese are sometimes limited in activities, such as physical activities due to stamina, and regularly experience prejudice and discrimination. The Individual with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) is more specific and lists the following categories of disabilities; Specific learning disabilities Speech or language impairments • Mental retardation (IQ is 70 or below) • Emotional or behavior disorders • Deaf/blindness (person both deaf and blind) • Visual impairments • Hearing impairments • Orthopedic (physical) impairments • Other health impairments (as epilepsy, muscular dystrophy, cystic fibrosis, diabetes, asthma) • Autism (a development disorder) • Traumatic brain injury • Multiple disabilities See box ‘‘Websites For Learning About Disabilities’’ for further definition of specific disabilities. Specific learning disabilities A category commonly misunderstood by the general public is learning disabilities. Students with learning disabilities Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

195

Disability Prejudice

Websites For Learning About Disabilities Visual Impairments:

Specific Learning Disabilities: • National Center for Learning Disabilities. http://www.ncld.org

• American Foundation for the Blind. http://www.afb.org

• The International Dyslexia Association. http://www.interdys.org

• National Association for Parents of Children with Visual Impairments. http:// www.napvi.org

• Learning Disabilities Association America. http://www.ldanatl.org/

of

• LD Online. http://www.ldonline.org Speech or Language Impairments: • American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. http://www.asha.org Mental Retardation: • American Association on Mental Retardation. http://www.aamr.org Emotional or Behavior Disorders: • Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. http://www. samhsa.gov Deaf/Blindness (person both deaf and blind): • National Center on Low-Incidence Disabilities. http://www.NCLID.unco.edu

Hearing Impairments: • Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing. http:// www.agbell.org Orthopedic (physical) Impairments: • The National Spinal Cord Injury Association. http://www.spinalcord.org Autism: • Autism Society of America. http://www. autism-society.org Traumatic Brain Injury: • Brain Injury Association of America. http://www.biausa.org/ Multiple Disabilities: • TASH, the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps. http://www.tash.org

(LD) make up about 50 percent of students with disabilities in America. People with learning disabilities may have a number of disorders, including one or more of the following: significant difficulty learning to read (dyslexia), difficulty with basic mathematics computations (dyscalculia), difficulty in forming letters correctly (dysgraphia), difficulty understanding instructions, difficulty reasoning, difficulties with memory, and difficulties with social interaction. The difficulties are lifelong and result from some type of brain dysfunction. They are not due to poor home environment or inadequate teaching. 196

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Disability Prejudice

Overall intellectual ability of an individual is generally determined by intelligence quotient tests, known more commonly as IQ tests. In U.S. schools, IQ testing is given to children in the early elementary grades. Testing covers a number of areas including mental and social reasoning development, character traits, reading, and play interests. By the 1920s IQ testing in the United States was widespread and continues to be the chief indicator of intellectual ability in the early twenty-first century. Learning disabilities are characterized by a wide discrepancy (differing values) in ability and achievement. For example, a student with a normal IQ of 103 who scores in the very low percentile rankings on achievement tests, perhaps fifth percentile, would be a person with learning disabilities. Persons with learning disabilities differ from persons who are simply ‘‘not getting it’’ or slower to pick up skills in reading, math, and writing because they have a neurobiological basis to their difficulties, meaning some type of dysfunction in the brain. Whereas non-learning disabled students who are slow to pick up skills can be helped and catch up with additional tutoring, learning disabled students’ difficulties require highly specific specialized instruction to make progress.

History of purposeful unequal treatment Section 2, Findings and Purposes, of the ADA states, ‘‘historically, society has tended to isolate and segregate individuals with disabilities . . . [they] have been faced with restrictions and limitations, subjected to a history of purposeful unequal treatment, and relegated [limited] to a position of political powerlessness in our society, based on characteristics that are beyond the control of such individuals . . . .’’ Since the beginning of U.S. history until the mid-1900s, attitudes and actions toward persons with disabilities were characterized by rejection, forcible removal from society, and neglect. Beginning in the early 1800s, the first institutions for disabled persons were established. The institutions, known as ‘‘asylums,’’ isolated the disabled from family and regular society. Asylums for the ‘‘deaf and dumb’’ opened in Connecticut in 1817 and in Kentucky in 1823, and in 1829 the New England Asylum for the Blind opened in Watertown, Massachusetts. In 1833, the State Lunatic Hospital opened in Worcester, Massachusetts, and in 1859 the Massachusetts School for Idiotic and Feebleminded Youth was established. In 1846, Edouard Seguin (1812–1880) published a landmark book on the subject of mental retardation entitled The Moral Treatment, Hygiene, and Education of Idiots and Other Backward Children. In 1874, Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

197

Disability Prejudice

the California Supreme Court in Ward v. Flood ruled that public schools principals could deny entrance to any child they did not believe had the ability to enter the school’s lowest grade. Denied entrance was based entirely on the principal’s subjective opinion of the child. By 1915, one of the first widely used special educational texts was titled Laggards in Our Schools by Leonard P. Ayres (1891–1972). A laggard is a person who falls behind or is last. As evidenced by the early institutions’ names and titles of authoritative books, negative labels have been applied to persons with disabilities for centuries. The following is a list of labels and terms commonly applied to persons with disabilities from early U.S. history continuing into the 1950s. The terms were used by persons responsible for the care and education of the disabled as well as the general public. Idiot

Deaf and dumb

Lunatic

Feebleminded

Imbecile

Mentally defective

Pervert

Backward children

Moronic

Dull

Delinquent

Retards

Incorrigible and truant boys Laggards

Crippled

Largely as an outgrowth of studies by psychologist Henry Goddard (1866–1957) in the 1910s and 1920s, the number of state institutions for feeblemindedness or ‘‘mental defectives’’ increased. In 1912 Goddard published his book The Kallikak Family: A Study in the Heredity of Feeble Mindedness. Although his research was based on hearsay from interviews with members and acquaintances of the Kallikak family, Goddard claimed his studies proved that feeblemindedness was inherited from generation to generation. Goddard’s book ushered in extreme forms of prejudice against individuals with disabilities including the eugenics movement. The eugenics movement’s stated goal was to improve human genetic qualities. Toward this goal individuals with disabilities and mental illnesses were sterilized. The individual did not even have to have any ‘‘defects’’; it was enough cause for sterilization if a person was the child of a ‘‘defective’’ parent. The eugenics movement led to increased euthanasia. Euthanasia 198

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Disability Prejudice

is the practice of killing or permitting the death of a hopelessly ill or injured individual. Babies with disabilities were allowed to die and adults with disabilities were assisted with committing suicide. In 1923, forty states had institutions housing approximately fortythree thousand mentally defective persons. Twenty-three states by 1929 had legalized ‘‘eugenical’’ sterilization of the mentally defective so they could not produce children. Several states had such laws on their books until the 1970s.

Pioneering advocates A few pioneering persons in early U.S. history struggled to improve the lives of the disabled. In 1817 Thomas Hopkins Gallaudet (1787–1851) established the American Asylum for the Education of the Deaf and Dumb in Hartford, Connecticut. Modern-day Gallaudet University in Washington, D.C., was named for the Gallaudet family. In 1887, teacher Anne Mansfield Sullivan (1866–1936) began work with Helen Keller (1880–1968), who was both blind and deaf but ultimately became a role model for disabled people. The National Education Association established a Department of Special Education in 1897, but it failed to survive. In the first half of the twentieth century children with obvious significant mental and physical disabilities were kept out of public schools and usually institutionalized. Other children who had less obvious disabilities were admitted to public schools. However, they found it impossible to keep up with schoolwork. Educators began the practice of placing children who could not succeed in the typical classroom into separate classes that offered little educational substance but kept them apart from the children considered normal achievers. In 1944, Elise H. Martens of the U.S. Office of Education boldly put forth the idea that all children, with no exceptions, should be educated in public schools. It was thirty or more years before legislation requiring what Martens suggested passed through Congress. Famous people who advocated for persons with disabilities included author Pearl S. Buck (1892–1973), Hollywood stars Roy Rogers (1911– 1998) and his wife Dale Evans (1912–2001), and the politically powerful Kennedy family. However, the roots of prejudice ran deep within American society. Their success came primarily in raising public awareness. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

199

Disability Prejudice

In the first half of the twentieth century children with obvious significant mental and physical disabilities were kept out of public schools, but have been given more opportunities in recent times. AP I MA GE S.

Roots of disability prejudice Studies in psychology reveal that prejudices against the disabled are rooted in negative stereotyping, stigmatization, psychological discomfort, and pity. Each of these topics will be explored in the following sections. Due to these factors, the non-disabled often develop prejudices subconsciously and once acquired, these prejudices are not easily overcome. 200

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Disability Prejudice

Negative stereotyping Negative stereotyping

means believing all members of a certain group share the same negative characteristics. For example, a prevalent concern of employers when considering whether or not to hire disabled persons is that they might have high absentee rates. Many studies show this stereotype of absenteeism has no basis but continues to be a concern. In the twenty-first century, a person belonging to a minority race is likely to be judged on his or her individual characteristics such as trustworthiness, ability to get along with others, skill, and experience. However, a disabled person is often only judged by his or her disability. Non-disabled people view a disability—physical or mental—as a negative characteristic. All of a disabled person’s characteristics—mental, physical, and social—are then judged in a negative light. Different, useless, unfortunate, and sick are just a few negative stereotypes applied to persons with disabilities. Research has identified specific stereotypes that nondisabled people commonly attribute to specific disabilities. Persons with mental retardation or mental illness are stereotyped as violent. Blind people often encounter non-disabled individuals who shout at them as if they were also deaf. Many people stereotype persons with severe physical disabilities as also mentally impaired. Negative perceptions about disabled persons result in their exclusion from groups or activities regardless of their actual abilities.

A blind woman begging on the street in the early twentieth century. # CO RB IS .

Stigmatization A stigma is an identifying mark or characteristic that reduces an individual to a slightly less-than-human status in the minds of non-disabled persons. Disabled persons throughout history have had to contend with severe stigmatization. Beautiful bodies radiating good health are associated with the good and noble people. Although the thirty-second president of the United States, Franklin D. Roosevelt (1882–1945; served 1933–45), used a wheelchair, pictures of Roosevelt sitting in his chair were almost never Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

201

Disability Prejudice

seen in the 1940s. Dedicated in 1997, the Roosevelt memorial located in Washington, D.C., stirred controversy when a statue of the late president showed him seated but with a coat covering his wheelchair. Under protest of organizations representing persons with physical disabilities, the statue was changed revealing that Roosevelt was seated in a wheelchair. From biblical times, physical deformities have been associated with punishment for sin. In Western culture, many fabled stories have evil characters that are missing an arm or leg. The evil Captain Hook from the children’s tale Peter Pan was missing a hand; in its place was a hook. The frightening Captain Ahab in the American classic Moby Dick was obsessed with finding the whale that severed his leg and scarred his body. His wooden leg could be heard thumping heavily as he paced the deck of his ship. Nowhere is stigmatization more evident than with people disabled by mental retardation. Society has long viewed those individuals as subhuman. Because of fear or embarrassment, most non-disabled persons choose to avoid contact with the mentally retarded. Society has historically perceived mental illness such as depression or schizophrenia as something people do to themselves, something they could avoid if they only had a better character. A majority of Americans believe the cause of mental illness is emotional weakness. This stigma lingers in the twenty-first century, even though research clearly has shown mental illness results from changes in the brain’s chemistry. Psychological discomfort In addition to stereotyping and stigmatization,

persons with disabilities are held back from fully participating in society because most non-disabled persons feel very uncomfortable interacting with them. Many individuals feel embarrassment or awkwardness around disabled persons. Non-disabled persons often fear they do not know how to talk to disabled persons, what to say or how to say it. Others are reminded of the ever-present possibility in daily life of an accident that could leave them impaired and dependent on others. Other nondisabled individuals simply view interaction with disabled persons as displeasing. Psychological discomfort keeps disabled persons separated and Isolated. Pity and need Many non-disabled people see the disabled as persons to be pitied and assume they are helpless and incompetent. Insisting the 202

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Disability Prejudice

disabled must be protected rather than respected, the non-disabled unconsciously discriminate by keeping the disabled dependent others for constant assistance. This form of prejudice, although stemming from sympathy and pity, keeps the disabled socially and economically unproductive.

The Disability Rights Movement In 1970, Ed Roberts (1939–1995), a quadriplegic (no use of arms and legs) disabled by polio (a viral disease that destroys nerve cells, frequently leading to paralysis) at the age of fourteen, received a government grant to establish a program for students with physical disabilities at the University of California, Berkeley. While publicly expressing doubt that Roberts could succeed, the university’s officials had admitted Roberts in 1962 out of courtesy for his determined attitude. Even though he found few buildings accessible to someone in a wheelchair, he succeeded at Berkeley by convincing university administrators to improve various kinds of access, such as breaks in curbs for people using wheelchairs, paving the way for more students with physical abilities. Meanwhile, it was difficult for Roberts to complete his education. For example, no access existed for dormitories so he had to live in the infirmary (university health center). The program Roberts founded in 1970 helped disabled students navigate their way around Berkeley. In 1972, Roberts expanded his program that he called Center for Independent Living (CIL) to provide a wide range of services, such as housing assistance, employment services, and financial counseling. CIL also became a national advocate for legislation to end discrimination against persons with disabilities and to instill pride and empowerment within the disabled community. In 2006 CIL’s headquarters remains in Berkeley with offices also located in nearby Oakland, California. In 1970, activist Judy Heumann (1947–), a student who had been disabled by polio when she was 18 months old, founded Disabled in Action (DIA). Heumann hoped to become a teacher and attended Long Island University in New York. However, New York City would not issue her a teacher’s license because she used a wheelchair and school officials assumed she could not control students. Publicity of Heumann’s situation was reported in the media and resulted in an outpouring of support from disabled persons across the country who had also been discriminated against in one way or another. With a greater understanding and awareness of the pervasiveness of discrimination of the disabled, Heumann established the DIA. Its goals are to end discrimination against the Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

203

Disability Prejudice

disabled by seeking new legislation and enforcing existing legislation giving equal rights to the disabled through educational programs and public demonstrations. Heumann and other persons with disabilities marched under the DIA banner in Washington, D.C., in 1972, along with other groups advocating civil rights for the disabled. The disability rights movement was born. The disability rights movement took inspiration from the black civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s by people standing up to authority and no longer accepting continued discriminatory treatment. Persons with disabilities demanded their voices be heard. They spoke about attitude barriers caused by Americans stereotyping them as pitiful, sick, useless, dumb, and even violent. They also spoke about physical architectural barriers, such as stairs and curbs, which kept those in wheelchairs at home since they could not navigate to school, stores, and employment. The disabled would no longer be silent, content to accept any charity that came their way.

Section 504 The first significant piece of legislation resulting from disabled persons’ activism was the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, a federal act known as Public Law (P.L.) 93-112. Section 504 of the law was the first civil rights legislation in the United States written to specifically protect persons with disabilities. The soon-to-be famous Section 504 began, ‘‘No otherwise qualified individuals with handicaps in the United States . . . shall, solely by reason of his/her handicap, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance . . . .’’

These words became a cornerstone of civil rights for persons with disabilities. Disabilities, called handicaps in Section 504, are defined as any impairment that significantly limits one or more major life activities, such as walking, seeing, hearing, and learning. The law protected people with disabilities from discrimination in programs receiving federal funding. Programs receiving federal funds—including schools, transportation systems, libraries, and hospitals—had to be accessible to disabled persons or risk losing their federal funding. After a law is passed, the appropriate departments within the federal government must write rules and regulations for enforcing it. The 204

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Disability Prejudice

Department of Health, Education and Welfare (HEW) completed writing the regulations for P.L. 93-112 in spring of 1977, and the signature of the head of HEW, Secretary Joseph Califano (1931–), was required. It was not until P.L. 93-112 passed through Congress and the regulation written that business and community leaders realized what had been done. Regulations would require them to come up with money to build ramps, elevators, and fit buses with lifts for wheelchairs. Intense opposition to Section 504 developed as public awareness of the issue grew and some feared the costs of making accommodations. Listening to business leaders, Califano hesitated at signing P.L. 93-112. Califano expressed concern over the cost to businesses to comply with the regulations. Disability activists unleashed a firestorm of protests. Protest demonstrations were held at HEW offices nationwide. In a sit-in protest, three hundred disabled activists occupied Califano’s office in Washington, D.C., for 24 hours. The most powerful and moving demonstration occurred at the HEW in San Francisco, California. Organized by Judy Heumann, the HEW offices were occupied by disabled persons for twenty-five days. Officials cut off phone and food service. Communication difficulties were easily overcome as deaf persons standing in the windows used American Sign Language to ‘‘talk’’ to persons on the street. Food arrived from restaurants and groups around the city. Finally on April 28, 1977, Califano, under intense public pressure, signed the regulations for P.L. 93-112 that included Section 504. Disability activists knew they had taken a giant step forward in their fight against prejudice and discrimination.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) The second major civil rights legislation for the disabled was passed in 1974, the Education for All Handicapped Children Act. Parents of disabled children had been told for decades that their children could not be educated at public schools. Parents were told to either keep their children home or send them to special private schools, generally expensive and far from home. Then in 1954 the U.S. Supreme Court in the landmark case of Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka ruled that the segregation (separation based on race) of students by race was unconstitutional. The Court ruled that an education must be available to all children on an equal basis so that they could have an equal opportunity Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

205

Disability Prejudice

to succeed in life. Parents of children with disabilities began to ask why the principle of equal access to education was not applied to their children. In the 1960s and early 1970s parents challenged the legality of excluding their disabled children from public educational programs available to non-disabled children. In a series of cases in the early 1970s, courts began to rule on behalf of students with disabilities, saying they could not be denied a free public education. An example is Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Children (PARC) v. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, decided in 1972. In the PARC case, the court ruled that children with mental retardation had the right to a free public education and that they could benefit from an education designed to meet their specific needs. The 1974 Education for All Handicapped Children Act ordered states to create educational opportunities for all students. One year later, the act was amended (added to) and became known as Education of the Handicapped Act, Public Law 94-142. P.L. 94-142, renamed in 1990 as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), is the basis for education of students with disabilities. P.L. 94-142 contains three revolutionary principles. First is ‘‘zero reject.’’ No child can be denied a free public education regardless of the severity of his disability. Each state is required to put in force a system of ‘‘child find,’’ to seek out all of those disabled children not in public school and enroll them. Second, the school must provide an ‘‘appropriate’’ public education, that is, use specialized instruction and services to allow the student to obtain an education. Third, the student must be educated in the ‘‘least restrictive environment (LRE)’’: within the regular classroom setting or a setting as much like a regular classroom as possible. P.L. 94-142 assures that students with disabilities will be educated in their neighborhood schools with non-disabled students.

Protests at Gallaudet University In 1988, another major disability rights protest occurred at Gallaudet University in Washington, D.C. Established in 1864, Gallaudet was a highly respected university for deaf students. However, its president had always been a person with hearing. When in March 1988 the school filled the vacant president’s position with another hearing president, the students erupted in protest. Shutting the school down for a week, students demanded a deaf president be appointed. The students were victorious when I. King Jordan (1943–) was named president. Jordan, formerly the 206

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Disability Prejudice

dean of students, was a deaf man. In Deborah Kent’s book The Disability Rights Movement, Jordan is quoted, ‘‘We can no longer accept limits on what we can achieve.’’ The Gallaudet demonstrations were covered extensively in the media. Fully aware of the black and women’s civil rights movements, Americans, most for the first time, began to realize that a civil rights movement among persons with disabilities existed. At Gallaudet, Americans saw deaf students fighting for a deaf person to guide their university. Like the movement as a whole, disabled individuals were no longer willing to be guided and led only by the non-disabled. No longer would they allow society’s pity, fears, and stereotyping to hold them back. What they demanded was full participation in society.

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) While Gallaudet demonstrations were very visible to the American public, a small group of persons with disabilities, the National Council on the Handicapped, was holding meetings only a few miles away. Appointed by Republican president Ronald Reagan (1911–2004; served 1981–89), the little-known council was crafting a bill to give civil rights protection to persons with disabilities. Two key members of the council were its thirty-nine-year-old attorney Robert L. Burgdorf Jr. and fiftyeight-year-old disability advocate Justin Dart Jr., son of one of President Reagan’s close personal friends, a California millionaire who had headed Rexall Drugs, a large, successful company. Both Burgdorf and Dart contracted polio in 1948. Burgdorf was an infant and was left with a paralyzed upper right arm. Dart was eighteen years old and lost the use of both legs. The obscure council on which they served was quietly writing the comprehensive legislation that would protect the rights of all individuals with disabilities. Advocacy groups for disability rights such as the National Council on Disability (NCD), founded in 1978, pushed for passage of ADA. Senator Tom Harkin (1939–) of Iowa and Senator Edward Kennedy (1932–) of Massachusetts provided key help in directing the bill’s passage in Congress. On July 26, 1990, Republican president George H. W. Bush (1924–; served 1989–93) signed into law the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The goals of ADA were to provide opportunity for persons with disabilities to participate fully in the workforce and social life of the country, to earn living wages, and to live independently. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

207

Disability Prejudice

President George H. W. Bush signing into law the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) on July 26, 1990. AP IMA GE S.

ADA provisions established sweeping protections in employment (Title I), public services (Title II), public accommodations (Title III), telecommunications (Title IV), and building design (Title V). The protections were still solidly in place in the first decade of the twenty-first century.

ADA Provisions Title I Employment Employers cannot discriminate against an individual because of the individual’s disability in matters of ‘‘application procedures, hiring, advancement, or discharge of employees, employee compensation, job training . . . .’’ 208

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Disability Prejudice

Title II Public services Public services must be

accessible to the disabled. Public services means any services provided by federal, state, and local governments such as city bus transportation or school bus service, access to facilities such as social security offices, access to voting places, and access to city hall, and state and federal buildings housing a host of government agencies. Title III Public accommodations and services operated by private entities Title III prohibits

discrimination by persons who own, lease, or operate establishments that provide public accommodations. Public accommodations include places where the general public buys goods, receives services, and enjoys entertainment. Examples include hotels, restaurants, movie theaters, stadiums, grocery stores, clothing stores, Laundromats, banks, professional offices as those of doctors, lawyers, and accountants, hospitals, airports, parks, zoos, private as well as public schools, and social service centers as daycare or senior citizens centers. Title IV Telecommunications Title IV requires improved accessibility to

communication services for the hearing and speech impaired. Examples are relay services through telephones and closed captioning of public service announcements, such as printed messages across television screens in case of a weather or emergency alert.

Improvements under ADA include ramps, lifts on buses, parking places for disabled, and Braille instructions at elevators and at ATMs. # R OY ALT Y- FRE E/ CO RBI S.

Title V Section 501, Construction, requires that buildings are accessible

to the disabled. This section is responsible for ramps and extensive use of elevators in buildings. ADA struck at the roots of prejudice against people with disabilities. Special interest groups such as business associations viciously opposed ADA. They believed finding money for modifications to buildings would be almost impossible, and predicted that an avalanche of lawsuits would result against businesses for various violations of ADA requirements. Predictions of early opponents of ADA did not happen to any great extent. By 2000, polls revealed over 80 percent of business leaders favored ADA. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

209

Disability Prejudice

ADA forced millions of business community and education leaders to recognize people with disabilities as members of the human race, as citizens who can advocate for their rights with legal support. Because of ADA requirements, people with disabilities can access buildings and entire communities. Improvements under ADA include ramps, lifts on buses, parking places for disabled, Braille instructions at elevators and at ATMs, wide and automatic doors, modified working places and bathrooms, listening devices, printed captions, and telephone relays. More and more people with severe disabilities train for, apply for, and get jobs. Nevertheless, even with ADA, disability rights activists believe it will take many, many years for ADA and the disabled community to reach all of its goals.

Into the twenty-first century In 2001, Republican president George W. Bush (1946–; served 2001–) signed the New Freedom Initiative to build on the progress made with ADA. The New Freedom Initiative expands the use of technology to aid in increased employment and educational opportunities. A new government website, Disability Info.gov, is a resource of programs and technology relevant to the daily lives of people with disabilities, their family, employers, friends, service providers, and community members. In 2005, the National Council on Disabilities’ studies indicate that while prejudice remains, gains for the disabled have been made in at least five areas: (1) people with disabilities are experiencing less discrimination in employment; (2) a higher percentage of students with disabilities are graduating from high school and attending college; (3) public transportation systems have become more accessible to those people using wheelchairs; (4) significantly more persons with disabilities are voting; and (5) technology changes and updates are aiding the disabled in the workplace and at home. Discrimination in housing and lack of affordable housing are still major problems. Employment At ADA’s passage in 1990, Congress and persons who spoke

out for the disabled knew from decades of study by the U.S. Department of Labor that workers with disabilities were productive, adjusted well to work settings, and had safety records identical to non-disabled. Changes in workplace to accommodate disabled workers generally involved little cost. Such accommodations often involved as little as putting a ramp over a set of stairs or providing turn-around space at a workbench. 210

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Disability Prejudice

United Nations and Worldwide Disability At the beginning of the twenty-first century, the United Nations (UN) estimated five hundred million individuals (10 percent of the world’s population) were people with disabilities. Upwards of 20 percent of the population in some countries are disabled, which means through family ties at least one half of those countries’ populations are affected in some manner by disability. The number of persons with disabilities increases as the world population increases. The number also increases due to lack of proper medical care, natural disasters, war, and outbreaks of violence within countries. Therefore, the UN found it vital to work to improve education, economic opportunity, and access to medical care for persons with disabilities. Societies in every country harbor prejudice against the disabled. In the form of social attitudes and physical barriers, prejudice isolates the disabled leaving them with little hope of making a living or participating in society. Founded in 1945 on the principle of equality for all, the UN works to end prejudice and the resulting discrimination against the disabled. Three agencies within the UN are especially active in addressing the disabled population. The World Health Organization (WHO) provides technical assistance to countries to equalize access to proper medical care for persons with disabilities. The International Labour Office (ILO) promotes increased economic opportunities for disabled persons. The UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF) works on behalf of children with disabilities. From the 1950s to the start of the twenty-first century, the UN programs transformed from providing services to care for individuals with disabilities to breaking down barriers, allowing the disabled a chance to live independently and self-sufficiently within their communities. By the late 1960s and early 1970s, the disabled, no Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

longer willing to lead lives of passively accepting services, demanded more extensive participation in society. To aid in this goal, in 1975 the UN’s Commission for Social Development recommended countries begin eliminating physical architectural barriers, such as providing buildings with ramps and elevators as well as stairs. On December 9, 1975, the UN General Assembly adopted the Declaration on the Rights of Disabled Persons. The Declaration stated that disabled persons were entitled to the same rights as the non-disabled in all areas of life—rights to an education, medical services, employment, legal aid, to live with their families, and to be protected against abuse and discrimination. On December 16, 1975, the UN General Assembly proclaimed 1981 as the International Year of the Disabled Persons with programs devoted to bringing persons with disabilities into full participation within their societies. In December 1982 the UN proclaimed 1983 through 1992 the Decade of Disabled Persons. During the decade UN agencies recognized disabled persons as full citizens of the world. It encouraged educating persons with disabilities within the regular school system and teaching skills, such as independent living, to prepare individuals for making a living. International development agencies and organizations were encouraged to work together toward these goals. At the start of the twenty-first century UN planners addressed the issue of making new information technologies available to persons with disabilities. Through computer literacy, international resources become available to disabled persons online on the Internet. Those resources can link and enable disabled persons to build a powerful international community for the advancement of their political and economic gains. 211

Disability Prejudice

A poll taken by Louis Harris and Associates, a private polling business, in 2000, just ten years after passage of the American Disabilities Act (ADA,) found that only 56 percent of persons with disabilities who were capable and ready to work were employed. These numbers did reflect a significant improvement since enactment of ADA in 1990. A similar Harris poll in 1986 revealed only 46 percent of disabled persons who were able to work were employed. Nevertheless, the 2000 figures fall far behind the employment numbers of non-disabled persons. Those who do not work collect federal disability and welfare checks. Yet the majority of these people want to be productive taxpaying citizens. At the beginning of the twenty-first century, studies indicate that the majority of non-disabled persons still, however quietly and hidden, hold prejudices against persons with disabilities. These prejudices continue to impact disabled persons economically, by limiting their ability to join the workforce and make a living. Education Just as prejudice has negatively affected employment, it con-

tinues to affect educational opportunities. In the twenty-first century, educational opportunities for disabled students, despite IDEA, are still impacted by prejudice. Educators struggle to follow the requirements of IDEA. Only a tiny fraction, about 7 percent, of federal funding promised to schools for implementing IDEA has reached school districts. Many general classroom teachers are honest when they say they are uncomfortable with disabled students in their classrooms. Parents of nondisabled students complain that disabled students instructed in the general classroom take too much of the teacher’s time, are distracting to other students, and are sometimes repulsive. Many teachers, especially at the high school level, are highly reluctant to accommodate students with disabilities. While by law they must agree to individualize studies for disabled students, in reality their extremely busy schedules allow little time for individualized instruction, and resistance and prejudice against such students creeps in. A 2000 Harris poll found the high school dropout rate of students with disabilities was over twice that of non-disabled students. However, since the passage of IDEA and ADA, the graduation rate has significantly improved. In 1986, 61 percent of students with disabilities graduated from high school. In 2000, almost 80 percent graduated. The same poll indicated 12 percent of persons with disabilities received college degrees compared to 23 percent of the non-disabled population. 212

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Disability Prejudice

Combating prejudices in the twenty-first century Persons with disabilities continued to struggle in the twenty-first century for full participation in society. Many national organizations continued to promote policies, programs, and procedures to ensure equal opportunity of all persons with disabilities. Together Section 504, Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), and ADA require that people with disabilities are able to access educational programs and services, activities, and employment opportunities available to non-disabled persons. They protect civil rights of people with disabilities, making clear discrimination will not be tolerated. The Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice is the chief enforcer of laws that prohibit discrimination against people with disabilities.

For More Information B O O KS

Friend, Marilyn. Special Education: Contemporary Perspectives for School Professionals. New York: Pearson Education, 2005. Kent, Deborah. Cornerstones of Freedom: The Disability Rights Movement. New York: Children’s Press, 1996. Lattarulo, Lori A. Disability, Society, and the Individual. Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen Publishers, 2001. Nazzaro, Jean N. Exceptional Timetables: Historic Events Affecting the Handicapped and Gifted. Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children, 1977. Shapiro, Joseph P. No Pity: People with Disabilities Forging a New Civil Rights Movement. New York: Three Rivers Press, 1994. U.S. Supreme Court. University of Alabama at Birmingham Board of Trustees v. Patricia Garrett. October Term, 1999. WEB SIT ES

‘‘ADA Home Page.’’ Civil Rights Division, U.S. Department of Justice. http:// www.usdoj.gov/crt/ada/adahom1.htm (accessed on November 6, 2006). Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund. http://www.dredf.org (accessed on November 22, 2006). ‘‘Enable.’’ United Nations. http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable (accessed on November 22, 2006).

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

213

11

Consequences of Prejudice

ike the wide variety of prejudices that exist in societies around the world, the consequences of the prejudices and the behavior influenced by them are similarly varied. Prejudice affects the everyday lives of millions of people across the globe. Prejudice held by individuals unnaturally forces on others who are targets of their prejudice a false social status that strongly influences who they are, what they think, and even the actions they take. Prejudice shapes what the targets of prejudice think about the world and life in general, about the people around them, and how they feel about themselves. Importantly, prejudice greatly influences what people expect from the future and how they feel about their chances for self-improvement, referred to as their life chances. All of these considerations define their very identity as individuals.

L

People acting out their prejudices cause domestic violence, crime, death, and the loss of billions of dollars in lost productivity, property loss, and expense to society, such as cost of court trials and social services provided to victims including psychological counseling, in dealing with dysfunctional (abnormal behavior) elements of society. Other prejudicial behavior, such as male teachers favoring calling on male students in a classroom, may be more subtle (less obvious). But its effect can be just as broad-sweeping as the more violent consequences of prejudice. Opportunities in life are lost and personal relationships damaged when people act upon their prejudice. When not acknowledged and confronted, prejudice negatively impacts the lives not only of the victims, but of those holding the prejudice. Prejudice can impose very dramatic barriers or invisible barriers on individuals. For example, in the United States, many children are raised with certain beliefs, one being the American Dream. The children are taught if they apply themselves and work hard enough and set their sights on what they want most, they can achieve it by persistence. They are not 215

Consequences of Prejudice

WORDS TO KNOW discrimination: Treating some people differently than others or favoring one social group over another based on prejudices. displaced persons: People forced to leave their homes, either entering other countries becoming refugees or remaining in their own country at some other safer location. refugees: People who cross international boundaries either to escape prejudice and persecution or environmental crises, such as prolonged droughts, in their home countries.

genocide: A deliberate destruction of a political or cultural human group. hate crime: A violent attack against a person or group because of their race, ethnicity, religion, or gender. prejudice: A negative attitude towards others based on a prejudgment about those individuals with no prior knowledge or experience. stigma: A feeling of shame or of lesser social value than others.

taught about certain social barriers, such as racial or gender discrimination in hiring or in job promotions, that may present themselves throughout their lives that counter the progress made by solid work habits.

Everyday prejudices Since multiple prejudices are present throughout society in a complex way, at minimum, the consequences of prejudice are always present in subtle, if not more obvious, ways. For example, because people are largely aware of the prejudices held by others toward them, the prejudice has a self-fulfilling effect. This means people behave the way others expect them to behave. Similarly, people holding a prejudice treat others differently based on how the person with prejudices expects the others to behave or how the person with prejudices wants the others to behave. These behavioral expectations are often based on stereotypes. Stereotypes are an oversimplified prejudgment of others using physical or behavioral characteristics, usually exaggerated, that supposedly apply to every member of that group. In addition, people behave differently from person to person when interacting with others, depending on whether they expect hostility from others either in attitude or in action. Studies have shown that a person targeted by stereotype expectations held by others may end up behaving as the stereotype. More generally, a person is likely to behave as the other person expects him to behave. All of these behaviors mean 216

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Consequences of Prejudice

that prejudice, or anticipated prejudices, affect everyday interactions with almost everyone a person comes in contact with. Consequences of everyday prejudice go beyond simply shaping relationships between people. People are relentlessly assaulted by value judgments based on skin color, social class, gender, religious affiliation, political views, and so on. Such constant exposure to ridicule and discrimination leads to a lowered self-esteem. Those subjected to such prejudice become unsure where they belong in society. They develop hatred and anger directed both outwardly at those holding prejudices against them and inwardly for having the supposed traits that attract such prejudices. Such prejudices are destructive of individuals and society. But they extract a hidden cost as well by prohibiting individuals from living up to their true potential. Very small but harmful prejudicial actions can create barriers for entire populations, such as women or minorities, seeking to enjoy the benefits of participating in mainstream society. Often these actions are unintentional, caused by prejudices a person is little aware he has. However, many times they are intentional acts meant to degrade another person considered inferior. It is sometimes difficult to determine if an act is unintended and simply insensitive or meant as intentional hostility. Regardless of intentions, the consequence of action is often the same. Many times the person who is the target of such prejudicial actions is placed in difficult situations. Any protest he or she might make of such prejudicial actions would give the appearance of oversensitivity and possibly incite further reaction from the initiator. For example, a woman may be placed in an awkward situation when she is congratulated for offering a solution to a technical engineering problem as if such an idea would not be normally expected of a woman. The person targeted by prejudicial actions is not the only person affected. Prejudice affects the behavior of the person holding the prejudice as well. That person may harbor anxieties or anger, or alter his normal activity because of the prejudice he feels for someone else. Such feelings of prejudice can lead to alcohol and substance abuse just as for people who are the targets of prejudice.

Creation of stigma Insensitive actions and the projection of stereotypes onto other people can create a stigma (a feeling of shame or lessened social value). The stigma shapes how the target group behaves when in future contact with Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

217

Consequences of Prejudice

the dominant group. Anxiety is created within the stigmatized person, and her personal expectations of her life chances are lowered. People in a group devalued due to prejudices against them are placed in a no-win situation. If their behavior does not conform to expected behavior or society’s norms, or standards, they are considered deviant. The dominant group considers the deviance a result of some psychological or physical problem or defect. The person targeted by prejudice becomes stigmatized. If the targeted, or subordinate, group adopts the behavior of the dominant group so as to escape prejudice, then a person’s own group may consider him deviant. For example, African Americans have labeled blacks who adopt white dominant cultural behaviors, such as joining certain automotive clubs, as Uncle Toms (black people who are perceived by other blacks as being too submissive to whites) or Oreos (blacks who have behavior patterns that are perceived by some to be typical of white people). Stigmas lead to marginalization, meaning a person or group becomes isolated from mainstream society and excluded from protections others may take for granted, such as due process of the law (legal protections through established formal procedures). International human rights watch groups see war and genocide as the extreme forms of marginalization, in which people are viewed as the enemy and devalued as humans. They may even be considered subhuman. Less extreme results of marginalization lead to poverty, poor health, lack of education, and unemployment. Racism (prejudice against people of color) and sexual orientation prejudice (a negative attitude toward persons because of the sexual preferences) are two common forms of marginalization. Populations in Third World (nations lagging in economic development) countries are marginalized to the extent that they are allowed to die from hunger and disease in large numbers with little assistance from more affluent societies.

Health consequences One of the most basic needs in life is maintaining physical health. However, due to prejudice, the condition of people around the world is largely influenced by their perceived race, ethnicity, gender, social class, and sexual orientation. Those trapped in low-income areas with prejudicial barriers to jobs and education opportunities are significantly more likely to suffer health problems. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, in 2006 the overall life expectancy of Americans, French, and British was 218

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Consequences of Prejudice

seventy-eight years. However, life expectancy differed among the various races and ethnic groups within these Western nations. For example, in the United States most racial minorities had shorter expected life spans than whites. African Americans’ life expectancy was five years shorter than whites. Those in lower economic classes suffered greater chronic diseases, such as heart disease, lung cancer, and diabetes, all of which contributed to the lower life expectancy, according to Charles E. Hurst in the 2004 book Social Inequality: Forms, Causes, and Consequences. Health problems from the work environment of lower-paying jobs included greater exposure to such hazards as lead poisoning, greater occurrence of injury, and increased chances of eventually developing arthritis from the physical labor. The death rate from injury among low-income males was over three times higher than persons in higher social classes. Not only were the occurrences of disease greater, but the prospects of death from the disease were greater. For example, black females in low-economic situations had the shortest survival period and highest death rate from breast cancer as compared to the white females in the population. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Office of Minority Health, among blacks trapped in impoverished neighborhoods with little access to education and jobs, the infant mortality rate in 2000 was at a rate of 14.1 deaths per 1,000 births, a rate more than double that of whites living in more affluent suburbs, which was 6.9 deaths per 1,000 births. According to the CDC in 2000, the rate of AIDS (Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome; a condition of immune deficiency associated with infection of the immune system cells) among black men in America was six times greater than among white men and nineteen times higher among black women than white women. Loss of self-esteem among minorities trapped in low-income communities led to greater alcohol and drug abuse and smoking of tobacco. These self-destructive behaviors led to greater health problems including cardiovascular disease. According to Hurst, the greater the economic inequality in a community, the greater the incidence of suicide in the subordinate, or secondary, groups. Overall, those trapped in conditions of low income and little chance for self-improvement were less likely to live healthy lifestyles. Those individuals diagnosed with mental health issues were found more frequently among women, the unemployed, and the impoverished. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

219

Consequences of Prejudice

Among women with limited opportunities to the education and employment that they desired, cases of mental depression occurred with greater frequency than in society in general. According to the National Institute of Mental Health, in 1998 women were two to three times more likely to suffer major depression than men. This trend had been documented in various nations including the United States, Sweden, Germany, Canada, and New Zealand. Other chronic health conditions also surfaced such as various digestive problems, anemia, and migraine headaches. Hurst highlighted that racial minorities and low-income social classes (groups of people sharing similar wealth and social standing) were much less satisfied with their personal lives, housing, jobs, and free time. This dissatisfaction built through a lifespan frequently leading to increased health problems in later life. For example, people must have a feeling of control over their lives to give them greater chances for favorable mental health. This feeling of satisfaction also led to greater economic productivity and increased contributions to society in general. Feelings of powerlessness came from being in jobs of repetitive work with little complexity and close supervision. Education was often seen as the gateway to increasing a person’s control over his life chances at jobs and personal fulfillment. Therefore, restrictions established by prejudices and discrimination led to feelings of powerlessness and, eventually, despair. People were financially unable to leave their low-income neighborhoods where streets were filthy and dangerous. Prejudice, poverty, and despair were very closely linked and formed a cycle from which it was nearly impossible to break free. Economic costs to society resulting from lost personal potential due to prejudice would likely be staggering if they could be calculated.

Crime Loss of self-esteem and hope for future betterment contributes to criminal behavior. Though crime occurs in all classes of society, such as whitecollar crime in the upper classes, social class position influences the type of crime that someone will commit. Through violent and property crimes committed by lower classes, not only is there a loss of productivity to the community, but other costs associated with crime include the expenses of police in crime-fighting activity. The percentage of policing funds spent in the world and the percentage of costs of losses from criminal activity triggered by various form of prejudice would be difficult to calculate from crime statistics kept, but they would likely be considerable. 220

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Consequences of Prejudice

Not only does prejudice contribute to criminal behavior, prejudice also influences how crime is fought. According to Willard M. Oliver in his 2001 book Community-Oriented Policing: A Systematic Approach to Policing, police departments in various Western countries often have their own prejudices. Police on routine patrol often spend more time patrolling in low-income neighborhoods, which usually contain a high percentage of racial minorities. Despite this increase in patrol time in minority communities, actual response time to reported crimes against minorities in these same lowincome neighborhoods is often much slower than in upper-class neighborhoods. Residential areas in the United States and France remain highly racially segregated (to publicly keep separate social groups based on physical characteristics, such as skin color), with minorities concentrated in overcrowded city settings. Single-parent families are prevalent with many members of the minority community living on welfare programs. Opportunities for education and jobs seem remote to many. Such segregation maintains these education and job limitations on minorities, with little chance for improvement despite individual capabilities and achievements. Minorities in these communities cannot enjoy the benefits of social mobility (the amount of opportunity a person has in a particular society to change social standing from one social class to another) from their achievements like whites living in white-dominated communities. Such non-minority neighborhoods have strong social controls to combat crime tendencies. With little to gain from individual achievement, racial minorities often feel little attachment to society in general, including its values and social controls. As a result, crime rates are often related to poverty and unemployment, especially crimes against property, such as burglary and motor vehicle theft. Oliver further points out that the greater the economic inequality in the form of discrimination in a particular community, the higher the violent crime rates. Violent crimes are linked more to greater social class prejudicial inequality than racial prejudice. The feelings of powerlessness, anger, anxiety, and alienation lead to aggressive behavior. These geographic concentrations of minorities and others with low social-class status means that minorities and low income people not only suffer the direct effects of prejudice and discrimination, but also are more likely to become victims of crime propelled by racial and economic segregation and discrimination. For example, according to author Katheryn Russell in the 1998 book The Color of Crime, the chances of a young black male becoming a victim of homicide were ten times greater than for white youth in the United States at the end of the twentieth century. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

221

Consequences of Prejudice

Not only do minorities and low-income communities become crime victims at a higher rate than whites, but that crime rate is often inflated (considered higher) further in the minds of others. Perceptions of racial groups held by those in the dominant white society often feed fears and perceptions of crime rates. A high percentage of minorities in a neighborhood creates a higher perception of crime rates—usually much greater than what the crime rates actually are. Fear of becoming a crime victim greatly influences people’s behavior. They spend more money on security gadgets and systems for their homes and cars. It also influences their behavior patterns about when and where they may go to visit stores, friends, or places of entertainment. Additionally, the bias of policing leads to another cost of prejudice and that is minorities’ distrust of not only police, but of the criminal justice system in general. This distrust was evidenced by riots in Los Angeles, California, in 1992 after a jury acquitted police officers in the beating of black motorist Rodney King (1965–), an event that was captured on home video, and by riots in France in October 2005 when two minority youths died while being chased by police. King was severely beaten for what appeared to be a traffic violation. The French riots grew out of decades of accusations of police brutality toward minorities. Statistics indicate that minorities are affected by prejudice in the criminal justice system beyond policing activities. Minorities are six times more likely than whites to receive more severe sentences—including the death penalty—for committing the same crimes. Similarly, the murder of white victims in the later decades of the twentieth century more often led to death sentences than when blacks were the homicide victim. Advocates for minorities charge that these statistics show that the criminal justice system devalues black victims, meaning they are considered less important than white victims. The factors of gender and social class follow similar trends in criminal justice. Women and low-income victims frequently see their aggressors penalized less severely than do men and upper-class victims. A tragic consequence of the marginalization of minorities and the underclass created by prejudice and discrimination is that a crime cycle develops. This cycle consists of minorities and unemployed developing crime records. These crime records then hurt the criminals’ future chances of being employed, which may lead again to more crime or, if they do not revert to a life of crime, they remain in poor-paying jobs with a deadend future. 222

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Consequences of Prejudice

Victims of domestic violence in an abuse shelter. # H ULT ON- DE UTS CH C OLL EC TIO N/ CO RBI S.

Domestic violence A major consequence of prejudice is violence. The scale of violence can vary greatly, ranging from occurrences of domestic violence to mass murder (genocide). Domestic violence is when a family member, partner, or ex-partner physically or psychologically harms or harasses another family member. Aside from physical contact and child abuse, domestic violence can include intimidation and threats of violence. This intimidation can take the form of stalking (harassing someone by relentlessly pursuing her). Domestic violence is often driven by frustrations of lack of economic opportunity due to prejudice and discrimination, and the resulting feelings of powerlessness. It is frequently further fueled by drug and alcohol abuse, which is also often a result of domestic result. Unemployment, health problems, isolation from society in general, and lower education are all factors of domestic violence. The pressures and frustrations resulting from discrimination mount up for those trapped in low social class conditions. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

223

Consequences of Prejudice

Domestic violence leads to costs for private assistance organizations and governmental social services for both the victim and abuser in addition to costs of police and court time. Studies in the late twentieth century indicate that only about one-third of cases of actual domestic violence are actually reported in the United States and Britain. In other countries where public awareness of domestic violence is much lower, the rate of reporting is probably even lower. According to Charles E. Hurst in Social Inequality: Forms, Causes, and Consequences, in 2000, it was estimated that domestic abuse affected 10 percent of the population in the United States, or approximately thirty-two million Americans including children. Like most consequences of prejudice and discrimination, domestic violence has long-range implications. Children often grow up with behavior patterns learned from their home life. Those who witnessed domestic violence and abuse or were victims of abuse could grow into adults having very similar behavior patterns. The dollar cost of domestic violence is huge. In the United States, $3 to $5 billion was annually spent in the late 1990s on medical expenses resulting from domestic violence. Sick leave, absenteeism, and lost productivity resulting from domestic abuse was estimated to be $100 million annually to U.S. businesses in the late 1990s.

Social protests Prejudice and discrimination leads to organized social protests—and sometimes, confrontations—by the targeted groups. Prime examples of this involved the events surrounding the civil rights and women’s rights movements of the 1960s and 1970s. Property damage, loss of life, policing expenses, and lost job productivity were extensive costs of the protests as they lasted years and involved tens of thousands of people across many communities and cities. Labor strikes, store boycotts (protests by refusing to do business with someone), sit-ins (when protestors refuse to leave a business or public building until their demands are met), and other tactics of social disorder disrupted business productivity. A major consequence of mass opposition to social or governmental prejudices is the loss of legitimacy of society and its institutions to those victimized by prejudice and discrimination. Laws and social customs that perpetuate prejudice undercut the very validity of the nation’s social institutions. This loss of legitimacy was the reason behind the 1992 Los Angeles riots. Minorities had lost faith in police and the criminal justice system as minorities typically received longer prison sentences and 224

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Consequences of Prejudice

Over 150 race riots were recorded in the United States between 1960 and 1993, including the one shown here in Detroit in 1967. # B ETT MA NN/ COR BI S.

harsher treatment by police than non-minorities for the same alleged offenses. Violence was seen as the only means to increase public awareness of these inequalities in society. Over 150 race riots were recorded in the United States between 1960 and 1993. In the 1992 Los Angeles riots fifty-two people died and over $800 million of damage occurred including the destruction of 1,100 buildings. Broad conflicts over prejudices can lead to social instability. During these times of peak protest activity, society lives with a tension in which any minor incident could trigger a major explosion of violence.

Displaced persons Prejudices can lead to consequences on a large scale. The term ‘‘displaced persons’’ came into use during World War II (1939–45). A massive relocation of populations during the late 1930s and early 1940s resulted from the combination of international war and genocide. Basically Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

225

Consequences of Prejudice

anyone forced to leave his home, regardless of reason, became a displaced person. It was estimated in the early twenty-first century that approximately twenty-five million displaced persons who did not cross international boundaries existed in the world. Many were in various African and Middle Eastern countries where ethnic conflict was rampant. Those who cross international boundaries either due to prejudice and persecution or environmental crises in their home countries, such as prolonged droughts, are called refugees. The most common reasons for people to become refugees are political and religious persecution. They fear persecution because of their race, religion, or nationality. Those trying to leave persecution behind by journeying to a new country often seek asylum (provided safety from prejudice and persecution of another nation). Many people leave their home country for another for economic reasons, such as to seek employment and permanently settle in the new country. They are known as immigrants, not refugees. International laws apply to protection of refugees, but not to displaced persons who stay within the boundaries of their own nation. Usually they are considered the responsibility of their nation’s government. Actions by any other country would be considered an unlawful intrusion on their sovereignty (independence). However, some cases arose in the late twentieth century where nations did intercede in internal atrocities. This included U.S. military intervention in the Balkan region of the Kosovo crisis in the late 1990s when Serbian forces were carrying out ethnic cleansing of ethnic Albanians. The U.S. intervention succeeded in stopping the mass killing. In the early twenty-first century, the government of Sudan was resisting foreign involvement in its Darfur region, where reports of genocide and dislocations were steady. The Sudanese government claimed that it was an internal conflict and any foreign intervention would be an illegal intrusion on its national sovereignty. This claim successfully kept foreign forces out. Refugees create international problems and disputes. Some governments might readily accept refugees and ultimately grant them citizenship. Others may arrest all refugees for unauthorized entry into their country and place them in detention centers for months and maybe even years. The United Nations (UN; an international organization created to resolve conflicts in the world and provide humanitarian aid where needed) High Commissioner originally sought in the 1950s simply to see that refugees found safe asylum in their new country or in some other country eventually, or return voluntarily to their home country. The United Nations expanded its role through the years to provide 226

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Consequences of Prejudice

humanitarian assistance to all displaced persons. At the beginning of 2005, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, established in December 1950 and located in Geneva, Switzerland, reported the existence of more than nine million known refugees in the world. This did not include another four million Palestinians who had become permanently displaced and were no longer officially considered refugees because of their permanent displacement. A major result of refugees is the establishment of refugee camps. With more than nine million refugees worldwide, humanitarian emergencies result, and the camps need sanitation, food, water, clothing, and shelter. Relief organizations, such as Red Cross, spend millions of dollars in providing for the needs of refugees. Creation of large refugee camps naturally leads to major health problems inside the camps, including prevalent psychological issues. Major depression and other mental health disorders include sleeplessness and anxiety. Refugees remain in these camps sometimes for years leading to millions of dollars in costs to provide supplies such as hygiene kits, emergency shelter kits, water, and soap. Five refugee camps existed in Darfur, Sudan, alone in 2006, holding 100,000 people. Some refugees risk their lives to ride flimsy boats or anything else that will let them float to safety from their country to another. They became known as boat people in the 1970s, when some two thousand refugees fled Vietnam by boat between 1977 and 1981 after the end of the Vietnam War (1957–75). Other large migrations by boat included people fleeing Cuba to the United States since 1960 including 125,000 in 1980 and 55,000 others fleeing Haiti to the United States between 1972 and 1981. The boats refugees commonly use are unstable crude vessels, sometimes made from scrap materials, and often overloaded. Lives are often lost on the journey to safety. For example, in 2001, 353 refugee boat people drowned trying to escape from Indonesia to Australia to escape political instability and seek better job opportunities. The number of refugees escaping injustice based on prejudice since the early twentieth century is staggering. The occurrence of refugees in Europe in the twentieth century included 1.5 million people fleeing the new Communist government in Russia during the Russian Revolution from 1917 to 1921. (Communism is a system of government in which the state controls the economy and a single party holds power.) During World War I, over one million Armenians fled genocide in Eastern Europe (known as Turkish Asia Minor at the time). The Turk Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

227

Consequences of Prejudice

Creation of large refugee camps, like this Palestinian camp, often leads to major health problems inside the camps, including prevalent psychological issues. # HUL TO N-D EUT SC H CO LLE CT IO N/C OR BIS .

Ottoman government murdered and deported hundreds of thousands of Assyrians and Armenians accused of fighting on the side of the Allies during the war. Following the Spanish Civil War in 1939, several hundred thousand refugees fled to France. World War II led to the dislocation of twelve million Germans including Jewish survivors of the Holocaust. Between the end of World War II and construction of the Berlin Wall in 1961, 3.7 million refugees fled Communist-controlled East Germany to West Germany. Immediately following the fall of the Soviet Union and eastern European Communist governments in 1991, two million people were displaced in the former Yugoslavia due to ethnic conflicts. Refugee movements in Asia during the last half of the twentieth century included more one million refugees displaced in the 1950s by the Korean War (1950–53) and the fall of Tibet to Chinese control in 1959. One of the largest population displacements in recent world 228

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Consequences of Prejudice

history occurred in 1947 with the political separation of India and Pakistan. Over eighteen million people were displaced, with Hindus and Sikhs leaving Pakistan for India, and Muslims leaving India for Pakistan. Another ten million were displaced in 1971 as Bengalis fled the newly established Bangladesh to India. Three million people were displaced in Indochina—largely from Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia— following the end of the Vietnam War and the rise of Communist governments. The Afghan War (1978–92) caused six million refugees to flee to Pakistan and Iran. They were joined in Iran with 1.4 million Iraqi refugees from the Persian Gulf War (1990–91). The African continent saw repeated population movements in the twentieth and early twenty-first centuries. They resulted from civil wars and ethnic conflicts following removal of colonial rule after World War II. Africa had been divided into colonies by European nations in the 1880s. This led to the establishment of new national boundaries. When Africans gained independence in many of the colonies following World War II, wars erupted. The new nations fought to establish revised boundaries to match their native homelands that existed prior to the 1880s or they purged other ethnicities from their new nations through genocide or ethnic cleansing. The number of refugees in Africa grew from 860,000 in 1968 to almost seven million in 1992. Many more millions were displaced within their own countries. The resulting refugee and displaced persons camps became fertile grounds for the rise of armed rebel groups who sought to regain their lost lands. For example, the 1994 Rwandan genocide caused two million refugees to flee, mostly to Zaire. Hutu rebels, in reaction to the ethnic Tutsi regaining control of the Rwandan government and expelling ethnic Hutu, launched attacks from the refugee camps against the new government of Rwanda. Political stability in some areas of Africa by the early twenty-first century led to a decline in refugee numbers from seven million to less than 2.8 million refugees at the beginning of 2005. The greatest number of African refugees in 2005 and 2006 were from Sudan. Many fled from the Darfur region to neighboring Chad, Uganda, Ethiopia, and Kenya to escape ethnic cleansing being carried out by Muslims controlling the Sudanese government against black African populations within Sudan. The Western Hemisphere of the Americas was not without its large refugee movements as well. The 1960s and 1970s saw many boat people fleeing Cuba following the rise of the dictatorship, or tyrannical rule, of Fidel Castro (1926–). Some 55,000 refugees fled Haiti by boat between Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

229

Consequences of Prejudice

A Nazi swastika desecrates a Jewish gravestone. AP I MA GES .

1972 and 1981 to the United States. The refugee movements led to new communities in the United States that were dominated by peoples from Cuba and Haiti. The Cuban refugees became a political force in the Miami area. The refugees also created problems in areas where they settled including the increased costs of public services needed to provide schools, healthcare including often severe mental health needs, housing, and other basic needs. One of the longest lasting displacements of the late twentieth and early twenty-first century occurred in the Middle East when Palestinian Arabs were forced from their homelands following establishment of the Jewish state of Israel within the Palestinian territory in 1948. Over 700,000 Palestinians were displaced in the late 1940s. That number grew to four million through population growth throughout the following several decades. Palestinian rebel groups used the refugee camps as bases for attacks against Israel and Israeli occupational forces. Because of their seemingly permanent condition, displaced Palestinians were no longer considered refugees by the UN by permanent Palestinian inhabitants. In 2000, the United Nations designated June 20 as World Refugee Day, a day to call attention to the plight of millions of people around the world who have suffered from displacement, prejudice, and persecution.

Genocide The ultimate consequence of prejudice is genocide. Genocide refers to one group attempting to murder all members of another group because of their race, ethnic relations, national affiliation, or religious beliefs. Genocide has been an all too common occurrence throughout human history. The Holocaust from 1933 to 1945, in which the German government killed eleven million people including six million European Jews, was the most noted case of genocide in history. The Germans also targeted Poles, Gypsies, Slavs, homosexual men, and various political opponents in order 230

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Consequences of Prejudice

Hate Crimes The fight against prejudice led to the creation of a new type of crime category by the U.S. Congress in 1992: hate crime. Hate crimes are acts committed against a person only because that person is considered to be a member of some social group that is devalued by society in general. The victimized group could be identified by race, religion, national origin, ethnicity, or sexual orientation. An action against a person with disabilities was added to the list in 1994. The purpose for the establishment of hate crimes as a category was to provide for harsher penalties for certain crimes if it can be determined the person was motivated by a prejudice toward one of the classes of people listed above. Hate crimes can involve violent crime, destruction of property, and hate speech. The choice of specific targeted individual may not even be relevant

to the crime. These crimes are intended to intimidate and harass members of targeted groups and maintain dominance of one group over another. Often the targeted group is seen as a threat to the living standards of the dominant group, either through job competition or differences in lifestyle. In 2004 the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) recorded 7,649 hate crimes in the United States with over nine thousand victims. Some 53 percent involved racial prejudice followed by 18 percent involving religious prejudice. Two-thirds of the aggressors were white. Besides black victims other groups being targeted were Jews and homosexuals. No matter who the victim might be, the psychological effects of hate crimes on victims can be damaging and long lasting. This problem has been very serious for gays and homosexuals.

to rid German society of those they considered undesirable contributors to the idealized German race and society. Germany had actually turned genocide into an industry, complete with specially constructed death camps, railroad systems for transporting targeted people, large gas chambers, and crematoriums for disposal of bodies. It was mass murder on a large scale. Gas chambers were disguised as showers. It would take only a small number of camp staff to kill tens of thousands of people a month. Occurrences of mass deaths resulting from hostile actions occurred throughout the twentieth century. At the beginning of the century, the American seizure of Philippine lands for American sugar planters during the Spanish-American War (1899) led to the deaths of an estimated one million civilians Filipinos between 1899 and 1913. American forces overthrew a newly established Philippine government that sought political independence from the United States. The genocide of Armenians by Turkish leaders in the Ottoman Empire in eastern Europe between 1915 and 1923 led to the displacement of two million Armenians from a land they had lived on for over Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

231

Consequences of Prejudice

two thousand years. The Turks accused the Armenians as being supporters of Russia during World War I (1914–18) and launched the genocide after Ottoman forces suffered a major defeat by Russian forces in early 1915. Armenians had maintained an ethnic tie to Russians prior to the war and were suspected of wanting independence from the Ottomans. Approximately 1.5 million Armenians were killed. In the early 1930s, Joseph Stalin (1878–1953) gained full power of the Communist government in the Soviet Union. Between seven million and fifteen million people died in the Ukraine from famine as the Soviet Union seized desperately needed food for its own population. Though the Soviet leader claimed this was a natural disaster, his actions clearly worsened the plight of Ukrainians. Stalin also purged most of Ukraine’s political leaders. Stalin’s actions further strengthened the Soviets’ hold on Ukraine that had begun earlier in the 1920s with the development of heavy industry to support the Soviet Union. The political control of Ukraine lasted until 1990. Other occurrences of genocide soon followed the Nazi Holocaust. In the late 1970s the Cambodian Khmer Rouge, an extremist political organization that ruled Cambodia from 1975 to 1979, killed about 1.7 million Cambodians. The Khmer Rouge selected people for death who they considered to be ethnic Vietnamese, Chinese, Thais, intellectuals, and religious leaders (including Buddhist monks), and others suspected of political opposition to the new Communist Party rule. Other notable occurrences of mass murder occurred in the 1990s. In the Balkans (region in southeast Europe), approximately eight thousand Bosnian Muslim men were executed in July 1995 by Serbian special forces who wished to remove the Bosnian Muslims living in an area in the middle of Serbian communities. An additional one million Croats and Bosnian Muslims were displaced. In Africa during a one hundredday period in 1994, in an ethnic political struggle for control of Rwanda, the Hutus of Rwanda killed almost one million Tutsis and politically moderate Hutus. The Rwandian genocide was aimed at the elimination of a group of people known as Tutsi, who made up about 14 percent of the country’s population. Hutu comprised 85 percent of Rwanda’s population. Factions within the Rwandan government organized the genocide. The United Nations established the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda to prosecute those responsible for the mass killings. By late 2006 trials had been completed or were still ongoing for some fifty-six defendants. 232

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Consequences of Prejudice

Remains of huts burnt by militia in Darfur in 2004. Fighting forced millions out of their homes in an ethnic cleansing campaign. AP IMA GE S.

Also in Africa by the early twenty-first century, another two million people had been killed and four million displaced in the Darfur region of Sudan. This genocide had been in progress since 1983 with no international intervention. Janjaweed militias, or armed forces, with support of the Sudanese government, systematically killed black Africans, eliminating entire populations from western Sudan.

The ethics of genetic engineering As the twenty-first century arrived, scientific advances were accumulating disconcerting knowledge about human genetics and its modification, known as genetic engineering. Genetic engineering is a modern term used by biologists to describe the ways that living organisms can be Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

233

Consequences of Prejudice

altered or modified, mostly for the purpose of improving the lives of human beings. Sometimes biologists use the term biotechnology rather genetic engineering. Genetics has to do with the study of genes (the distinct traits or characteristics that are observable in a living organism) and how these are inherited from generation to generation. The discoveries in this area of science led to a wider public discussion about their appropriate application to life. Naturally, prejudices and fear of prejudice came into the debate since the genetic makeup of populations or just individuals could be influenced by personal or political decisions.

Gregor Mendel is credited with discovering the principle of heredity. GET TY I MA GES .

The historical development of modern genetic engineering began in the nineteenth century with Gregor Mendel (1822–1884). Mendel is credited with discovering the principle of heredity, or the way the physical characteristics of living things are passed from one generation to the next. In 1953 James Watson (1928–) and Francis Crick (1916–2004) discovered the structure of the DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) molecule, the fundamental building block of all life. This important discovery was advanced in the 1970s when other scientists learned how to recombine and rearrange the genetic order of the DNA molecule. The first efforts at human gene therapy began in 1990. Gene therapy involves treating people suffering from a disease by placing the appropriate good genes into their system so that they might fight the disease. This research focused only on cases where some genes might be missing in the person or the genes are not performing properly. The genes are added by inserting a piece of DNA into the cells of the ill person. The success of gene therapy has been limited due to a number of factors. For example, often subjects of the therapy are suffering from multiple problems that may be interacting in some unknown manner and the person’s immune system may fight the introduced new genes. Little progress has been achieved since 1990 with gene therapy. The ability to recombine and rearrange DNA is the point that genetic engineering begins to consider the moral and ethical challenges that are a

234

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Consequences of Prejudice

part of this science. Some people wonder if scientists have the right to recombine genes just because they know how. But geneticists point to the real prospect of improved quality of life if they could recombine or eliminate harmful genes. If scientists know which genes are the causes of a particular disease, it would be difficult to justify legally prohibiting the use of this ability to remove or recombine the genes causing this disease. Or if scientists can dramatically increase the food supply by the proper use of genetic engineering, it might be possible to eliminate world hunger. Or if two people who want to have children carry a high probability of their offspring bearing a debilitating disease, this couple could receive appropriate genetic counseling on how to avoid passing the faulty genes on to their children. Some think genetic engineering opens the door for improving the natural environment and creating better reproductive technologies. Other geneticists, however, warn of the many potential problems society faces if scientists are not careful with genetic engineering. For instance, potential parents may want to create a child of their own design, sometimes referred to as designer babies. Genetic engineering would give them the capacity to determine the height, intelligence, gender, and other traits in their children they consider desirable. Genetic treatments can make people potentially faster, stronger, smarter, or possessing some other desirable feature. This suggests a kind of prejudice since some traits would be considered good and others bad. Or if information about one’s genetic makeup did not remain private, insurance companies might use such information to insure only those who are at very low risk of acquiring certain kinds of diseases. This can be seen as a kind of economic prejudice since only those fortunate enough to be born with the ‘‘right’’ genetic makeup or the money to change their genetic makeup would be acceptable to insurance companies. These kinds of issues seem to be ongoing problems for scientists, philosophers, and religious scholars. In the early twenty-first century, there is still no set of satisfactory ethical solutions for the science of genetic engineering. Questions continued about who would decide how the human race could be improved through biotechnology. The consequences of prejudices could be far-reaching in these monumental decisions. If newly engineered people came into existence new problems in prejudice might arise for society. Society in general might be prejudiced toward the altered persons by treating the people as if they represented a higher standard, or there might be prejudice against the people and persecution Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

235

Consequences of Prejudice

would result because they might not be considered natural humans. Fears of how prejudice would influence what groups of people might have access to genetic engineering grew. Perhaps social class differences would grow even greater. Prejudice can take many forms—ethnic and religious bias, racism, nationalism, sexism, classism, and prejudice against people based on sexual orientation. It also occurs in all societies around the world, including Western developed countries to Third World countries. Because of the wide range and many types of prejudice, the consequences of prejudice are highly varied and pervasive around the world. Current events in the early twenty-first century have shown that the deadly effects of prejudice in the new century are no less dramatic than in centuries past. It is evident human populations will have to continue coping with the consequences of prejudice for years to come including the costs of pain and suffering.

For More Information BOOKS

Allport, Gordon W. The Nature of Prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., 1979. Horowitz, Donald L. Ethnic Groups in Conflict. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985. Hurst, Charles E. Social Inequality: Forms, Causes, and Consequences. New York: Pearson, 2004. Moon, Bucklin. The High Cost of Prejudice. Westport, CT: Negro Universities Press, 1970. Oliver, Willard M. Community-Oriented Policing: A Systematic Approach to Policing. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2001. Plous, Scott, ed. Understanding Prejudice and Discrimination. Boston: McGrawHill, 2003. Russell, Katheryn. The Color of Crime. New York: New York University Press, 1998. WEB SIT ES

Understanding Prejudice. http://www.understandingprejudice.org (accessed on November 22, 2006). ‘‘World Refugee Day.’’ United Nations. http://www.un.org/depts/dhl/refugee/ (accessed on November 22, 2006).

236

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Where t o L earn More The following list focuses on works written for readers of middle school and high school age. Books aimed at adult readers have been included when they are especially important in providing information or analysis that would otherwise be unavailable. Books Aguirre, Adalberto, and Jonathan Turner. American Ethnicity: The Dynamics and Consequences of Discrimination. Boston: McGraw-Hill, 1998. Allport, Gordon W. The Nature of Prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., 1979. Altman, Linda J. Hitler’s Rise to Power and the Holocaust. Berkeley Heights, NJ: Enslow, 2003. Baird, Robert M., and Stuart E. Rosenbaum, eds. Bigotry, Prejudice, and Hatred: Definitions, Causes and Solutions. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books, 1992. Bell-Fialkoff, Andrew. Ethnic Cleansing. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 1999. Brown, Mildred, and Chloe Ann Rounsley. True Selves: Understanding Transsexualism: For Families, Friends, Coworkers and Helping Professionals. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2003. Brown, Rupert. Prejudice: Its Social Psychology. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell, 1995. Burgan, Michael. The Japanese American Internment: Civil Liberties Denied. Minneapolis, MN: Compass Point Books, 2006. Chafe, William H. Remembering Jim Crow: African Americans Tell About Life in the Segregated South. New York: W.W. Norton, 2001. Chessum, Lorna. From Immigrants to Ethnic Minority: Making a Black Community in Britain. Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2000. Davidson, Tish. Prejudice. New York: Franklin Watts, 2003. Dawa, Norbu. Culture and the Politics of Third World Nationalism. New York: Routledge, 1992. Dovidio, John F., Peter Glick, and Laurie A. Rudman, eds. On the Nature of Prejudice: Fifty Years After Allport. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 2005. Duckitt, John. The Social Psychology of Prejudice. New York: Praeger, 1992. xlv

WHERE TO LEARN MORE

Ferriss, Susan, and Ricardo Sandoval. The Fight in the Fields: Cesar Chavez and the Farmworkers Movement. New York: Harvest/HBJ, 1998. Flexner, Eleanor, and Ellen Fitzpatrick. Century of Struggle: The Woman’s Rights Movement in the United States. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press, 1996. Fonseca, Isabel. Bury Me Standing: The Gypsies and Their Journey. New York: Knopf, 1995. Frank, Anne. The Diary of a Young Girl. New York: Doubleday, 1995. Friedan, Betty. The Feminine Mystique. New York: Norton, 2001. Friend, Marilyn. Special Education: Contemporary Perspectives for School Professionals. New York: Pearson Education, Inc., 2005. Gilbert, Martin. The Holocaust: A History of the Jews of Europe during the Second World War. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1986. Greer, Germaine. The Female Eunuch. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2001. Hirsch, H.N. The Future of Gay Rights in America. New York: Routledge, 2005. Hobsbawm, E. J. Nations and Nationalism Since 1780. 2nd Ed. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1992. Jones, James M. Prejudice and Racism. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1997. Jones-Brown, Delores. Race, Crime, and Punishment. Philadelphia: Chelsea House, 2000. Kedourie, Elie. Nationalism. 4th Ed. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell, 1993. Kent, Deborah. Cornerstones of Freedom: The Disability Rights Movement. New York: Children’s Press, 1996. Lattarulo, Lori A. Disability, Society, and the Individual. Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen Publishers, 2001. LeGates, Marlene. In Their Time: A History of Feminism in Western Society. New York: Routledge, 2001. Lesch, Ann M., and Dan Tschirgi. Origins and Development of the Arab-Israeli Conflict. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1998. Levi, Primo. Survival in Auschwitz: The Nazi Assault on Humanity. New York: Collier Books, 1993. Levinson, David. Ethnic Groups Worldwide: A Ready Reference Handbook. Phoenix, AZ: The Oryx Press, 1998. Lieberman, Benjamin. Terrible Fate: Ethnic Cleansing in the Making of Modern Europe. New York: Ivan R. Dee, 2006. Louw, P. Eric. The Rise, Fall, and Legacy of Apartheid. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers, 2004. MacMaster, Neil. Racism in Europe, 1870–2000. New York: Palgrave, 2001. Manzo, Kathryn A. Creating Boundaries: The Politics of Race and Nation. Boulder, CO: L. Rienner, 1996. xlvi

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

WHERE TO LEARN MORE

Matthiessen, Peter. In the Spirit of Crazy Horse. New York: Penguin Books, 1992. Meier, Matt, and Feliciano Ribera. Mexican Americans, American Mexicans: From Conquistadors to Chicanos. New York: Hill and Wang, 1994. Mencken, H. L. Prejudices. Washington, DC: Ross and Perry, Inc., 2002. Molnar, Stephen. Human Variation: Races, Types, and Ethnic Groups. 2nd Ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1992. Monague, Ashley. Man’s Most Dangerous Myth: The Fallacy of Race. 6th Edition. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press, 1997. Muse, Daphne, ed. Prejudice: Stories About Hate, Ignorance, Revelation, and Transformation. New York: Hyperion Books for Children, 1995. Naimark, Norman M. Ethnic Cleansing in Twentieth-Century Europe. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2002. Packard, Jerrold. American Nightmare: The History of Jim Crow. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2002. Perlmutter, Philip. Divided We Fall: A History of Ethnic, Religious, and Racial Prejudice in America. Ames: Iowa State University Press, 1992. Plous, Scott, ed. Understanding Prejudice and Discrimination. Boston: McGrawHill, 2003. Richards, David A. J. The Case for Gay Rights. Lawrence: University of Kansas Press, 2005. Rudolph, Joseph R., Jr., ed. Encyclopedia of Modern Ethnic Conflicts. Westport, CN: Greenwood Press, 2003. Scherrer, Christian P. Genocide and Crisis in Central Africa: Conflict Roots, Mass Violence, and Regional War. Westport, CT: Praeger, 2002. Shapiro, Joseph P. No Pity: People with Disabilities Forging a New Civil Rights Movement. New York: Three Rivers Press, 1994. Solomos, John. Race and Racism in Britain. 3rd Ed. New York: Macmillan Palgrave, 2003. Steinberg, Stephen. The Ethnic Myth: Race, Ethnicity, and Class in America. Boston: Beacon Press, 2001. Sullivan, Andrew. Same-Sex Marriage: Pro and Con. New York: Vintage, 2004. Waller, James. Prejudice across America. Jackson: University Press of Mississippi, 2000. Washburn, Wilcomb E., ed. Handbook of North American Indians: History of Indian-White Relations Vol. 4. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution, 1988. Weine, Stevan M. When History is a Nightmare: Lives and Memories of Ethnic Cleansing in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Piscataway, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1999. Wolfson, Evan. Why Marriage Matters: America, Equality and Gay People’s Right to Marry. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2004. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

xlvii

WHERE TO LEARN MORE

Wormser, Richard. The Rise and Fall of Jim Crow. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2003. Web Sites American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). http://www.aclu.org/ (accessed on January 18, 2007). American Indian Movement. http://www.aimovement.org/ (accessed on January 18, 2007). Amnesty International. http://web.amnesty.org/report2005/rwa-summary-eng (accessed on January 18, 2007). Anti-Defamation League. http://www.adl.org (accessed on January 18, 2007). Apartheid Museum. http://www.apartheidmuseum.org (accessed on January 18, 2007). Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund. http://www.dredf.org (accessed on January 18, 2007). ‘‘Enable.’’ United Nations. http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable (accessed on January 18, 2007). Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation. http://www.glaad.org (accessed on January 18, 2007). Human Rights Campaign. http://www.hrc.org (accessed on January 18, 2007). Human Rights Watch. http://www.hrw.org/ (accessed on January 18, 2007). Genocide Watch. http://www.genocidewatch.org (accessed on January 18, 2007). ‘‘Islam: Empire of Faith.’’ Public Broadcasting System. http://www.pbs.org/ empires/islam/faithtoday.html (accessed on January 18, 2007). Japanese American National Museum. http://www.janm.org (accessed on January 18, 2007). Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund. http://www.maldef.org (accessed on January 18, 2007). National Civil Rights Museum. http://www.civilrightsmuseum.org/ (accessed on January 18, 2007). National Congress of American Indians. http://www.ncai.org/ (accessed on January 18, 2007). National Organization for Women (NOW). http://www.now.org (accessed on January 18, 2007). The Prejudice Institute. http://www.prejudiceinstitute.org (accessed on January 18, 2007). ‘‘Slavery and the Making of America.’’ Public Broadcasting System. http:// www.pbs.org/wnet/slavery/ (accessed on January 18, 2007). Understanding Prejudice. http://www.understandingprejudice.org/ (accessed on January 18, 2007). United Farm Workers. http://www.ufw.org (accessed on January 18, 2007). xlviii

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

WHERE TO LEARN MORE

United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. http://www.ushmm.org (accessed on January 18, 2007). United States Immigration Support. http://www.usimmigrationsupport.org/ (accessed on January 18, 2007). War Crimes Tribunal Watch. http://balkansnet.org/tribunal.html (accessed on January 18, 2007). ‘‘World Factbook.’’ Central Intelligence Agency. https://www.cia.gov/cia/ publications/factbook/index.html (accessed on January 18, 2007).

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

xlix

Prejudice in the Modern World Almanac

VOLUME 2

Prejudice in the Modern World Almanac

VOLUME 2

Richard C. Hanes, Sharon M. Hanes, Kelly Rudd Sarah Hermsen, Project Editor

Prejudice in the Modern World Almanac

VOLUME 2

12

Genocide in Rwanda

enocide is an end result of extreme prejudice (a negative attitude towards others based on a prejudgment about those individuals based on little prior knowledge or experience). Genocide is a planned, systematic attempt to eliminate an entire targeted population by murdering all members of that group. In the late 1930s and during World War II (1939–45), the Nazi army, under Germany’s dictator, or ruler, Adolf Hitler (1889–1945), methodically rounded up and murdered over six million European Jews. This horrific episode in world history was a genocide known as the Holocaust. Nazis also targeted two other groups, gypsies and homosexuals, for elimination.

G

Polish lawyer Raphael Lemkin (1900–1959) coined the term ‘ genocide’’ in the early 1940s. Genos is a Greek word meaning race or tribe. The ending cide means ‘‘to kill.’’ Lemkin, a Jew, fled the Nazi occupation of his homeland Poland in World War II but lost family members in the genocide. Each genocide that occurs in the world results from issues and difficulties specific to the country where it takes place. However, all genocides have several characteristics in common: (1) racial hatred or long-standing prejudice against a particular group; (2) scapegoating, which means blaming a minority faction, or section, in a society for all of that society’s problems; (3) characterization of a minority people as subhuman, unworthy of living; (4) an organized killing plan developed by officials within the country; (5) the means to carry out massive killings, usually involving the country’s military; and (6) in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, an international community that turns away and does not intervene. Beginning on April 6, 1994, and continuing through June of that year, a genocide took place in a small country in central Africa called Rwanda. Best estimates place the number of people murdered during that period at 800,000 to 850,000. The total population of Rwanda in 1994 was between 7.5 and 8 million people. The Rwandan genocide was aimed at the 237

Genocide in Rwanda

WORDS TO KNOW colonizer: A country that establishes political and economic control over another country and sends citizens to settle in the new country. extremist: One who takes a position on an issue that is beyond ordinary or moderate positions. genocide: The deliberate destruction of a racial, religious, or cultural group. ingrained: A deep-rooted quality.

prejudice: A negative attitude towards others based on a prejudgment about those individuals based on little prior knowledge or experience. race: A group of people who share a distinctive physical trait. refugee: A person who flees in search of protection or shelter.

elimination of a group of people known as Tutsi, who made up about 14 percent of the country’s population. Organized by factions within the Rwandan government, the attempted extermination of the Tutsi was carried out by a group of people called Hutu. Hutu comprised 85 percent of Rwanda’s population and controlled the government. Individual Tutsi were not killed because they were poor or wealthy, criminal or law abiding, political or nonpolitical, lazy or hardworking, man, woman, or child, but because they were Tutsi. The international community labeled the turmoil a civil war and chose not to step in until it was too late. For centuries in Rwanda, Tutsi and Hutu had lived side by side, often intermarrying. Yet in 1994 one group of ordinary poor people, the Hutu, were willing to exterminate their innocent neighbors and family members merely because they were Tutsi. Neighbors killed neighbors, teachers killed their students, and husbands killed their wives. The Rwandan genocide is partly traceable to issues of poverty, land scarcity, and overpopulation. Most importantly, deeply ingrained ideas of racial differences based on physical characteristics and long-standing bitter prejudice led a frustrated and desperate Hutu people, manipulated by their Hutu leaders, to murder hundreds of thousands of their Tutsi neighbors. This chapter describes how such prejudice took root and grew.

Rwanda: land of a thousand hills Known as the land of a thousand hills, Rwanda is neither a desert nor a teeming jungle, but a hilly country that lies entirely above 3,280 feet 238

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Genocide in Rwanda

Bodies of Rwandan genocide victims lie on a mound, while a front-end loader prepares to bury them in a mass grave in July 1994. AP IMA GE S.

(1,000 meters). For centuries it had been protected from hostile tribes and slave traders by mountains, lakes, and marshes. Its temperature, rainfall, and soil were favorable to human habitation and farming. Rwanda resembled a giant garden. The fertile land supported high densities of people. Hutu and Tutsi lived side by side on the same hills. The dense population required a centralized, controlled social structure in order to organize and carry out everyday activities, such as farming, cattle grazing, and keeping order for the benefit of all. The highly structured society had been headed by a king beginning at some point during the sixteenth or seventeenth centuries. In the late nineteenth century just before European colonizers settled in Rwanda, the king was Tutsi leader Kigeri IV Rwabugiri (d. 1895). Although Rwandan kings were of Tutsi lineage, they did not force Hutu into a slave-like feudal system, a misconception commonly held in history. Instead, they oversaw a complex arrangement where Tutsi and Hutu Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

239

Genocide in Rwanda

worked together to sustain a livelihood based on farming and cattle grazing. The king appointed three chiefs for each hill. The chief of landholdings oversaw distribution of land, food production, and taxation. The chief of pastures oversaw cattle and grazing. The chief of men kept a watchful eye on relationships and recruited men for the king’s army. Most chiefs were Tutsi but Hutu were also represented among the chiefs. Sometimes one chief might have certain responsibilities on more than one hill. The end goal of the complex system was to sustain all Rwandan families on each hill. Perhaps because it was the only way to maintain order in the densely populated land, the people for centuries had unquestioningly obeyed the king and their chiefs. This habit of strict obedience would play a large part in the 1994 genocide. Three groups of people—the Hutu, Tutsi, and the Twa—lived in Rwanda. Hutu made up about 85 percent of the population and farmed the land. Tutsi made up about 14 percent of the population and were predominantly cattle herders. In the twenty-first century, most think Tutsi moved into the Rwanda hills sometime during the fifteenth century, most likely to escape famine. Historians and anthropologists (scientists who study human origins) have never reached agreement on the Tutsi’s place of origin. The Twa, less than 1 percent of the population, lived by hunting and gathering natural foodstuffs such as roots, or worked in servitude for the king. The three were not separate tribes but shared the same language, worshipped the same gods, and shared the same culture. Intermarriage was common between the Hutu and Tutsi.

Germans arrive in Rwanda On May 4, 1894, the first European, German count Gustav Adolf von Gotzen, came into the Rwandan kingdom. Rwanda had been previously shut off from the outside world by its landlocked remoteness. At the Berlin Conference of 1885, control of the African continent was divided among European powers so its natural resources could be developed to bring increased wealth to the European countries. Tiny, beautiful Rwanda was claimed by Germany to be part of its colonial empire. Germans knew nothing of Rwanda and sent von Gotzen on an information-gathering mission. When von Gotzen arrived he found the Hutu, Tutsi, and Twa. He quickly observed that the three differed significantly in physical characteristics. The Twa were pygmies, very small, muscular, and hairy. The Hutu were generally short, but not pygmies. They had thick bodies with big 240

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Genocide in Rwanda

heads, wide noses, and prominent lips. But the Tutsi were different. Tutsi were tall and thin with fine facial features, thin noses and lips, and straight, white teeth.

Manufacturing the great myth Prior to 1894 the only Europeans to have ventured near Rwanda were British explorers John Hanning Speke (1827–1864) and Sir Richard Francis Burton (1821–1890). They were partners in a 1857–58 expedition to explore the lakes of central Africa, hopefully find the source of the River Nile, and to study local tribes. They never entered Rwanda but located Lake Tanganyika southwest of Rwanda in February 1858. Speke then ventured east of Rwanda to Lake Victoria, which he believed was the source of the Nile. While trekking toward Lake Victoria, Speke encountered black people that he noted had a thin graceful stature. These were most likely Tutsi. In his 1863 report, Journal of the Discovery of the Source of the Nile, he presented his theory that the people he encountered were a superior ruling race that had conquered other inferior races living in the area. Speke merely made up his theory as it had no factual basis. Late-nineteenth-century European anthropologists—along with most all Europeans—were very aware, even obsessed, with racial differences. They considered Caucasians (people of light skin color, commonly from European and Middle East ancestry) superior to any black-skinned group. German colonists who arrived in Rwanda were amazed at the kingdom’s sophisticated organization. They believed blacks were savages and never could have produced such an organized society.

British explorer John Hanning Speke, who encountered people who were likely Tutsi during the 1857–58 expedition he made with Sir Richard Francis Burton. # H ULT ON- DE UTS CH CO LL ECT IO N/ COR BI S.

Expanding on Speke’s thinking, the Germans and other Europeans who learned of Rwanda in the 1890s began building a variety of illogical theories that the fine-featured Tutsi were a superior race that invaded Rwanda in earlier times, conquered the Hutu and Twa, and were the people responsible for Rwanda’s organized society. They spoke of the Tutsi as a worthy race that, aside from being black, had none of the Negroid features of the Hutu or Twa. Various theories claimed the Tutsi Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

241

Genocide in Rwanda

descended from superior stock in southern Ethiopia, or from the ancient Egyptians, or even from Tibet. The made-up theories became more bizarre, such as Tutsi came from the Garden of Eden (home of Adam and Eve in the Bible), or the fabled lost continent of Atlantis, said to have sunk beneath the sea during an earthquake. Such theories resulted in the myth of Tutsi superiority. German colonizers stated that Tutsi were gifted with intelligence, boundless energy, natural leadership abilities, refinement in speech manners, and capable of self-control and feelings of love and goodwill. Hutu and Twa were both considered inferior races. Due to intermarriage, not all Rwandans exhibited precise Tutsi or Hutu physical characteristics, but a mixture of both. Therefore, the German colonists set up physical standards to determine who was a superior Tutsi and who was an inferior Hutu. Their standards were based on nose width and length, height and weight, head width and height, and the shape of their eyes. The colonists manufactured two racial groups in a country that had never before recognized differences. Few in number and pygmies, Twa were ignored. German placement of Tutsi and Hutu into the mythical categories was the first step, however unintentional, on the path to genocide one hundred years later. The myth became accepted as scientific truth. It greatly influenced both German and later Belgian views toward Tutsi and Hutu. The myth had a major effect on Rwandan society. For the next sixty years, the Tutsi believed themselves physically and mentally superior, and racial prejudice against the Hutu was extreme. Hutu were deprived of all political and economic power and told they deserved their fate because of their alleged inferiority. This served to frustrate and quietly infuriate the Hutu. A social time bomb had begun ticking. German colonizers instituted a system called indirect rule. The minority Tutsi were given most chief positions, educated and trained to privileged positions. Germans ruled through the Tutsi. Any punishment to keep Hutu in line was carried out by Tutsi, not the white colonizers. Hutu resented Tutsi, not the Germans who remained in the background.

Belgian colonial domination Following the defeat of Germany by the Allied powers of Britain, France, Italy, Russia, and the United States in World War I (1914–18), Germany’s colonies in Africa were divided between Britain, France, and other 242

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Genocide in Rwanda

countries. Control of Rwanda went to Belgium. The Belgians began to further empower the Tutsi over the Hutu by putting only Tutsi into government jobs. The remaining few Hutu chiefs were replaced with Tutsi chiefs. The Belgians introduced a forced labor system where every man, woman, and child had to volunteer a specific number of days each week to public projects. Public projects included building permanent structures, such as buildings and bridges, digging anti-erosion terraces, and maintaining roads. The Hutu despised the system; they were often forced to devote over 50 percent of their work time to public projects, taking away from time to grow food for their family. Tutsi were in charge of forcing Hutu to cooperate. Hutu strongly resented Tutsi treatment.

Becoming Christian In the late 1920s, Tutsi realized that to be on best terms with the white men they had to become Christians, the main religion of the Belgians. Tutsi rejected their native worship practices called kubandwa and flocked to the Catholic Church, newly established in Rwanda by missionary European priests. Destruction of the native religion further destroyed existing cultural ties and connections with Hutu. The Church immediately supported the Tutsi and from then on played an important part of Rwandan society and politics. The Church provided the only education in the country, and Tutsi were given priority.

Deep-rooted racial prejudice Racial prejudice had become firmly established in Rwandan society. Most Tutsi were still poor peasants like their Hutu neighbors. However, they too believed the Tutsi/Hutu myth. No matter what the real characteristics of each and every individual, if a person was Hutu he was considered to be stupid, lazy, and dishonest. By merely being Tutsi, an individual was smart, hardworking, and trustworthy. A clear social order of superior to inferior developed. At the top were the white colonizers: Belgium government officials and Catholic priests. Next in line were the Tutsi elite, then poor Tutsi, and finally all Hutus at the bottom. Few Tutsi had actually become part of the Tutsi elite. Elites are influential and powerful members of the highest social class. As such, they receive the best educations and accrue the most wealth. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

243

Genocide in Rwanda

After at least four hundred years of Rwandan history in which Tutsi and Hutu lived in equality, the European colonizers had successfully changed the course of the future by altering relations between the two groups. Rwandans had not always lived in peace before colonization; there were kingdom and family battles. But never were the battles simply between Tutsi and Hutu. By the late 1950s, that was the only way struggles were defined.

Hutu’s rise By the early 1950s, the Catholic Church had as many black priests, mostly Tutsi, as white priests. The educated black priests began challenging the European priests for leadership of Rwanda’s Catholic Church. Likewise, the Tutsi elite in government leadership roles were challenging the white Belgian colonialists who still held top leadership positions in the country. These Tutsi elite wanted the whites out of Rwanda’s government and church so they could declare Rwanda an independent country and rule without oversight of the Europeans. Both Belgian government administrators and the European priests felt their power threatened. Fearing the Tutsi elite were about to take over control of the Church and government, the European priests and Belgian colonizers decided to raise the status of the Hutu that made up the majority of Rwanda’s population. They then planned to use them to suppress and defeat the Tutsi elite. Once the Tutsi elite were removed from leadership roles in the government and Church, the colonizers and European priests intended to install Hutu into those roles. Uneducated and grateful to those in power for their rise in status, Hutu could easily be controlled so that colonizers and European priests would retain all real power in the country. Carrying out their plan, the colonizers and priests began to incite Hutu against Tutsi elite by claiming they (Tutsi) were responsible for the miserable conditions in which the Hutu lived. With clear moral support and organizational help from the whites, Hutu in the late 1950s established groups for security and for economic and cultural advancement. World coffee prices were strong and Hutu’s average family income rose. (Economically the country depended on its export crop, coffee, plus growing subsistence food for the population.) Hutu leaders emerged and the majority Hutu race began to revel in its newfound self-esteem and improved economic situation. The 1959 revolution of the Hutu began in earnest when a Hutu chief was attacked and severely beaten by Tutsi on November 1. The situation 244

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Genocide in Rwanda

exploded and fierce fighting between Hutu and Tutsi followed. Since Hutu and Tutsi had thought solely in racial terms for about sixty years since the European colonizers made up the Tutsi superiority myth, Hutu indiscriminately lashed out at all Tutsi, including the poor. Just like the Tutsi elite, they were hunted down and killed by the Hutu. Sixty years of Hutu racial hatred towards Tutsi suppression boiled over. By mid-November amid the violence, Belgian government officials had lost control of the situation and began talking of self-government for Rwanda. Sporadic fighting went on as Hutus continued to hunt down and kill Tutsi. Hutu emerged as clear victors poised to take over the Rwandan government. In 1960, Hutu began replacing Tutsi chiefs with new Hutu authorities called bourgmestres (legislators). Belgian authorities and Catholic priests supported the Hutu bourgmestres and helped them set up a provisional (transition) government. Bourgmestres formed the Parmehutu Party led by Gre´goire Kayibanda (1924–1976). On January 28, 1961, over three thousand bourgmestres, almost all Hutu, declared the creation of the Republic of Rwanda. In September 1961 bourgmestres elected Kayibanda president of Rwanda. On July 1, 1962, Rwanda became formally independent, separate from Belgium. Although European government control of Rwanda ended, the Catholic Church remained under the leadership of white European priests. The priests no longer supported Tutsi but instead supported and educated the Hutu, who posed no threat to their leadership. Rather than challenging the white priests, Hutu praised whites as their liberators from Tutsi.

Republic of Rwanda In 1961, the Republic of Rwanda’s population was approximately 2.8 million. About 15 percent, or 420,000, were Tutsi. Of those Tutsi, about 120,000 fled to refugee (person who flees in search of protection or shelter) camps in the neighboring countries of Uganda, Burundi, Tanzania, and Zaire (Congo). From both Uganda and Burundi, Tutsi tried to reorganize and periodically launched attacks into Rwanda. For revenge, Hutu officials ordered the slaughter of all remaining Tutsi leaders plus at least ten thousand other Tutsi still living in Rwanda. The violence finally slowed, then ended in 1964. Kayibanda held power from 1961 until 1973. The president was responsible for the appointment of all leaders, even those at very low levels Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

245

Genocide in Rwanda

of local government. He, of course, appointed Hutus, who gradually became the new elites. The government constantly promoted ideas consisting of three themes: the lofty human worth of being Hutu; the importance of following a moral Christian lifestyle as instructed by the Catholic Church; and the importance of hard work to better the country. The overwhelming majority of the population worked long hours on the land and lived in poverty, yet never questioned the leadership of the Hutu government or the Catholic Church. Poor but proud, Hutu peasants were content with the idea that they were, each and every one, superior over any Tutsi. Most Tutsi who held positions of power prior to 1959 had fled to neighboring countries. The most wealthy had immigrated to European countries and the United States. Tutsi who remained in the country were poor farmers just like the Hutu peasants. The old way of unquestionable obedience to the local authority predominated and would be a major influence in the genocide to come.

Habyarimana regime (1973–94) In the early 1970s, as Kayibanda began to age, calls for his replacement mounted among Hutu politicians. In a military coup, the Rwandan army overthrew the Kayibanda government in July 1973. Rwandan army commander Major-General Juvenal Habyarimana (1937–1994) took over the presidency on July 5, 1973. Habyarimana did not allow political parties but in 1974 created his own single party, the Movement Revolutionnaire National pour le Developpement (MRND). Every Rwandan citizen was required to be a member of MRND and to carry a residence identification card. On the ID card was printed where the person lived and whether he or she was Hutu or Tutsi. There were MRND leaders on every hill. The first ten years of Habyarimana’s regime appeared peaceful. However, there was strong ingrained racial prejudice against the Tutsi. Members of the Rwandan army were forbidden to marry Tutsi women. In the government, there were only two Tutsi parliament members out of seventy-one and one Tutsi government agency minister out of about thirty.

Hutu manipulation of foreign aid In the 1970s, Rwanda’s main source of income was from coffee exports. In addition to coffee income, foreign aid that had been nonexistent in the 1960s began increasing as the wealthier countries began programs of providing development aid to poor nations. While the country’s economy 246

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Genocide in Rwanda

appeared significantly improved, most of the incoming monies were controlled by the Hutu elite, including Habyarimana, his wife, her family, and close colleagues. They used the money to support extravagant lifestyles— expensive cars, travel, and land purchases from the poor peasants. The Hutu elite grew greedier and greedier while the poor grew more despondent. It was difficult to recognize what was actually happening in the country. The World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF) (international organizations providing money to developing countries), called Habyarimana’s regime highly efficient and a model of development in Africa. With coffee export money and developmental aid increasing, the economic picture appeared greatly improved. The international organizations did not look beneath the surface. If they had, they would have found that almost all income went to Habyarimana’s inner circle. The World Bank and the IMF granted more and more loans and grants to Rwanda. By the mid-1980s, developmental aid from foreign countries and international agencies like the World Bank and IMF made up 70 percent of the Rwandan government’s budget. Chief donor countries were Belgium and France. The United States was Rwanda’s third-largest donor. Switzerland, Germany, and Canada also contributed. The money supposedly went to agricultural development projects to benefit all the people, most of whom were farmers. However, Rwandan government policy actually excluded peasants from economic benefit and favored the Hutu elite and foreign European assistants sent to help with projects. Throughout the 1970s and 1980s, only 4 to 6 percent of aid was spent on rural development, even though 95 percent of the population lived in rural areas. Most development aid money went to the construction of elaborate houses and offices for the Hutu elite and their friends in the capital city, Kigali. The few development projects in rural areas began with big expensive houses for the foreign technical assistants.

Coffee crisis In 1987 the International Coffee Organization (ICO), an international organization that fixed prices paid for coffee worldwide, began to dissolve as member countries began to not honor their commitments. World prices fell sharply. In June 1989 Rwanda’s coffee income and, as a result, its economy was dealt a fatal blow. Under intense pressure from U.S. coffee traders who wanted to pay much less for coffee on the world Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

247

Genocide in Rwanda

market, the ICO became deadlocked and lost all control of world prices. By the end of 1989 coffee prices had dropped 50 percent. Retail prices for coffee were more than twenty times the price paid to African farmers as a tremendous amount of coffee wealth went to rich countries. Since a large percentage of Rwanda’s land had been planted in coffee, food for the people to live on was purchased from other countries. With substantially less income, Rwanda could not purchase enough food for its population. By 1990, 50 percent of the population was malnourished. The Hutu elite, unwilling to give up their fancy lifestyles, cornered what export monies that did come in plus development aid monies. Within the Habyarimana regime there was bickering and in-fighting over money, while the majority of Rwandans sunk more deeply into poverty and hunger. By the summer of 1990, the Habyarimana regime was being challenged by a number of factions. An increasing number of moderate Hutus in Kigali were unhappy with the greedy, corrupt Habyarimana government. They wanted to overthrow Habyarimana and install an honest Hutu leader who would look after the people. More radical Hutus, mostly within the Hutu elite group, wanted more and more of a share of monies and were angry that Habyarimana even listened to the moderate Hutu. It appeared the Hutu political system was about to collapse. Such a situation was just what Tutsi refugees whose families had fled Rwanda in the early 1960s were waiting for.

Tutsi refugees In 1964 there were roughly 336,000 Tutsi refugees. They lived in Burundi (about 200,000), Uganda (78,000), Tanzania (36,000), and Zaire (Congo, 22,000). The total number of refugees by 1990 was between 600,000 and 700,000, increased by births and further migration out of Rwanda. Tutsi refugees reminisced about the Rwanda they remembered as a land of prosperity and hoped to return. In 1979, the refugees had established the Rwandese Refugee Welfare Foundation (RRWF) to aid those in exile. The organization’s name was changed several times and in December 1987 it became the Rwandese Patriotic Front (RPF). The RPF was by then a Tutsi military organization intent on returning to and retaking Rwanda. Well-supplied with money from Rwandan Tutsi exiles that had reestablished themselves in successful careers in European countries and the United States, the RPF purchased weapons, planned multiple invasions from Uganda, and waited for the right moment to make a move. 248

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Genocide in Rwanda

A member of the Rwandese Patriotic Front (RPF) loads a mortar as crowds watch in Kigali, Rwanda, in 1994. # B ACI /C OR BIS .

Tutsi RPF advance When it appeared the Hutu political system was about to collapse in 1990, about 2,500 RPF forces moved in. The RPF attacked on October 1, 1990, from Uganda. Kigali residents were terrified and convinced that the Tutsi RPF was ready to launch a full attack on the city. Over national radio the Minister of Defense told the general population to track down and arrest Tutsi infiltrators. In reality, this was an order to track down and kill any Tutsi. The conflict appeared to have ended by October 30, 1990. Rwanda’s regular army, the Forces Arme´es Rwandaises (FAR), beat back the RPF and they retreated to their Ugandan strongholds. Contrary to appearances, the Tutsi RPF advance into Rwanda was the beginning of a four-year conflict.

Arusha Peace Accords By 1992, President Habyarimana believed the only way to retain any power was to negotiate some sort of settlement with the RPF. Habyarimana Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

249

Genocide in Rwanda

decided to support a ceasefire and began negotiations in Arusha, Tanzania. The peace agreement signed in Arusha on August 4, 1993, between Habyarimana and the RPF disbanded both the RPF and FAR armies, allowed the return of the Tutsi refugees, and agreed on government power sharing between the Habyarimana government and the RPF. Back in Kigali, many of the Hutu elite had no intention of abiding by the Arusha Accords and were planning their own extremist solution.

Planning of the genocide The Hutu elite within the Habyarimana regime had benefited from forty years of controlling the government and incoming money from both coffee and foreign aid. Those same Hutu had no intention of allowing President Habyarimana to begin a real democratic process of sharing power with Tutsi. The Hutu extremists believed they could carry out a scheme to take absolute control of the country. They planned to expel Habyarimana, murder moderate Hutu, defeat the RPF, and kill all Tutsi so as never to be challenged for power by the Tutsi again. They began by organizing antiTutsi extremists. In 1992, they formed the radical anti-Habyarimana, anti-Tutsi group, Coalition pour la Defense de la Republique (CDR). The CDR established a fiery radio station and several radical publications, which helped to incite the Hutu masses against all Tutsi. By the early 1990s, the Hutu peasants had slid from poverty into misery. They were easily manipulated with racist hate propaganda to see the Tutsi as the source of all their problems. During 1992, not only did CDR membership grow but the numbers of anti-Tutsi extremists within the MRND and FAR increased by thousands. The FAR extremists established secret death squads made up of both soldiers and civilians ready and able to kill at a moment’s notice when commanded to do so. Using foreign development aid money, FAR, CDR, and MRND extremists established armed local militias of volunteer citizens, mostly poor, illiterate Hutu peasants. The militias were known as Interhamwe and Impuzamugambi. Both obeyed orders from leaders without questioning. Total acceptance of authority had been the nature of Rwandans in general for centuries. A process known as ‘‘Sensibilisation’’ became commonplace. 250

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Genocide in Rwanda

‘‘Sensibilisation’’ With each new RPF raid into northern Rwanda in 1992 and 1993, the increasingly organized extremist Hutu carried out retaliation by killing Tutsi civilians. To motivate local Hutu peasants to kill Tutsi, the local Hutu officials followed a set pattern known as sensibilisation. Extremist authorities came to a village and told ridiculous tales that Tutsi were evil beings with horns, tails, hooves, pointed ears, and red eyes that glowed in the dark. Although hard for Americans to understand how, the Hutu peasants were long conditioned to believe what authorities said. Authorities also told Hutu peasants to fear all Tutsi, not just those connected with the RPF. Generally, an extremist official from Kigali came along to lend an air of importance and respectability to the meeting. The killing plan would be approached as if it was just another community work project, a job to do for the good of the people. Since calling the project a bloody massacre would be too harsh, the project was generally called ‘‘bush clearing.’’ When the order to go to work came, the peasants carried out the killings as they would any other work order.

Genocide begins On April 6, 1994, Habyarimana was returning to Kigali airport on his private airplane when two missiles were launched from just outside the airport. Directly hit, the plane crashed into Habyarimana’s garden. All aboard were killed. The genocide started in Kigali within the hour. The identity of Habyarimana’s killer is not known. However, the president’s assassination and organized start of the genocide within fortyfive minutes of it strongly suggested the president’s murder was planned by some faction of the Hutu extremists, perhaps extremists in the inner core of his regime. By 9:15 PM , the Interahamwe had set up roadblocks to prevent various Tutsi from fleeing their homes. Impazamugamhi search teams systematically searched Tutsi houses and killed all occupants. Hutu extremists had devised a systematic genocide plan as early as late 1992, complete with names and addresses of proposed victims. In the first hours of the genocide, well-known moderate Hutu in Kigali were murdered along with Kigali Tutsi. At the same time, the radical radio station was pleading for the Hutu population throughout Rwanda to avenge the president’s death and kill the Tutsi before the Tutsi could kill them. The genocide had begun. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

251

Genocide in Rwanda

The final solution For the Tutsi victims, there were no places to hide. The country was densely populated, leaving no wild country into which one could flee. Neighbors hunted down neighbors. One of the few hiding places was between the ceiling and roof of a house, but soon this became the first place to be checked. Churches proved poor hiding places and turned into death traps. The wounded in hospitals were lined up and killed. It was presumed if individuals were already wounded, they must be Tutsi. Victims were shot or, more often, hacked to death. Victims would sometimes offer their killers money to use bullets rather than machetes. Eighty percent of deaths occurred between the second week of April and third week of May. Approximately 7,776,000 people lived in Rwanda. On April 6, 1994, approximately 930,000, 12 percent of the population, were Tutsi. By late July, only about 130,000 Tutsi survived—105,000 in refugee camps in Rwanda and neighboring Burundi and 25,000 still in Rwanda but not in camps. It is impossible to determine a precise number of persons killed in the 1994 Rwandan genocide. The United Nations (UN; an international organization created to resolve conflicts in the world and provide humanitarian aid where needed) estimated between 500,000 and 1,000,000 people died in October 1994. In its November 1994 Final Report the UN backed off to the more conservative number of 500,000 killed. Within a few years further calculations by researcher Gerard Prunier published in his 1998 book The Rwanda Crisis: History of a Genocide taken from the Rwandan census put the number between 800,000 and 850,000 killed. This estimate has been more universally accepted. These number included moderate Hutu killed during the genocide; however, their numbers varied wildly from 10,000 to 30,000. RPF advance What the Hutu extremists did not count on was the strength of the RPF. While Hutu militias occupied all their time murdering innocent and unarmed Tutsi, the determined, well-armed, and disciplined Tutsi RPF marched into Kigali by April 11 and began a monthlong battle to take the city. RPF cut off roads to Kigali and on May 22 took over the airport. The RPF had taken Rwanda.

The RPF swore in their new Tutsi government July 19, 1994. The figurehead president was a Hutu but had supported the RPF. The real man in power was Tutsi RPF leader General Paul Kagame (1957–) who took the title of vice president. The combination of genocide and war had killed 10 percent of the population, left 30 percent in refugee camps, and the rest of the population in complete disarray. 252

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Genocide in Rwanda

Rwandan refugees. It has been estimated that over 800,000 people were killed in the 1994 Rwandan genocide. # HO WA RD DAV IE S/ CO RB IS.

International community’s indifference During the early 1990, Western powers remained almost entirely passive toward Rwanda’s deteriorating human rights record and violent racism. From late 1993 onward, the governments of Western powers and the UN possessed information about an impending genocide. Arms distributions to the Hutu populations, extremist anti-Tutsi propaganda, violent actions of militia groups, and government-supported massacres of Tutsi all increased. In January 1994, a high-ranking official of the anti-Tutsi Interahamwe militia informed the UN of plans to exterminate all Tutsi. The informant bragged his Interahamwe troops could kill one thousand Tutsi in twenty minutes. He also reported a plan to kill Belgian peacekeepers, hoping their deaths would result in withdrawal of any remaining foreign peacekeepers. On October 5, 1993, the UN secretary general created the United Nations’ Assistance Mission to Rwanda (UNAMIR) to monitor the Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

253

Genocide in Rwanda

French troops offering humanitarian intervention. # PE TER TUR NL EY /CO RB IS .

situation and protect civilians. UNAMIR had first been proposed by the Arusha Peace Accords. However, UN member countries revealed an unwillingness to send troops or provide resources to give UNAMIR muscle. Rwanda was not politically or economically important enough to any other country to justify the expenditure of sending in assistance. UNAMIR troops, numbering only 2,548, began arriving in Rwanda in November 1993 but were virtually powerless. The troops witnessed and reported that the Rwandan government was arming Hutu peasants throughout the country. As the genocide began in April 1994, ten Belgian peacekeepers were killed as predicted in January. Belgian and French governments withdrew all their troops participating in UNAMIR by April 14. Western powers still refused to distinguish between a genocide and a civil war. As long as the action in Rwanda was considered a civil war, the foreign powers could ignore the slaughter (see box). When the UN secretary general received reports on April 29 that 200,000 people had already been massacred, he asked for UNAMIR 254

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Genocide in Rwanda

Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide The General Assembly of the United Nations presented the first international human rights treaty to the world in December 1948. The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide was the United Nations’s answer to the Nazi Holocaust in which six million European Jews and other targeted groups were murdered during World War II (1939–45). In signing the treaty, a nation declared it would cooperate with other nations to ensure genocide never happened again. The treaty’s fundamental intent was to make clear that if the threat of genocide loomed over a people, that threat concerned all humanity. The articles of the treaty defined genocide, listed punishable acts, stated that private individuals as

well as rulers and officials could be tried, and declared that trials would be held within the country where the genocide took place or in an international court. As the 1994 Rwandan genocide began, nations of the international community, including the United States, refused to call the unfolding horror a genocide. Instead it was labeled a civil war so the 1948 treaty would not have to be invoked. In a visit to Rwanda in March 1998, Democratic president Bill Clinton (1946–; 1993–2001) apologized for the United States and world community’s lack of help in the crisis. Later, after he left office, Clinton remarked his biggest regret of his presidential years was not acting to prevent the Rwandan genocide.

reinforcements. The United States blocked the reinforcements. With the recent U.S. military disaster in Somalia in October 1993 in which U.S. soldiers were brutally killed by Somalia militia in the Battle of Mogadishu, President Bill Clinton (1946–; served 1993–2001) argued that the UN could not become involved in every conflict in the world. The United States had no pressing national interest to be involved in Rwanda. The United States sent no help until July 1994 when President Clinton directed a humanitarian airdrop of life sustaining supplies and troops to distribute them.

International criminal tribunal for Rwanda Following the genocide, the UN Security Council established the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) to bring to trial those most responsible for the genocide. The ICTR moved slowly and inefficiently in bringing suspects to trial. The ICTR had only a handful of judges and the appeals court was far away in The Hague, Netherlands. In Rwanda the ICTR worked under primitive conditions frequently with no electricity. The Rwandan government was in constant conflict with the Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

255

Genocide in Rwanda

The UN Security Council established the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) to bring to trial those most responsible for the genocide. # LAN GEV IN J AC QUE S/ CO RBI S S YGM A.

ICTR over who would try defendants, Rwandan courts or ICTR, and the death penalty, which ICTR refused to support. Between 1994 and the end of 2004, about sixty-three people, individuals who were accused of being genocide leaders, came under the ICTR process. Despite inefficiency, the ICTR actions have had a few significant results. Over one hundred genocide leaders, including at least fourteen high-level suspects, remain free as of late 2004. Nevertheless, the international court prosecutors made it extremely difficult for them to reorganize. The ICTR obtained the first-ever international convictions of genocide and the first international conviction for rape (forcing another person to submit to sexual acts) as a war crime (any of various crimes committed during war and considered in violation of the rules of warfare). Furthermore, the ICTR judges and prosecutors are piecing together a factual historical record of the genocide. The successes came at a high cost, about $1.2 billion by 2005, with 872 paid staff members. 256

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Genocide in Rwanda

The UN Security Council gave the ICTR a deadline of 2008 to complete trials and 2010 to complete appeals.

Aftermath in Rwanda Shortly after the genocide, Kagame’s government detained about 135,000 to 140,000 Hutu in Rwanda and accused them of participation in the genocide. The regular Rwandan courts were in disarray following the genocide. Kagame attempted to reorganize the judicial system so it could handle the thousands of detained Hutu. Still, the number of detainees overwhelmed the Rwandan courts and jails. Between 1997 and June 2002, the courts tried 7,211 persons. These trials resulted in 1,386 acquittals, or releases, and 689 death sentences. However, no executions occurred after 1998. Ten years after the genocide, Kagame remained in control of the government, a Tutsi government. Of the approximately seven million Rwandans, one million were Tutsi. In 2004, Amnesty International, an international human rights watch group, reported that Rwanda was a tightly controlled country where opposition to the Kagame government was suppressed. Political opposition leaders faced harassment and arrest. There was no freedom of the press. Journalists criticizing the government were harassed, threatened, and detained. Both Tutsi and Hutu were traumatized people. Whether an individual was a Tutsi survivor or Hutu who carried out horrible acts, all had been severely damaged by the genocide. In the end, both would have to come together as one people to heal the nation. By 2006 it was uncertain if this would be possible. Rwanda remained a very traumatized country in a very unstable part of the world.

For More Information B O O KS

Berry, John A., and Carol Pott Berry, eds. Genocide in Rwanda: A Collective Memory. Washington, DC: Howard University Press, 1999. Human Rights Watch. Rwanda: The Search for Security and Human Rights Abuses. April 2000, Vol. 12(1). Also can be found online at http:// www.hrw.org/reports/2000/rwanda/ (accessed on November 7, 2006). Kim, Sungmin. Genocide in Rwanda and External Influences: The Intermeshing of Colonial Racism, Development Aid, and Western Powers’ Calculated Apathy. M.A. Thesis, University of Oregon, 2002. Melvern, Linda. A People Betrayed: The Role of the West in Rwanda’s Genocide. New York: Zed Books, 2000. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

257

Genocide in Rwanda

Prunier, Gerard. The Rwanda Crisis: History of a Genocide. London: Hurst & Company, 1998. Scherrer, Christian P. Genocide and Crisis in Central Africa: Conflict Roots, Mass Violence, and Regional War. Westport, CT: Praeger, 2002. Twagilimana, Aimable. The Debris of Ham: Ethnicity, Regionalism, and the 1994 Rwandan Genocide. Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 2003. United Nations Commission of Experts Established Pursuant to Security Council Resolution 935 (1994) on Rwanda. Final Report. Geneva, Switzerland: United Nations, 1994. WEB SIT ES

International Campaign to End Genocide. http://www.genocidewatch.org (accessed on November 22, 2006). PBS, and Helen Cobban. ‘‘Rwanda Today: The International Criminal Tribunal and the Prospects for Peace and Reconciliation.’’ Frontline: Ghosts of Rwanda. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/ghosts/today (accessed on November 22, 2006). ‘‘Rwanda.’’ Amnesty International. http://web.amnesty.org/report2005/rwasummary-eng (accessed on November 22, 2006). ‘‘Rwanda.’’ Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) World Fact Book. https:// www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/rw.html (accessed on November 22, 2006). ‘‘Rwanda.’’ Human Rights Watch. http://www.hrw.org/doc?t=africa&c=rwanda (accessed on November 22, 2006).

258

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

13

Japanese Internment in America

rom 1942 to 1944, over one hundred and twenty thousand Japanese Americans living along the Pacific Coast were detained in internment camps (places in which people are confined in wartime) by the United States government. In Canada, about twenty-three thousand people of Japanese descent were removed from their homes in British Columbia and moved to camps further inland. Both governments’ actions were defended as a military necessity after the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, on December 7, 1941.

F

Immigration from Japan to North America began during the late nineteenth century. By 1900 there were over twenty-five thousand Issei (first-generation immigrants from Japan; pronounced ‘ EE-say’’), or Japanese citizens, living in the United States. Most settled along the West Coast, where they experienced economic success, especially in agriculture since a large part of the Pacific Coast’s economy was built on agriculture and they could bring with them farming skills. However, they did not find social acceptance because of public prejudice against Asian immigrants. By 1940, about one hundred and twenty-seven thousand Japanese Americans lived in the United States. Approximately one-third of these were Issei and the remaining two-thirds were their children and grandchildren, who had been born in the United States and were U.S. citizens. After the United States entered World War II (1939–45) in 1941, American citizens and government officials assumed Japan would attack the West Coast. In a striking overreaction based on fear and prejudice, Japanese Americans and Japanese aliens were regarded as potential enemy agents. Despite questions from government lawyers about the violation of citizens’ constitutional civil rights, the government passed legislation allowing the U.S. Army to detain Japanese Americans based solely on their race. Those living in California, Oregon, Washington, and Arizona were removed from their homes and placed in one of ten internment camps throughout the United States. 259

Japanese Internment in America

WORDS TO KNOW alien: People who hold citizenship in a foreign country.

Issei: The first generation of immigrants from Japan to America.

detainee: A person held in custody, often for political reasons. internment camp: A place in which people are confined in wartime.

naturalization: The process through which a citizen of one country becomes the citizen of another country, often requiring a certain length of residence.

isolationism: Opposition to foreign commitments or involvement in foreign disputes.

Nisei: Children of Issei born in the United States.

Thirty-three thousand Japanese Americans served with distinction in the U.S. armed forces, even though many of their family and friends were detained throughout the war years. Prejudice against Asian Americans had been well established during the early years of the nineteenth century in North America. Restricted immigration, laws, and outright hostility set the stage for detaining an entire class of people based on race.

Japanese immigration into the United States The United States opened Japan to world trade in the mid-nineteenth century when U.S. commodore Matthew C. Perry (1794–1858) sailed into Tokyo Harbor. Japan strove to meet the new challenges of trade and industrialization. Leaders worked to build a powerful nation that would not fall under the domination of any foreign power. The heavy taxes imposed to fund this drive fell mostly on the Japanese farming class. Under the burden of taxation, young males began to leave Japan to look for work as laborers in the independent monarchy, or realm, of Hawaii. Hearing about the new possibilities in America with rapid growth of industry and agriculture in the American West, Japanese began to arrive in the United States by the 1890s. This first generation of immigrants from Japan to America was called Issei. Issei drew the anger of Americans, who saw the alien Japanese as a competitive threat to their own livelihoods. Alien is a term used to describe people who hold citizenship in a foreign country. Under U.S. immigration law that was strongly prejudiced against Asian immigrants, the Issei were aliens not eligible for citizenship. In contrast, other immigrants arriving 260

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Japanese Internment in America

from Europe could obtain citizenship. Therefore, they were not able to vote and held no political power among politicians to see that their needs and wants were recognized by the government. Objecting to the presence of the Japanese on racial and economic grounds, a group of American labor unions formed the Asiatic Exclusion League in 1905 in San Francisco. The League gathered in California in May 1905 to protest the immigration of all Asians into the United States. Various organizations, primarily labor unions, proposed laws and resolutions that encouraged prejudice against the Japanese. In 1906, heightened racism resulted in Japanese children being segregated (separated) from American students in the public school system in California. The move sparked a diplomatic crisis between the two countries. The following year, the United States and Japan reached the Gentleman’s Agreement. Japanese children would be integrated back into the public schools, and Japan would not issue any more passports to Japanese wanting to immigrate to the United States to find work. An unanticipated result of the Gentleman’s Agreement was that tens of thousands of Japanese women began to immigrate to the United States. They came in order to participate in arranged marriages with the Issei who desired to create Japanese American families and remain in the United States. The sentiment on the West Coast among the predominantly white public remained one of suspicion against the Japanese, and this new development in immigration only heightened the uneasiness. While the Japanese were recognized as good laborers with a strong work ethic, they were viewed as competitors for jobs and not welcomed as fellow citizens. This prejudice existed despite the Japanese willingness to take physically difficult and exhausting work that few Americans were willing to take at low pay. They differed in appearance and customs, including clothing and religion, and they experienced limited interaction on a social level with their white neighbors, who were mostly of northern and western European descent. However, the services provided by the Issei became more and more important to the West Coast economy as Japanese small businesses expanded to include everything from produce houses and laundries to hotels and restaurants. In 1913 and 1920, the California legislature passed the Alien Land Acts which made owning land illegal if the owner was ineligible to apply for citizenship. Some Issei dealt with the problem by setting up corporations to hold title to the land they had accumulated. Others registered their holdings in the names of their children, the Nisei (pronounced Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

261

Japanese Internment in America

‘‘NEE-say’’), who had been born in the United States. Anyone born in the United States, even if parents were aliens, was a U.S. citizen. Both attempts to evade the intent of the law were closed by an amendment to the Alien Land Law in 1923. Like other immigrant groups who had difficulty integrating into U.S. society in large part due to racial and ethnic discrimination, the Issei tended to gather together in isolated communities such as ‘‘Little Tokyo’’ in Los Angeles and ‘‘Little Osaka’’ in San Francisco. These communities provided educational and religious organizations that strengthened the security of the immigrants’ position in their adopted country. On the other hand, it set the largely self-sufficient Japanese apart from the larger community and increased the sense of suspicion and discrimination against them. Initiatives and legislation to restrict or prohibit Japanese immigration, land ownership, and U.S. citizenship would continue for decades to come. Acting on the public prejudices, Congress passed the Immigration Act of 1924 in order to limit immigration to the United States. Immigrants from Asia and eastern and southern Europe were particularly restricted. Asian immigrants were entirely banned. Americans were greatly prejudiced against eastern and southern European immigrants, who had begun arriving in the United States in large numbers in the 1890s. They were darker skinned and had different cultural traditions than western and northern Europeans who had largely settled North America and many of the southern and eastern Europeans were Catholics, a religion much disdained by the general public in the United States. Life became especially difficult and complicated for children of Issei—the Nisei—who, although they were American citizens, were caught between two countries and two identities. The Issei criticized their own children for being too American while American society viewed them as too Japanese. Despite high expectations from their parents, the Nisei faced limited employment opportunities outside their community. In the late 1920s, the Nisei organized the Japanese American Citizens League (JACL) in order to increase their involvement in American politics. Membership was extended only to those who possessed U.S. citizenship. One hundred and two registered delegates attended the first convention in Seattle, Washington, on August 29, 1930. The JACL creed, adopted in 1940, declared ‘‘I’m proud I’m an American citizen of Japanese ancestry. I pledge myself to do honor to her [America] at all times and places; to defend her against all enemies, foreign and domestic; 262

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Japanese Internment in America

to actively assume my duties and obligations as a citizen, cheerfully and without any reservation whatsoever, in the hope that I may become a better American in a greater America.’’ By 1940, about 127,000 Japanese Americans lived in the United States, approximately 112,000 of them in California and along the Pacific Coast. Less than 50,000 were Issei and the majority were Nisei or their children, called Sansei or ‘‘third generation,’’ who were also U.S. citizens.

United States enters World War II Germany, Italy, and Japan formed an alliance in the late 1930s with the mutual goal of acquiring additional territory for each nation. The three together were known as the Axis Powers. The Japanese leaders believed boundary expansion was necessary to gain control of natural resources for the Japanese people to remain economically competitive with the West and assure Japan’s future existence as a strong nation. By the early twentieth century, Japan had already developed an aggressive plan to increase its hold on the territory and natural resources of southern Asia. By 1940, Japan’s stated goal was to construct a Japanese Empire that would extend from Manchuria (in Northeastern China) to Thailand. In 1939, German troops invaded Poland to further expand Germany’s growing military domination of Europe. Through a secret agreement with the Soviet Union, Germany divided Poland between itself and the Soviets. As a result of the invasion, Great Britain and France declared war on Germany on September 3, 1939, marking the beginning of World War II. The United States maintained a position of neutrality (not taking sides). When France was defeated by Germany in June 1940, the United States changed from a policy of neutrality to supporting Great Britain, the chief country opposing Germany. War strategists concluded that the security of the United States depended on the continued existence of the Great Britain. The American government chose to avoid an outright declaration of war because the general public and Congress favored a policy of isolationism (staying out of foreign commitments or involvement in foreign disputes). Instead, the United States planned to provide the British with war materials while maintaining a defensive position against Japan in the Pacific. In July 1940, President Franklin D. Roosevelt (1882–1945; served 1933–45) froze all Japanese assets, or possessions, in the United States and later established a commercial blockade (shutting off a seaport entrance to prevent ships from entering Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

263

Japanese Internment in America

The Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, with devastating success. GE TTY IM AGE S.

or leaving) against Japan. This political action greatly increased tensions between Japan and the United States. In December 1941, Prime Minister Hideki Tojo (1884–1948) began Japan’s move toward expansion in the Pacific with an attack on the U.S. naval fleet at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. Japan’s goal was to cripple the U.S. fleet. Tojo reasoned if the United States was unable to resist at sea, Japanese forces would be able to complete their expansion into Southeast Asia and protect their growing empire. The Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor on December 7 with devastating success. On December 8, President Roosevelt asked Congress to declare a state of war against the Empire of Japan. Following declarations of war against the United States by Japan’s allies, Germany and Italy, the United States also officially entered World War II in Europe. 264

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Japanese Internment in America

The final days of 1941 and early months of 1942 were marked by U.S. preparations for war and fear of further attacks, most likely on the West Coast. Reports of successive Japanese victories throughout Southeast Asia filled the news media. Rumors that Japanese Hawaiians had aided the attack on Pearl Harbor were reported in the U.S. press. Statements by government officials as well as newspaper editors added to the public’s fears that a West Coast invasion was at hand. Threat of a Japanese invasion, often referred to as the ‘‘yellow peril’’ in a derogatory reference to skin color, loomed in the minds of Americans living on the shores of the Pacific Ocean. The shores were patrolled constantly in search of the enemy. Because of the perceived threat to national security, the U.S. and Canadian governments began an intense campaign to remove persons of Japanese ancestry, both U.S. and Canadian citizens and non-citizens, from the Pacific Coast. From 1942 to 1944, the U.S. government evacuated over one hundred and twenty thousand Japanese Americans from their homes and transferred them to detention camps because of fears about their loyalty.

Executive Order 9066 After the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, all Japanese living in North America were regarded as potential enemy agents. There was a great deal of pressure to remove them from their West Coast homes. In Canada, there were about 23,000 people of Japanese descent living in the west, mostly in British Colombia. As a member of the British Commonwealth, Canada had been involved in the war since it began in 1939. Following the attack on Pearl Harbor the Canadian government began to move Japanese men of military age to inland work camps. In February 1942, those Japanese Canadians remaining in British Colombia were relocated to camps farther east. Most of their property was confiscated and they lived under stark conditions with poor protection from harsh winter conditions. Despite warnings from U.S. attorney general Francis Biddle (1886– 1968) that the forced removal of U.S. citizens was unconstitutional, President Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9066 on February 19, 1942. Order 9066 authorized the evacuation of selected persons from certain military areas in the country and established curfews and evacuation directives. Congress quickly passed Public Law No. 503, which put Order 9066 into U.S. law. All Japanese Americans—Issei, Nisei, and even those with only one grandparent of Japanese ancestry—were affected. With the United States Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

265

Japanese Internment in America

Identification records of Japanese Americans, who during World War II were designated enemy aliens. AP I MA GE S.

266

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Japanese Internment in America

at war with Germany and its ally Italy, German and Italian citizens who lived in the United States, and greatly outnumbered the Japanese people living in the designated areas, were also affected by the order. However, those Germans and Italians who were considered suspect would be allowed individual hearings, while the Japanese were not treated as individuals but as an enemy race. All Japanese, Italian, and German aliens in the United States were designated ‘‘enemy aliens’’ and were required to carry special identification or run the risk of being detained or deported. Besides being restricted from traveling near important defense installations such as military bases and shipyards, enemy aliens could not possess short-wave radios or cameras. The government did not want them potentially communicating with Japanese officials overseas or taking pictures of prospective military targets. The signing of Order 9066 set in motion the steps leading up to the relocation of Japanese Americans on the West Coast. President Roosevelt established the War Relocation Authority (WRA) to oversee their removal. Milton Eisenhower (1899–1985), brother of famous American general Dwight D. Eisenhower (1890–1969), headed the WRA for its first three months to get the program established. He then left to help lead the Office of War Information. Dillon S. Meyer replaced him. In early 1942 U.S. Army lieutenant general John L. DeWitt (1880– 1962), commanding general of the Army’s Western Defense Command, ordered the removal of two thousand Japanese living on Terminal Island in Los Angeles, California. They were given twenty-four hours to sell their homes and businesses. DeWitt then declared the western half of California, Oregon, and Washington to be military zones but allowed for voluntary evacuation. Despite selling their property as directed, most Japanese at this time remained where they were as they had no where else to go. On March 24, 1942, another military order established a nighttime curfew and a five-mile travel restriction on persons of Japanese ancestry. That same day, a removal order was issued on Bainbridge Island, Washington, where military operations were located. Japanese Americans were given twenty-four hours to evacuate. Attempts to resettle outside the military zones were complicated by the five-mile travel restriction. There was uncertainty and confusion over where the Japanese could evacuate to. The general public’s threatening attitude frightened the Japanese Americans trying to comply with the military order. The evacuation was initially very chaotic. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

267

Japanese Internment in America

In 1942, Japanese Americans were given twenty-four hours to sell their homes and businesses. C OU RTE SY O F TH E LI BR AR Y OF CO NG RES S.

By early spring of 1942, the American government solved the evacuation confusion. Officials posted orders in Japanese communities directing all persons of Japanese ancestry to report to assembly points. Each family was issued a number and a list of approved baggage. They could bring only what they could carry and pets were not allowed. With only days to prepare, the Japanese were forced to sell their homes, cars, and businesses at prices far below their market value. Neighbors and others took advantage of the evacuees’ situation by buying their possessions and businesses for very little money. Some welcomed the elimination of Japanese Americans as competitors in agriculture and small business. The U.S. government also began legal proceedings to gain control of the evacuees’ farmland and other properties. 268

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Japanese Internment in America

Relocation centers and internment camps By June 1942, all Japanese Americans living in California, Oregon, Washington and Arizona had been removed from their homes. The WRA was placed in charge of overseeing the resettlement process for over one hundred thousand people. Some of the detainees had little awareness of their Japanese ancestry, as they were American citizens with as little as one-sixteenth Japanese blood. Because the evacuation had been hastily arranged, no facilities for detaining the evacuees existed when the order to relocate was given. The WRA used existing structures such as abandoned stockyards, off-season racetracks, and unused fairgrounds to temporarily house the detainees. Having recently left comfortable houses with every modern convenience, the Japanese Americans often found themselves now calling a horse stall their home. Freedom was eliminated and privacy was minimal. Government officials at the centers administered tests to determine each person’s level of loyalty to the United States. Among the numerous questions, they were asked whether they wanted to renounce their U.S. citizenship. Feeling great pressure, almost six thousand did. Families stayed an average of one hundred days at an assembly center before being transported to a detention camp. The first permanent internment facilities were located at Manzanar, California, and Poston, Arizona. They were army reception centers that had been turned over to the WRA to house the detainees. Other camps were hastily built in remote areas inland because many communities were unwilling to accept the detainees in their neighborhoods. Additional camps were built in Tule Lake, California; Gila River, Arizona; Topaz, Utah; Minidoka, Idaho; Amache, Colorado; Heart Mountain, Wyoming; Rohwer, Arkansas; and Jerome, Arkansas. By the first anniversary of the Pearl Harbor attack, over one hundred and ten thousand people of Japanese descent had been placed in a WRA camp. Under the direction of a manager appointed by the army, several hundred white staff members and soldiers managed each camp. Amache was the smallest camp, housing seventy-three hundred detainees, and Tule Lake, holding about eighteen thousand, was the largest. Early on there was a drive to separate loyal Japanese Americans from the threat of pro-Japanese agitators who considered themselves to be prisoners of war because of their internment by the United States. By 1943, most of the openly defiant detainees who professed to be antiAmerican had been transferred to the camp at Tule Lake in California where they were under heavy guard. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

269

Japanese Internment in America

By June 1942, all Japanese Americans living in California, Oregon, Washington and Arizona had been removed from their homes. AP I MA GE S.

The U.S. military commanders in Hawaii were less prejudiced against the 150,000 Japanese Americans living there, about one-third of the island’s population. Therefore, people of Japanese ancestry living in the Hawaiian Islands were not sent to relocation camps. Japanese people were the largest single ethnic group in Hawaii at the beginning of World War II and their businesses were an essential part of the economy. As a result, they were not affected except for a few hundred whose loyalty to the United States was suspect. Those were sent to the U.S. mainland for detention. 270

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Japanese Internment in America

Creating a life within camps The WRA camps were built in remote parts

of the country that few other Americans found habitable. Summer temperatures were often suffocating and winter temperatures sometimes dipped below zero degrees Fahrenheit. Each camp consisted of hundreds of wooden barracks covered with tar paper. A single building housed up to three hundred Japanese Americans. Within each building a family’s oneroom living quarters measured twenty feet wide by twenty-five feet long. Walls were paper thin and families could hear all that went on within their barracks. WRA officials planned for a family of four to live in each unit but as many as ten people often crowded together in order to keep their extended family together. The residents went to work making furniture and sewing curtains to add personality and privacy to their small homes. The embarrassing lack of privacy in the barracks was overshadowed by the complete lack of privacy in the public showers and toilets in the camp. Women wore swimsuits to take showers in the crowded facilities and the men gathered scrap lumber to build screens for the men’s and women’s latrines to allow each individual some privacy. The barracks were not equipped for each family to cook their own meals and so detainees ate in a common dining hall. A recreation hall housed numerous activities in the camps. For recreation, the Issei made traditional Japanese crafts and artwork from whatever materials they could scrape together. For games, the Nisei used whatever equipment the evacuees had brought with them. Ping pong, badminton, and cards were common indoor games in the recreation halls that were much larger than any of the housing. Basketball, football, golf, and tennis were also options, but everything took second place to the favored American sport of baseball. The detainees, using seeds provided by the government, also tended small ‘ victory gardens’’ that contained lettuce and various vegetable. These gardens were widely promoted by the government to encourage all Americans, even detained Japanese Americans, to add to the nation’s production of food. The camps developed a sense of routine, and each fall nearly thirty thousand Nisei children were prepared to start school in makeshift classrooms set up by the WRA in one of the barracks. The schools lacked textbooks and laboratory equipment. Often each student’s only school supplies were a small blackboard and chalk or writing tablet and pencil. The schools were staffed by white teachers as well as teachers selected from among the detainees. There was plenty of work for the adults in the camps. Many worked in the kitchens, laundries, or administrative offices while others worked Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

271

Japanese Internment in America

Japanese Americans line up for a meal at the internment camp in Washington. # S EAT TLE POS T- INT EL LIG EN CER CO LLE CT ION ; M USE UM O F HI ST ORY & IN DUS TR Y/ COR BI S.

in any available fields or orchards. Detainees from the medical professions staffed small hospitals to provide medical care for other residents. Over time, people established churches, post offices, fire departments, and newspapers in order to make life more tolerable in the camps. They made great use of the scant supplies provided them by camp guards or could be salvaged within the camp. Japanese Americans also willingly worked to do their part for the war effort. Some made huge camouflage nets for the Army to hide military equipment on the battlefield. Where the land allowed, sugar beets were grown to provide sugar for overseas as well as the homefront. Because there was a nationwide shortage of rubber, farmers grew guayule, a plant that contains rubber. It was used to make tires for military vehicles and airplanes necessary for the war. In general, interned Japanese Americans tried to keep up the same homefront activities that all Americans 272

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Japanese Internment in America

The Ringle Report The curfews, evacuations, and detentions of Japanese Americans were all legally challenged in the U.S. courts throughout the war. Over one hundred individuals attempted to challenge the government’s orders and a few cases even reached the Supreme Court. These included Yasui v. United States (1943), Hirabayashi v. United States (1943), and Korematsu v. United States (1944). Although Gordon Hirabayashi was convicted of curfew violation, his case did cause the Court to consider the constitutional question of whether the curfew orders issued by U.S. Army Lieutenant General John L. DeWitt could be applied selectively on the basis of race. The Court declared that military necessity required Japanese Americans to be selectively subject to the curfew order because their racial group constituted a greater source of danger to military efforts. Fred Korematsu’s case forced the Court to rule on the constitutionality of evacuation and internment. The Court sided with the federal government in stating that the detention was a military necessity and Korematsu’s conviction was upheld. Decades later, a 1983 report by the Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians concluded that Executive Order 9066 was not justified by military necessity. The Commission’s findings allowed the courts to reopen the Korematsu,Yasui, and Hirabayashi cases. It stated that the policies of detention and exclusion were the result of racism, war hysteria, and a failure of political leadership. The commission found that the

U.S. government had suppressed important information in a report known as the Ringle Report. Lieutenant Commander Kenneth D. Ringle, of the Office of Naval Intelligence, had questioned the validity of interning Japanese Americans in a memorandum written in February 1942. The Ringle Report estimated that the number of Japanese Americans who could be considered enemy agents of Japan was less than 3 percent of the total, or about 3,500 Japanese Americans in the United States. The most dangerous of these were already in custodial detention or were well known to the authorities. Ringle concluded that the ‘‘Japanese Problem’’ was greatly distorted and cases should be handled individually and not based on race. De Witt was aware of the Ringle Report and therefore knew that, according to Naval Intelligence estimates, 90 percent of the Army’s evacuation of Japanese Americans was unnecessary. When the Department of Justice filed government briefs in the Hirabayashi and Korematsu cases it chose not to mention the Ringle Report. Instead it asserted that Japanese Americans must be evacuated as an entire class. The Ringle Report held key evidence that the court could have used in determining the critical question of military necessity. When the cases were reopened, all three convictions were overturned (decision of lower court reversed). It was determined that the government’s suppression of evidence resulted in a miscarriage of justice.

participated in across the nation such as Red Cross blood drives, war bond (government certificates sold to individuals and corporations to raise money to finance war with the purchaser receiving their money back plus interest at a future time) sales, and scrap-metal drives. Scrap-metal drives gathered discarded or unused items made of metal, such as metal pots and pans and car parts, that were needed by the defense industry. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

273

Japanese Internment in America

Japanese in the U.S. military Late in 1942, the WRA distributed a form titled ‘‘Application for Leave Clearance’’ for detainees to fill out. The WRA explained that the form would help administrators determine the loyalty of those interned. Japanese Americans who gave acceptable answers would be allowed to leave the camps and move to cities in the eastern and midwestern parts of the country. It was determined there were fewer prejudices against the Japanese in these cities and there were also many war-industry jobs available. U.S. farms were suffering from a labor shortage and many detainees left to return to jobs in agriculture. Anyone who could prove he had employment outside the camp was permitted to leave. Between 1943 and 1944, many thousands of the detainees left for jobs in government departments, defense plants, agriculture, and the military. The ‘‘Application for Leave Clearance’’ contained twenty-eight questions. The last two questions initially caused a sharp division among those living in the camps. The applicant was asked to swear unqualified allegiance to the United States of America and be prepared to serve in the Armed Forces. Many Issei believed renouncing their Japanese citizenship while not being allowed to become U.S. citizens would leave them without a country. There was also a strong negative reaction to sending young men to war to fight for freedom, liberty and justice while it was denied to their families because of their race. Nevertheless, despite their internment some Nisei believed that joining the military was their opportunity to finally demonstrate the loyalty that they had always sworn to have for the United States. There were twenty-three thousand men of military age in the camps and the Army initially received about twelve hundred volunteer applications for basic training. Of these, approximately eight hundred passed their physicals and were inducted. Early in 1943, Nisei recruits left the internment camps for basic training at Camp Shelby, near Hattiesburg, Mississippi. They joined a group of Hawaiian soldiers who made up the 100th Infantry Battalion. Once basic training was completed, the Army shipped the Hawaiian 100th and the all-Japanese American 442nd Regimental Combat Team overseas for combat duty. Over twenty-five thousand Japanese Americans served with distinction in the U.S. armed forces, but the 442nd became the most decorated, or honored with awards, army unit of World War II. The 100th Battalion compiled such an impressive war record that it earned the nickname ‘‘the Purple Heart Battalion.’’ 274

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Japanese Internment in America

In January 1944, Nisei became eligible for the military draft. They participated in all major campaigns in the Pacific. Several hundred Nisei women also joined the Army. In the war against Japan, Japanese Americans also served in Military Intelligence where they translated captured documents, interrogated prisoners of war, worked with signal intelligence intercepting enemy electronic communications, and issued war propaganda (spreading information, often misinformation, to persuade people to adopt a certain viewpoint). The names of former residents serving in the military were proudly displayed as an honor roll on a billboard in each camp.

Resettlement While Japanese Americans fought and died for their country, many of their friends and families still lived in internment camps. Angry about their continuing confinement, several thousand Japanese Americans renounced their U.S. citizenship while in camp. Those considered by U.S. officials as greater threats to the United States had been sent to other camps with higher security. Some who renounced their citizenship were repatriated back to Japan; however, most had their U.S. citizenship reinstated when it was ruled that their renunciation occurred under coercion. By December 1944, the end of the war was in sight with a probable Allied victory. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Korematsu v. United States that the forced internments were a military necessity and therefore did not violate the U.S. constitutional principles. Nonetheless, the war was winding down and the remaining forty-four thousand Japanese Americans being detained were freed. Many had nowhere to go and lingered at the camps. As a result, the last camp did not actually close until March 1946. Japanese Americans were allowed to move anywhere in the United States except to the West Coast. Reports of cruelty and inhumane acts by the Japanese military during the war overshadowed the acts of bravery by the Nisei soldiers for many Americans. A great deal of hatred for people of Japanese heritage still existed in the Pacific states. This sentiment is reflected in a quote from a union leader of a central California agricultural association. As reprinted in Michael Cooper’s 2000 book Fighting for Honor: Japanese Americans and World War II, it reads: ‘‘We’re charged with wanting to get rid of the Japs for selfish reasons. We might as well be honest. We do. It’s a question of whether the white man lives on the Pacific Coast or the brown men. They came into this valley to work, and they stayed to take over.’’ Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

275

Japanese Internment in America

The Civil Liberties Act The economic losses suffered by Japanese American internment amounted to more than $400 million in property and income. The psychological stress of confinement and the humiliation of being regarded as traitors to their country cannot be calculated. After the war, some Japanese Americans began to seek financial compensation for the losses they had suffered. The American government passed the Japanese American Evacuation Claims Act of 1948 to compensate evacuees for property damage. The McCarran-Walter Act of 1952 removed the ethnic and racial bars to immigration and naturalization (the process through which a citizen of one country becomes the citizen of another country, often requiring a certain length of residence). Japanese immigrants, as well as resident aliens who had lived in the United States for many years, were allowed to become naturalized citizens. In 1959, U.S. citizenship was restored to Japanese Americans who had renounced it in protest during their confinement. The extreme ethnic and racial discrimination against Japanese Americans during World War II was long overlooked or ignored by the

American public. Finally, in 1976 President Gerald R. Ford (1913–; served 1974–77) formally revoked Executive Order 9066 and issued a statement declaring that the evacuation was wrong. In 1980, Congress established the Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians. The Commission’s report, issued in 1983, concluded that 9066 was not justified by military necessity and the government withheld information in the Ringle Report. Congress passed the Civil Liberties Act of 1988 and symbolically named the bill House Resolution 442, in honor of the Nisei battalion 442 of World War II. President Ronald Reagan (1911–2004; served 1981–89) signed the bill, which awarded each person who had been interned an apology and $20,000. Forty years after the bombing of Pearl Harbor by Japanese, the United States was faced with fear of another ethnic group, Arab Americans. On September 11, 2001, almost three thousand civilians died when terrorists from the Middle East attacked the U.S. mainland. As a result, the U.S.

General hostility made some Japanese Americans fearful of returning to U.S. society at all. In November 1945, fifteen hundred renounced their U.S. citizenship and boarded a ship bound for Japan. Although some community leaders resisted having Japanese Americans settle in their cities, most of the violence against them occurred in rural farming communities. Stores displayed signs stating Japanese would not be served and town buildings were marked with graffiti bearing racial slurs and threatening physical harm. Just as much as anger over the war, the hostilities were believed to be rooted in the fear of economic competition from the Japanese Americans. The government offered little assistance for Japanese Americans in their efforts to resettle. The loss of property and income left most with 276

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Japanese Internment in America

government investigated and deported many Middle Eastern people who were staying in the country illegally. However, the Civil Liberties Act guaranteed that the government would never again incarcerate a group of its own citizens without due process of law (treated fairly and their civil

liberties respected). They could not be detained solely on the basis of race Because of that bill, the government did not round up and detain American citizens of Middle Eastern descent or Middle Easterners who were legally in the country as it had with Japanese Americans during World War II.

Ronald Reagan after signing the Civil Liberties Act of 1988. # WAL LY MCN AM EE /CO RB IS .

little to return to and the additional challenge of starting over. Those who had managed to store some of their property often found it had been stolen or vandalized during their three-year absence. Complicating the struggle to resettle was a housing shortage in many U.S. cities. The severe shortage was caused by American workers who had moved into cities to take advantage of the high wages of war-industry jobs plus the return of millions of veterans. To alleviate the situation, Japanese American churches organized hostels, or inns, for those returning from the camps while others settled into old Army barracks or trailers. Many Japanese Americans were able to integrate back into mainstream society but they carried with them a fear that their ancestry, rather than their actions, would always determine how they would be treated. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

277

Japanese Internment in America

For More Information BOOKS

Conrat, Richard, and Maisie Conrat. Executive Order 9066. Los Angeles: California Historical Society, 1972. Cooper, Michael L. Fighting for Honor: Japanese Americans and World War II. New York: Clarion Books, 2000. Fugita, Stephen S., and Marilyn Fernandez. Altered Lives, Enduring Community. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2004. Lehman, Jeffrey, and Shirelle Phelps, eds. West’s Encyclopedia of American Law. 2nd ed. Detroit: Thomson Gale, 2005. Wells, Anne Sharp. Historical Dictionary of World War II: The War Against Japan. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, 1999. WEB SIT ES

Japanese American Citizens League. http://www.jacl.org/ (accessed on November 22, 2006). Japanese American National Museum. http://www.janm.org (accessed on November 22, 2006). National Japanese American Historical Society. http://www.nikkeiheritage.org/ (accessed on November 22, 2006). ‘‘The War Relocation Authority and The Incarceration of Japanese-Americans During World War II.’’ Truman Presidential Museum and Library. http:// www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/japanese_internment/ background.htm (accessed on November 22, 2006).

278

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

14

Prejudice in Iraq: Shiı´tes, Sunni, and Kurds

he modern nation of Iraq (in the Middle East) is home to twenty-six million people. Of those, 97 percent are followers of the religion known as Islam. People who adhere to Islam are called Muslims. Almost all Muslims belong to the two major sects or branches of Islam: Sunni and Shiı´tes. While worldwide 85 to 90 percent of Muslims are Sunni, in Iraq and neighboring Iran Shiı´tes are in the majority. Shiı´te Arabs make up 60 to 65 percent of the Iraqi population, or about 15.6 to 17 million people. Sunni Arabs represent 32 to 37 percent, about 8.3 to 9.6 million people. People of Arab ethnicity originated in Southwest Asia on the Arabian Peninsula.

T

Kurds are also Muslims, the majority of whom are Sunni. However, they identify themselves as only the Kurdish people. Kurds make up 15 to 20 percent of Iraq’s population, between four and five million people. Kurds descend from Indo-European tribes. Iraqi Shiı´tes live primarily in central and southern Iraq, from Baghdad south between the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers to the city of Basra and the Persian Gulf. The Sunni live from Baghdad north along the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers. The entire area of the Tigris and Euphrates River was commonly known as Mesopotamia from ancient times until the end of World War I (1914–18) when the country of Iraq was created. Kurds live in mountainous northeastern Iraq. Kurdish areas in Iraq are bordered on the east by Iran and the north by Turkey. During the twentieth century, the story of Iraq was one of prejudice, discrimination, and persecution—Sunni against Shiı´te, Shiı´te against Sunni, and the Sunni-controlled Iraqi government against the Kurds. Taught in early childhood, any Iraqi can relate the story of the separation of Shiı´te and Sunni that occurred during the seventh century. The separation left a legacy of prejudice, hatred, and violence among Shiı´te and Sunni that spanned fourteen centuries. 279

Prejudice in Iraq: Shiı´ tes, Sunni, and Kurds

WORDS TO KNOW Kurds: An ethnic group native to a region that includes parts of Syria, Iraq, Iran, and Turkey.

sectarian: A government run by religious leaders of one religion.

Muslim: A follower of the Islam religion; the two main branches of Muslims are the Sunni and Shiı´te.

secular: A government run by political leaders rather than by leaders of a certain religion.

Sunni-Shiı´ te separation Sunnis and Shiı´tes originally split over who should rightfully succeed the prophet Muhammad at his death in 632 CE . Sunni followed Abu Bakr (c. 573–634), who was Muhammad’s closest companion and a member of Muhammad’s tribe, but not his family. Others believed Muhammad wished his son-in-law Ali to succeed him. Ali’s followers became known as the Party of Ali or Shi’at Ali. Over the next twenty-four years, the number of Muslims who followed Ali increased to, eventually, some 160 million followers in 2006. Ali became the fourth Islamic spiritual leader known as a caliph. After only five years as caliph, Ali was assassinated in 661. Devastated followers granted Ali’s last wish. They tied his lifeless body to a camel and sent the camel off. Where the camel stopped they built a shrine to Ali and a mosque for worship. The camel stopped at Najaf, located about 100 miles south of Baghdad, near the Euphrates River. A few decades later in 680, Ali followers—then known as Shiı´tes— urged Ali’s son Husayn to challenge the then seventh caliph, a Sunni. However, at the town of Karbala, roughly halfway between Najaf and Baghdad, Husayn, his family, and companions were ambushed and killed by the caliph’s men. Both Najaf and Karbala became holy sites to Shiı´tes. The roots of Shiı´te hatred for Sunni and Sunni for Shiı´te were firmly rooted. Shiı´te Muslims remained a small minority living in the region along the Euphrates River near Najaf and Karbala. Just as the Shiı´tes living in modern day Iran, they were predominantly of Persian ancestry rather than Arab ancestry. Persians descend from various peoples in history, including Arabs, Turks, and Mongolians who settled primarily in Iran.

Shiı´te population increases In the nineteenth century, the Iraqi Shiı´te population dramatically increased with the agricultural improvements that included irrigating 280

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Prejudice in Iraq: Shiı´ tes, Sunni, and Kurds

Islamism Two major groups of Islam worshippers were Sunni and Shiite Muslims. Muslim fundamentalists (religious followers who strictly interpret religious guidance) of both Islamic sects held a set of political beliefs in the early twenty-first century that Islam is not only a religion, but a political system as well. This belief was known as Islamism. The fundamentalists believed that the increasing influences from Western society in the Arab world—including an emphasis on wealth and individualism, as well as Western entertainment— were evil for Islamic societies. Their unhappiness also targeted other Muslims, including leaders of Arab countries who were deemphasizing the role of Islamic religion in government. In the 1960s, such movements as pan-Arabism (a desire to politically unite all Arab populations in the Middle East and Northern Africa and become free of Western influences) and Arab nationalism (the belief that a particular nation and its culture, people, and values are superior to those of other nations) focused more on cultural similarities among Arab states and favored governments that were more secular in nature. Influenced by the Soviet Union, the more liberal and moderate Arab countries adopted socialist (economic production is controlled by the government for the benefit of all the citizens) forms of government. Islamists opposed this type of government. They wanted a society and legal system strictly based on Islamic codes. During the 1980s, Islamist rebels joined together to challenge the Soviet army in Afghanistan. Heavily funded by the United States, they successfully drove the Soviets out. Dismay over continued poverty in the Arab states led more Muslims to join in the support of Islamism, and it became a growing influence in Arab countries. Israeli occupation of parts of Palestinian Arab territories in the West Bank and Gaza Strip in the Middle East further fueled the popularity of Islamism and disdain of the United States, which supported Israeli activities. Islamism

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

was carried forward by various organizations, such as the Muslim Brotherhood, in the late twentieth century. During the 1990s, Islamist conflicts occurred in Algeria, Sudan, and Nigeria. In 1996, the Islamist organization known as the Taliban gained power in Afghanistan. Fundamentalists also gained control of Pakistan. Though Islamism—led by such groups as the Muslim Brotherhood—developed in the early twentieth century, the movement did not become internationally active until the 1980s. It gained considerably more worldwide recognition in the 1990s in reaction to increased U.S. and European military presence in the Middle East triggered by the Persian Gulf War of 1990. In Saudi Arabia, an Islamic group known as the Wahhabi increased its following during this time. Saudi resident and future Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden (1957–) was greatly influenced by the Wahhabi. This gain in support was in reaction to the friendly relations of the Saudi government with the United States during the 1991 Gulf War allowing establishment of permanent U.S. military bases. A coalition force led by the United States repelled Iraqi forces following their invasion of Iraq, and a permanent U.S. military presence was established in Saudi Arabia. Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein took advantage of the Islamists’ sentiments by charging that Saudi Arabia had sold out Islamic interests to the West. The terrorist attack in New York City and Washington, D.C., on September 11, 2001, was attributed to Muslims from Saudi Arabia. The attack, which killed more three thousand civilians, brought the world’s attention to Islamism. The Islamist movement in the early twenty-first century remained strong, driven still by U.S. support of Israel, strong U.S. presence in Saudi Arabia, and the U.S.–led war against Muslims in Iraq since 2003. Many Muslims continued to believe the West was prejudiced against them and persecuting them.

281

Prejudice in Iraq: Shiı´ tes, Sunni, and Kurds

the southern desert with a canal from the Euphrates River that was completed. The irrigated land supported dates, rice, and grain. Many Sunni Arabs moved into the region to farm. Being close to the holy places of Najaf and Karbala, the Sunni assimilated and gradually became members of the Shiı´te sect. Hence these new Shiı´tes were of Arab origin, and soon Shiı´te Arabs greatly outnumbered Persian Shiı´tes. When Shiı´tes died, they wanted their bodies buried near Ali’s at Najaf or Husayn’s at Karbala. Cemeteries around the towns grew large. Shiı´tes made pilgrimages (journeys to a sacred place) to both Najaf and Karbala to pray at the mosques (Muslim houses of worship) and shrines of their ancient leaders.

Iraq is created Modern Iraq history began in 1920. The Middle East, including Mesopotamia, had been part of the Ottoman Empire (Turkish Empire) since 1534. With the defeat of the Ottoman Empire at the end of World War I, the British and French, both victors, divided the Middle East. Mesopotamia came under British control. Britain arbitrarily (randomly, without apparent logic) created a country out of three former Ottoman provinces: Basra, the Shiı´te-dominated land in the south of the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers; Baghdad, the Sunni area to the north; and Mosul, the oilrich northeastern Kurdish region. This new country was called Iraq. Both Shiı´te and Sunni revolted, but the British quickly squashed the uprisings. Britain appointed as king a Sunni Muslim named Faisal I (1885–1933). Britain’s move to install a Sunni king led to eight decades of Sunni rule. King Faisal I died in 1933. His son, Ghazi, took over but was killed in an automobile accident in 1939. Prince Abdul Ilah, Ghazi’s brother, led the country until 1953, when Ghazi’s son became King Faisal II (1935– 1958) at the age of eighteen. Shiı´tes, led by their clerics (religious leaders), resisted Sunni rule. Sunni rule was staunchly secular, not run by religious leaders. The Sunni government acted continuously to suppress the Shiı´tes, whom they considered uneducated radicals. Constantly denied representation in the government, Shiı´tes revolted in 1935, but the Faisal monarchy, or realm, easily put down the revolt. Sunnis were favored over the Shiı´tes for positions in government employment and education. Nevertheless, some Shiı´tes migrated to Baghdad, Iraq’s capital and largest city, and within the city tried to lose their Shiı´te identity. Some managed to obtain an education while others became successful shop owners. 282

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Prejudice in Iraq: Shiı´ tes, Sunni, and Kurds

Baa´ th Party rises to power In the early 1950s, the Iraqi government established oil agreements with foreign companies, and money soon poured into the country. Young educated Sunnis, tired of being under a monarchy and wanting a share of power and oversight in the increasingly prosperous government, moved to overthrow King Faisal II. In 1958, Sunni rebels and army officers overthrew the monarchy, killing both the king and Prince Abdul Ilah. Ten years of political instability followed that included two violent changes in government leadership in 1963, the first as a result of an assassination of the president and the second from a military coup. Through the power struggles the Sunni political party known as the Baa´th grew in strength. The Baa´th party took control of the government in 1968 and a member, Saddam Hussein (1937–2006), began his rise to power. The Baa´th party was overwhelmingly Sunni and remained rigorously secular. Baa´thist viewed the Shiı´tes as religious fanatics. In 1971, the Baa´th government completed a takeover of all Iraqi oil facilities from foreign control, a process that had begun in 1961. Many Sunni became wealthy, and Sunni communities prospered. Many Sunni also became prosperous landowners, especially north of Baghdad. Shiı´tes moved north to work on the Sunni land and some found ways to acquire their own property. However, most Shiı´tes struggled and lived in poverty. Shiı´tes, to combat Sunni dominance, established a political party— al-Dawa—that called for an Islam government run by clerics. The same movement to establish an Islamic state (one run by clerics) was taking place in neighboring Iran but there the Shiı´tes were in the overwhelming majority, comprising about 90 percent of the population.

King Faisal II was killed and his monarchy was overthrown in 1958. AP I MA GES .

Sunni Saddam Hussein takes control Baa´thists’ discrimination against and oppression of Shiı´tes turned deadly. Between 1974 and 1977, thirteen Shiı´te clerics were murdered and fifteen others were sent to prison for life. Members of al-Dawa responded with attacks on Baa´th offices. The Baa´th Party outlawed al-Dawa. Sunni Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

283

Prejudice in Iraq: Shiı´ tes, Sunni, and Kurds

Muslim Brotherhood Weary of European colonial powers controlling much of the Arab world in northern Africa and the Middle East, a movement known as the Muslim Brotherhood was created in Egypt in 1928. The Brotherhood opposed Western influences in Arab societies and promoted a return to Islamic states of past centuries. Believing Muslim lands had been trampled over by foreign influences, they also sought to rid Arab nations of leaders who were friendly to Western powers. Branches of the Muslim Brotherhood grew in other Arab states, including Syria and Jordan and, though officially banned, gained political influence. The Brotherhood was not only a religious movement, but a social movement as well. Their goal was to protect workers from unfair treatment by Western companies operating in Arab country. They also promoted construction of hospitals, schools, and other social institutions. By 1948, the Muslim Brotherhood had half a million members, and Cairo was a central meeting place for Muslims. The assassination of Egyptian president Anwar Sadat (1918–1981) in 1981 was attributed to the Egyptian Islamic Jihad (a military religious war), a violent wing of the Muslim Brotherhood. They believed Sadat was responsible for introducing Western ideas into Islamic societies. Another violent wing of the Brotherhood was the Islamic Jihad in Palestine to combat the presence of the state of Israel. They also opposed the moderate political policies of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), led by Yasser Arafat (1929–2004). The Brotherhood’s popularity continued into the twenty-first century as they continued insisting that

Anwar Sadat. C OUR TE SY O F TH E LI BR AR Y OF C ONG RE SS.

Muslims should live according to strict Islamic codes and reject Western ideas and innovations. Another armed wing of the Brotherhood was Hamas, which formed in Gaza in 1987. In the 2005 Egyptian parliamentary elections, though the organization was still officially banned, Brotherhood members won 20 percent of the parliament seats. They largely ran as independent candidates. The Brotherhood was also believed to be influential with insurgents fighting in Iraq against U.S. occupational forces and Iraqis friendly with the Western powers.

Saddam Hussein, by then a Baa´thist leader, took control of the Iraqi government in 1979. At the same time Hussein came to power, the Iranian Shiı´te majority overthrew the leader of Iran, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi Shah (1919–1980), 284

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Prejudice in Iraq: Shiı´ tes, Sunni, and Kurds

and installed a sectarian (religious led) Shiı´te government with cleric Seyyed Ruhollah Khomeini (c. 1900–1989) as its leader. From that time on, Iraqi Shiı´tes were treated with brutal oppression. Hussein, determined to prevent a Shiı´te power shift in Iraq as happened in Iran, used his Sunni army and security forces to round up and execute al-Dawa members as well as persons known to aid or sympathize with the party. Tens of thousands of Shiı´tes were kidnapped from their families and never seen again. Hussein started his brutal hunt of Shiı´tes a year before he began a war with Iran in 1980. Tensions between Iraq and Iran had increased greatly following the Iranian Revolution the previous year in 1979. The Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini overthrew the existing Iranian government and established the Islamic Republic of Iran. He called for Islamic revolutionaries across the Muslim world to follow Iran’s example. Tensions across the Middle East escalated including a border dispute between Iran and Iraqi. Hussein finally launched an attack on the oil-rich, Iranian-held land of Khuzestan in southwest Iraq, along the Persian Gulf, in September 1980. The very costly war lasted eight years and, all the while, Hussein’s forces continued to abduct Shiı´tes and demand proof that they did not sympathize with Iranian Shiı´tes. If their claims were unsatisfactory, they were either executed or forced out of the country. In reality, many Iraqi Shiı´tes fought for Iraq against Iranian Shiı´tes during the war. Hussein forbade Shiı´tes from public religious rituals and from displaying pictures of Shiı´te leaders, especially those of Ali and Husayn. He also banned Shiı´te pilgrimages to Najaf and Karbala. People were threatened to never speak against Hussein. The penalty was death.

The 1991 Shiı´ te uprising The Iraq-Iran war wound down by 1989 with no significant victories or change of borders but with perhaps as many as nine hundred thousand Iraqis and Iranians killed and injured. The war ended with a ceasefire negotiated under international pressure. In 1990, Hussein directed his forces to invade oil-rich Kuwait, a small Middle East country on the coast of the Persian Gulf between Iraq to the north and Saudi Arabia to the south. Fearful of further expansion by Iraq troops across Kuwait toward the border of Saudi Arabia, a U.S.–led coalition force (made up of many nations) repelled Iraqi forces. U.S. Republican president George H. W. Bush (1924–; served 1989–93) encouraged Iraqi Shiı´te to rebel and overthrow Hussein. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

285

Prejudice in Iraq: Shiı´ tes, Sunni, and Kurds

Out of Iraqi’s eighteen provinces, fourteen experienced Shiı´te uprisings. However, the United States decided not to lend military support and Hussein brutally halted the rebellion. He bombed Shiı´te shrines, houses, and bazaars (marketplaces). His forces terrorized the country slaughtering tens of thousands of Shiı´tes.

United States invades Iraq, 2003 The United Nations, an organization of the world’s nations created to resolve conflicts in the world and provide humanitarian aid where needed, passed resolutions throughout the 1990s demanding Hussein halt any productions of weapons of mass destruction (nuclear and biological weapons capable of killing large numbers of people). Hussein continued to terrorize the Kurdish and Shiite populations as the United States carried out numerous bombing missions against Iraqi military installations including Operation Desert Strike that lasted several weeks in October 1996 and Operation Desert Fox in December 1998. The resolutions seemingly went unheeded and U.S. forces invaded Iraq in the spring of 2003 amid an international controversy over whether any weapons of mass destruction actually existed. Hussein’s government fell on April 9, 2003, and Hussein was captured on December 13, 2003. Shiı´tes for the first time in eighty years were no longer under Sunni rule. However the Iraq war continued even though U.S. president George W. Bush (1946–; served 2001–) had declared it over in 2003. By 2006 a civil war had developed between the Sunnis and Shiı´tes. Shiı´tes embraced their newfound freedom enthusiastically. They immediately renamed streets, bridges, and public gathering areas after Shiı´te leaders and heroes. All likenesses and representations of Hussein were destroyed. Pilgrimages to Najaf and Karbala began again and crowded those cities. Merchants sold prayer beads, rugs, and clogs of earth from the holy cities to the faithful. Shiı´tes again performed public religious rituals once banned under Hussein. For example, Shiı´te men paraded through streets beating their backs with chains. The ritual symbolized Ali’s suffering. The Shiı´tes again publicly commemorated their holiest day of the year, Ashoura, marking the death of Husyn in Karbala in BCE 680. The already vast cemeteries around Najaf and Karbala grew dramatically as Shiı´tes brought back corpses of loved ones they had sought and found. Human rights groups estimated anywhere from three hundred thousand people to seven million, mostly Shiı´tes, were murdered under 286

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Prejudice in Iraq: Shiı´ tes, Sunni, and Kurds

Shiı´tes again perform public religious rituals once banned under Saddam Hussein. AP I MAG ES .

Hussein’s rule. At the end of 2003, two large issues loomed. Iraqi Shiı´tes would have great difficulty putting aside grievances and deep hurt. They, along with the Sunni, would need to carve out a new Iraqi self-image as one people, which would require Sunnis to accept not being in total control of the country. By early 2006, Iraqis had freely elected a permanent government. Reflecting the Iraqi population makeup, Shiı´tes won a clear majority, but about 20 percent of representatives were Sunni. A new constitution had been completed and approved by the people in October 2005. The constitution provided several basic principles: a democratic (power of government held by the people through election of political leaders) form of government; freedom of religion though Islam is identified as the national religion; and, the right to assemble. Whether the new Iraq would actually work was uncertain because of the sectarian (religious) strife that steadily worsened through 2006. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

287

Prejudice in Iraq: Shiı´ tes, Sunni, and Kurds

The United States still maintained an occupation force of about 150,000 troops in Iraq to attempt to keep order. However, daily violence continued claimed the lives of Iraqi civilians, police, and military, as well as American soldiers. By late 2005 and early 2006, Iraqis were segregating into Shiı´te and Sunni enclaves. By late 2006 some 53,000 Iraqi civilians had been killed and over 3,000 U.S. and other coalition soldiers including over 2,700 U.S. soldiers after the war was declared over by American leaders.

Deep division Two and half years after the U.S. invasion, the deep divisions and hatred between Shiı´te and Sunni surfaced. The most violent areas in late 2005 and early 2006 were in a large circle around Baghdad. The U.S. military estimated 85 percent of violent attacks were occurring in Baghdad and in communities to the north, west, and south. The belt around Baghdad, including the city and at least forty outlying towns, had until the last few years been mixed with Sunni and Shiı´te residents. Since the U.S. invasion, families seeking safety from violent prejudicial acts had been packing up and moving where their sect predominated. The movement resulted in segregation of areas in Baghdad and of whole towns. In Baghdad, as in towns around the city, entire sections were becoming Sunni only or Shiı´te only. In 2006, violence continued to escalate in the Baghdad belt. Contributing to the violence were the Iraqi security forces who were supposed to maintain peace. Although the United States trained a new Iraqi army and police force, it appeared the new Iraqi battalions were not mixed. Instead, men in battalions in the northeast were overwhelming Kurdish, battalions to the south were Shiı´te, and battalions in the belt were largely segregated into either Shiı´te or Sunni. According to news reports, some Shiı´te young men openly declare that they joined a security force to make their revenge-taking against Sunni appear lawful. Sunni leaders claimed daily harassment, seizure, and executions of Sunnis by Shiı´te-dominated security forces. According to these leaders, the Shiı´te forces who were under command of the Iraqi Interior Ministry canvassed neighborhoods, arresting and allegedly assassinating Sunni. Shiı´tes, on the other hand, claimed they were targeted by Sunnis in killings, often by suicide bombings. Threatening letters, hate graffiti on walls, individual murders, and suicide bombers at funerals, mosques, and most any public place all are part of dangerous daily life in Iraq. 288

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Prejudice in Iraq: Shiı´ tes, Sunni, and Kurds

The Shiı´te families who lived in the predominantly Sunni towns of Samarra and Tarmiya north of Baghdad constantly received death threats. By 2005 and 2006, they were unable to leave the walls of their homes. Most moved from Sunni to Shiı´te communities within Baghdad or to towns to the south such as Madaen, Hilla, and Hut. Conversely, Sunni families of those same towns moved to Sunni neighborhoods in Baghdad or towns to the north such as Samarra and Tarmiya. Such scenarios were playing out throughout the Baghdad belt. Those who remained in mixed neighborhoods were keenly aware of their surroundings and lived in fear with threats and violence. Violence and counterviolence (violence in response to violence) made the old hatreds only more bitter and lessened the likelihood of a united Iraq.

Kurds in Iraq Kurds numbered twenty-five to thirty million worldwide in the early 2000s. The majority lived in a mountainous area of about 230,000 square miles that is located in four countries, Iraq, Turkey, Iran, and Syria. For over a millennium this area was called Kurdistan. There were approximately four to five million Kurds in Iraq, 13.5 million in Turkey, 6.5 million in Iran, and a little over one million in Syria. Several million more lived in various countries in Asia. Kurds are not Arabs; instead, their ancestors are Indo-European tribes that inhabited the mountainous regions for as long as four thousand years. Arabs conquered these mountain people in the seventh century and Islamicized them, meaning they made them followers of Islam. In modern times Kurds like other Muslims were either Sunni or Shiı´te. The majority were Sunni. However, the hatred that separated Sunni Arabs from Shiı´te Arabs did not exist among Kurds. The Kurds were the world’s largest ethnic group without their own country. Their desire for a Kurdish nation led to uprisings in all four countries of Iraq, Iran, Syria, and Turkey comprising ancient Kurdistan. In modern times, the Kurdish lack of an independent homeland became known as the Kurdish problem. Following World War I and the breakup of the Ottoman Empire (1299–1922), the 1920 Treaty of Sevres called for a country for Kurds. However, the subsequent Treaty of Lausanne, signed in 1923, failed to fulfill that promise of a Kurdish homeland. Uprisings among the Kurdish in Iraq, Iran, Turkey, and Syria resulted. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

289

Prejudice in Iraq: Shiı´ tes, Sunni, and Kurds

Prejudice Suffered by Kurds in Turkey, Syria, and Iran Prejudice (a negative attitude towards others based on a prejudgment about those individuals with no prior knowledge or experience) against Kurds in countries bordering Iraq—Turkey, Syria, and Iran—is ongoing even in the twenty-first century. Kurds experience prejudice and discrimination (treating some differently than others or favoring one social group over another based on prejudices) culturally, socially, politically, including the banning of their language. Following World War I, Article 62 of the Treaty of ` Sevres signed in 1920 allowed for self-rule, called autonomous rule, in areas predominantly populated by Kurds. Article 64 suggested independence for the Kurdish people. However, the subsequent Treaty of Lausanne signed in Switzerland in 1923 made no provision for Kurdish independence. With no hope for a homeland, Kurds in Turkey rebelled in three violent uprisings in 1925, 1930, and 1936-38. Movement for Kurdish autonomy arose in the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980 but was harshly repressed by Turkish military. As a result, Turkey attempted to abolish any Kurdish identity. Through the 1980s, the Turkish constitution banned the use of the Kurdish language in both speech and written word. Someone overheard using Kurdish words were subject to police surveillance or arrest. During the 1980s, Turkish troops destroyed thousands of Kurdish villages, just as Saddam Hussein destroyed Kurdish towns in Iraq. Turkey. Referred to as animals, microbes, or worthless, Kurds in Turkey were subjected to dehumanizing speech. Kurdish political parties were systematically restricted and shut down. Those Kurdish leaders who spoke of a separatist movement (separating from Turkey and claiming independent rule) were imprisoned. The most famous jailed political leader was Leyla Zana

290

(1961–), the first Kurdish woman elected to Turkey’s parliament (government) in 1991. When taking the oath for her seat in parliament, Zana spoke in Kurdish and wore the colors representing the Kurdish flag, yellow, green, and red. Her language and clothing outraged the other members of parliament. The Kurd areas of southeastern Turkey are the most economically underdeveloped in the country. While other areas of Turkey had greatly modernized with industrial growth, Kurdish areas lagged far behind since the Turkish government withheld resources from the area. Syria. Amnesty International, a worldwide human rights organization, reported in 2005 that Kurds, although the second largest ethnic group in Syria, were routinely victims of prejudice and discrimination. Kurds were barred from many professions, not allowed to own property, and refused admission to study at the university. No published materials in Kurdish were allowed. When Kurds attempted to protest the discrimination, they faced arrest, torture, and unfair trials. Iran. Since World War I, the Kurds were in constant revolt against the Iranian government. They actually managed to establish in December 1945 the only Kurdish independent nation, the Mahabad Republic of Kurdistan. The Mahabad Republic came to a quick end in December 1946 when the Iranian army easily defeated the Kurds. Subsequent revolts by Kurds—the largest occurring from 1979 to 1984, when the Ayatollah Khomeini established religious rule in Iran—were met with suppression of Kurdish activities, including arrests, and executions. One tactic used by Iranian governments to end revolts was the assassination of Kurdish leaders. At the beginning of the twenty-first century, Kurds in Iran continued as a discriminated minority.

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Prejudice in Iraq: Shiı´ tes, Sunni, and Kurds

In Iraq, most Kurds lived in the northeast in an area about the size of Austria. The land they occupied held about two-thirds of the oil production and reserves of Iraq. For this reason, the Iraqi government long feared Kurdish separation and the loss of most of its wealth. Furthermore, the Iraqi government believed if the Kurds gained independence, then Shiı´tes in the southern regions might also demand independence, likely meaning an end to modern Iraq. Since the establishment of the Iraqi state in 1932, succeeding Iraqi regimes have kept Kurdish separation movements suppressed. Kurds have suffered cultural and political discrimination, destruction of entire towns, and, in the late 1980s, genocide. Genocide is a planned systematic attempt to eliminate a whole targeted group of people by exterminating all members of that group. Kurdish and Iraqi militaries engaged in fighting in the 1960s, conflict that ended with sixty thousand deaths and hundreds of thousands of displaced persons when hundreds of villages were destroyed. Fighting again broke out in 1978 and 1979 with Iraqi government forces soundly defeating Kurdish guerilla fighters (small groups of combatants). Six hundred Kurdish villages were destroyed and 200,000 Kurds displaced to other parts of Iraq. Chemical attacks wipe out thousands Determined to halt the Kurd

rebellions, the Baa´th Party in the 1960s began severe oppression of Kurds, murdering many. When Saddam Hussein took power in 1979, he continued the campaign. However, in the 1980s, Kurds attempted to take advantage of situations when Iraqi forces were busy warring with neighboring Iran. Hussein’s response culminated in a Kurdish genocide in 1987-88. Al-Anfal (anfal means spoils) was the codename for the genocide, a planned military operation directed by Hussein’s cousin Ali Hasan al-Majid. Al-Majid became known as ‘‘Chemical Ali’’ because he unleashed chemical weapons against Kurds. During the genocide, rebel villages were identified as ‘‘prohibited’’ areas where the Iraqi military were told to kill every living thing, humans and animals alike. In many villages, men fifteen to seventy were separated from children, women, and elderly men and either killed or taken to detention camps (a large center created to hold members of an undesirable peoples, such as political prisoners or members of an ethnic group). In March 1988, Chemical Ali used lethal chemicals on the residents of Halabja, a town of forty to fifty thousand people. The attack on Halabja took place on March 16. Within hours, five thousand innocent Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

291

Prejudice in Iraq: Shiı´ tes, Sunni, and Kurds

Ali Hassan al-Majid, Iraqi president Saddam Hussein’s cousin, became known as ‘‘Chemical Ali’’ because he unleashed chemical weapons against Kurds. R OB ERT NIC KE LS BER G/ TIM E L IFE PIC TU RES /G ETT Y I MAG ES .

people (75 percent of them women and children) were dead and another ten thousand maimed, disabled, or disfigured. The other days were spent attacking other of the forty cities and towns. The attack on Halabja was the worst chemical attack in modern times. The chemicals used included mustard gas, cyanide, and the nerve agents Sarin, Tabun, and VX. Most victims are believed to have died instantly when the chemical agents destroyed their body or paralyzed them. Conventional weapons such as bombs and artillery shells also were used to bombard the town. Over the course of three days, about twelve thousand innocent people died. The fighting continues The embittered Kurds again rose up against

Hussein in 1991 when his forces were involved in the invasion of Kuwait. When the United States military, with help from forces of many nations, repelled the Iraqi forces from Kuwait, a safe haven was set up in northern Iraqi Kurdistan for Kurds. Under the direction of the 292

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Prejudice in Iraq: Shiı´ tes, Sunni, and Kurds

Two million Kurds flee Iraq, settling at camps on the border to wait for humanitarian aid. # DAN IE L LA IN E´ /C OR BI S.

United Nations, humanitarian aid reached the Kurds located along the Iraq-Turkey border. A northern no-fly zone was established to prevent the Iraqi air force from carrying out bombing raids on the Kurds. From October 1991 until the overthrow of the Iraqi government by U.S. forces in 2003, the Kurdish people in the safe haven were left to govern themselves. The area became a place of freedom. Thousands of Iraqi refugees seeking freedom and a more peaceful existence went to the no-fly zone. Basic rights of the people—including those other than Kurds—were protected by the Kurdish leadership. Thousands of destroyed villages and towns in Iraq were rebuilt, and families returned. Following the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the fall of Saddam Hussein, the Kurdish region was the most stable of the entire country. Kurds participated in the democratic election of government officials and voted approval of the Iraqi constitution that protected their rights. In 2006, as Sunni Arabs and Shiı´te Arabs carried out violent Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

293

Prejudice in Iraq: Shiı´ tes, Sunni, and Kurds

actions against one another elsewhere in Iraq, Iraqi Kurdistan remained stable and relatively free of violence. Building a unified Iraq continued to prove difficult. Kurds, Sunnis, and Shiı´tes, though all Muslim, had far different goals. In federal government elections Shiı´te Arabs voted overwhelmingly for candidates of religious parties. If their votes were the only votes, a sectarian (ruled by religious leaders) or theocratic government, such as that of neighboring Iran, would no doubt be established in Iraq. Sunni Arabs had no desire for a sectarian government and were anti-Iranian. Sunni strongly opposed and feared the establishment of a sectarian Shiı´te government in Iraq. Kurds also desired a secular (non-religious) government. However, Iraqi Kurds ideally preferred to be separated from Iraq so that they might establish their own nation: Kurdistan. The newly approved constitution actually protected all three groups, allowing each to partially achieve their goals for governance. All three received a share of Iraq’s oil revenue (income). When Sunni dictators were in power they used oil revenues to finance their own development and the destruction of the northern Kurdish region and the Shiı´te south. Kurds remained secular in their region; the Shiı´tes created a sectarian region in southern Iraq if they desired. Sunnis were to be protected from Shiı´te domination. Whether the newly elected representative government and the constitution could hold the country together remained in question in late 2006.

For More Information BOOKS

Esposito, John L. Oxford History of Islam. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999. Kepel, Gilles. Jihad: The Trail of Political Islam. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2002. Lapidus, Ira M. A History of Islamic Societies. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2002. Peters, Francis E. Muhammad and the Origins of Islam. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1994. PE RIODIC AL S

Di Giovanni, Janine. ‘‘Reaching For Power.’’ National Geographic, June 2004, pp. 2–35. Tavernise, Sabrina. ‘‘Sectarian Hatred Pulls Apart Iraq’s Mixed Towns.’’ New York Times, November 20, 2005. 294

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Prejudice in Iraq: Shiı´ tes, Sunni, and Kurds

WEB SIT ES

‘‘Iraq.’’ CIA World Factbook. https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/ geos/iz.html (accessed on November 22, 2006). ‘‘Saddam’s Chemical Weapons Campaign: Halabja, March 16, 1988.’’ U.S. Department of State. http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/rls/18714.htm (accessed on November 22, 2006).

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

295

15

Multi-Ethnic Conflict: Yugoslavia

t the end of the twentieth century no region of the world better illustrated ethnic conflict than that of the Balkan countries formerly united as Yugoslavia. The term ethnic refers to a group of people recognized by certain characteristics, such as culture, national origin, ancestral history, or certain physical traits. Ethnic prejudice and violence became so dramatic in the region that the term ethnic cleansing was commonly used for the first time. It was used widely by the news media reporting on the conflict. Ethnic cleansing means the deliberate attempt to eliminate an entire ethnic group. Ethnic cleansing is a particular form of genocide (the deliberate destruction of a racial, religious, or cultural group) based on ethnic prejudice.

A

The violence erupted in Yugoslavia following the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1991. The former world superpower had controlled Yugoslavia for more than forty-five years following World War II (1939–45), a war in which the Allied forces including the United States, Britain, and the Soviet Union defeated Germany. Turmoil in the region lasted through much of the 1990s based on long-standing ethnic tensions within the former Yugoslavia. It led to mass killing among ethnic Serbs, Croats, Bosnian Muslims, and Kosovo Albanians as Yugoslavia broke apart. Western nations from Europe and North America responded with force after numerous rounds of peace negotiations failed. The ethnic violence was associated with the rise and fall of Serbian leader Slobodan Milosevic (1941–2006). For many around the world Milosevic became the human face of ethnic cleansing and violence.

Early ethnic tensions Immediately following World War I (1914–18) in 1918 the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes was established. They adopted the name Yugoslavia in 1929. During the 1930s it became apparent that the ethnic 297

Multi-Ethnic Conflict: Yugoslavia

WORDS TO KNOW autonomy: Freedom of a government to make its own decisions known as self-rule.

nation for violating treaties or other undesired activities.

crime against humanity: A criminal offense in international law that refers to murderous actions on such a large scale that it affects the global population as a whole.

federalist state: A national government system in which a central government shares power with provincial governments such as states.

embargo: A ban on shipping of goods and trade; usually an action taken against a foreign

genocide: The deliberate mass destruction of a racial, religious, or cultural group.

groups were unwilling to blend and merge together. The Serbs who made up about 40 percent of the population dominated politics. The Croats and Slovenes resented Serbian aggressiveness. These ethnic groups lived an uneasy coexistence each distrustful of the other. Political assassinations were not unusual.

World War II and ethnic violence Yugoslavia witnessed bitter ethnic relationships and rivalries during World War II. At the beginning of World War II, the Yugoslav leadership formed a military alliance with Nazi Germany. However, political upheaval followed and German dictator, or tyrannical ruler, Adolf Hitler (1889–1945) ordered air attacks on Belgrade. German ground troops arrived on April 6, 1941. The Yugoslav army was defeated in eleven days by forces from Germany and its allies including Italy, Albania, Bulgaria, Romania, and Hungary. They were known as the Axis Powers in addition to Japan. Following the German arrival, Yugoslavia was no longer a single, independent state. Instead, its land was parceled among its conquerors. For example, Italy and Germany shared Slovenia, Italy controlled various other areas including Albania and the Kosovo region of southern Serbia, and Germany and Bulgaria controlled parts of Serbia and Macedonia. Croatia declared itself an independent state and incorporated large sections of Bosnia-Herzegovina with the help of Nazi troops. The Croat leadership, sharing a belief in the fascist (a political system in which a strong central government, usually run by a dictator, controls the nation) Nazi vision of ethnic purity, set out to rid Croatia of Serbs. From 1941 to 1945, the regime of Ante Pavelic´ (1889–1959) expelled 298

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Multi-Ethnic Conflict: Yugoslavia

Serbs from Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina, forced Orthodox Serbs to convert to Catholicism, and placed Serbs in concentration camps just as Germany was doing to Jews. Over 300,000 Serbs and Jews in Croatia were killed or disappeared. Meanwhile violence and murder accompanied the German occupation of northern Slovenia. Slovenes were forcibly removed from their farms and homes and placed in Serbia. Slovene culture was banished and German colonists claimed the land and dwellings left behind by the forced relocation. Various resistance movements formed in the areas occupied by the Axis powers, most notably led by Communist activist Josip Broz Tito (1892–1980), a Croat-Slovenian. (Communism is a political and economic system where a single party controls all aspects of citizens’ lives and private ownership of property is banned.) In July 1941, after the Germans launched a surprise attack on the Soviet Union, armed Communist supporters in the Yugoslav region launched attacks against their German occupiers. They succeeded in holding parts of western Serbia. In December 1943 the Allied forces held a conference at Tehran, Iran, and decided to support Tito’s resistance movement. They provided weapons and supplies. After all enemy armies were driven out of Yugoslavia, Tito became prime minister of a newly reunified government of Yugoslavia and the Communists had positioned themselves to rule.

Communist activist Josip Tito. GE TTY IM AGE S.

In November 1945 the Communist Party captured 90 percent of the vote for the nation’s legislature. The next year, Yugoslavia adopted a constitution modeled upon the Soviet Constitution of 1936. Yugoslavia was a federation (sharing power between a central government and various states) called the Federal Peoples Republic of Yugoslavia comprised of six states or provinces: Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, and Slovenia. Bosnia-Herzegovina’s population included the ethnic groups of Bosnian Muslims, Serbs, and Croatians. Ethnically, Bosnian Muslims were originally the same as Serbs many centuries ago. However, they converted to Islam in the fifteenth century. Bosnian Muslims traditionally Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

299

Multi-Ethnic Conflict: Yugoslavia

Bosnian Muslims Under Yugoslav dictator Josip Tito, Muslims in Bosnia gained status and were eventually accorded equal footing with the other five peoples of Yugoslavia—Serbs, Croats, Slovenes, Montenegrins, and Macedonians. In the 1970s many Islamic places of worship, known as mosques, were built in Bosnia and many Bosnians made the annual religious pilgrimage to Mecca. Following World War II, intermarriage between Muslims and non-Muslims increased, as did secularism (non-religious political leadership) within Bosnia. When Sarajevo was awarded the 1984 Winter Olympic Games by the International Olympic Committee, it was a recognition from the international community of the tolerant and cosmopolitan (worldly) atmosphere that flourished in Bosnia. Bosnian Muslim woman praying. A P IM AG ES .

lived in cities working as professionals and in government. Serbs predominantly populated Serbia with Albanians in its southern region known as Kosovo. The majority of Croatia’s population was Croatian, Slovenia’s population was overwhelmingly Slovene, Montenegro’s was predominately of Montenegrins, and Macedonia was dominated by Macedonians. Despite the language of the constitution and the appearance of Western-style federalism, the government of Yugoslavia was totally controlled by the central Yugoslav Communist Party led by Tito and it was under the direction of the Soviet Union leadership. The party leaders dictated the policies and laws of the nation. Yugoslavia would be controlled by Communists until 1991.

Stirrings of ethnic conflict and the rise of Milosevic Tito ruled until his death on May 4, 1980. His final years were marked with economic, agricultural, and most notably ethnic difficulty. Tito’s death was followed by a decade of attempts to hold the multi-ethnic 300

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Multi-Ethnic Conflict: Yugoslavia

Serbs, Croats, Bosnia, and Kosovo Albanians The people known as Serbs, Bosnian Muslims, and Croats belong to three distinct ethnic groups. All three speak their own dialect of the SerboCroatian language. Originally farmers, after World War II Serbs increasingly migrated to cities where they became wage earners. Serbs are strongly influenced by Eastern European culture. Their religion is Eastern Orthodox. Bosnian Muslims, sometimes referred to as Turks, were originally ethnically the same as Serbs, but converted to the Muslim religion in the fifteenth

century. Bosnian Muslims live mostly in cities and are professionals, business owners, and government workers. Croats are predominantly rural farmers, but many live in cities of southern Croatia. Croats are strongly influenced by the Western European culture in literature, art, science, and education. They are geographically located near the Italian cities of Genoa and Venice. Croatian culture reflects Italian culture. Croats are Roman Catholic.

country together. While the Slovenians and Croats sought increasing independence in economic policies and political decisions, the Serbs supported a stronger federal government. In addition, Albanians in Kosovo voiced demands for greater autonomy (freedom to self-rule). A movement for recognition as a republic began in Kosovo. Slavic Muslims in Bosnia-Herzegovina also asserted their vision of a distinct nation. In March 1981 Albanian students demonstrated in protest of their poor living conditions at the University of Prisˇtina. This protest gained the support of fellow Albanians in Kosovo who made greater demands for republican (a country governed by the consent of the people and for the benefit of the people through elected representatives) government in place of Communist rule. The protests also increased anti-Serb sentiment. The Serbs, who numbered far fewer than the Albanians, countered with accusations of discrimination, terror, and genocide. The Albanian revolt was eventually stopped by the Yugoslav army, but ethnic relations in Kosovo continued to grow more contentious. The need for police action in Kosovo and the resulting rising costs for that action paid by the citizens of Slovenia and Croatia created resentment. Slovenia became the center of non-Communist political groups. They campaigned for nuclear disarmament of the world’s superpowers, feminism (a belief in the social equality of women), and rights for minority groups. Slovenian politicians blamed Serbs for standing in the Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

301

Multi-Ethnic Conflict: Yugoslavia

way of political and economic reform. Moderate Communist leaders tried to lessen the tension between Serbs and Slovenes. Into the growing chaos and tension stepped Slobodan Milosevic (1941–2006), an ambitious Communist party activist. A Serb, Milosevic emerged as Serbia’s leader in 1989 and began pushing to expand Serbia’s borders wherever Serbs lived. Milosevic began to violently enforce his dream of a greater Serbia. First focusing within Serbia, he used the Albanian conflicts in Kosovo and the grievances of the Serbs as excuses to remove the former supporters of Tito from the Serbian Communist Party. He assumed its top leadership position. Milosevic persuaded many that Serbs had been the victims of discrimination at the hands of the Tito supporters and that the time had come to assert control over Kosovo and Vojvodina, the northernmost province of Serbia. In 1989 Milosevic and his supporters crafted a new Serbian constitution that eliminated any autonomy enjoyed by Kosovo and Vojvodina. In addition, a new established pro-Milosevic government in Montenegro expanded his control over four of the eight seats in the collective presidency of Yugoslavia that was created following Tito’s death.

The breakup of Yugoslavia In 1990 with the demise of the Soviet Union and its influence, Yugoslavia began to break apart.

Ethnic war begins Serbs within the province of Croatia, armed and financed by the Serbiandominated Yugoslav National Army, revolted in August 1990. They blockaded roads and train tracks. Order quickly dissolved as the local Croatian government began trying to disarm the Serb population and dismiss them from employment. In January 1991 the Yugoslav National Army started arresting Croat officials for their anti-Serbian actions while talks aimed at avoiding civil war broke down. Armed conflicts increased as more talks between Croat leaders and Milosevic only further emphasized their differing points of view. Finally, Croatia along with Slovenia declared independence from the Yugoslav federation on June 25, 1991. Though the Croat leaders promised equal rights for Serbs within the country, conflicts immediately broke out in Croatia. Serbs living in Croatia, about 12 percent of the population, joined with the nearby Serbian military to halt the independence move by the Croats. Serbs from Serbia and Croatia immediately began attacking Croatian targets with weapons while the Yugoslav National Army provided air support. Able to fend off the Serb forces 302

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Multi-Ethnic Conflict: Yugoslavia

through the rest of 1991, Croatia received official recognition as an independent nation by other European nations on January 15, 1992. Following the path of Croatia and Slovenia, Bosnia-Herzegovina led by the Bosnian Muslims and Croats living in Bosnia and Macedonia also announced in late 1991 their intention to break from the Yugoslav federation. As a result, the war expanded to Bosnia-Herzegovina when Bosnian Serbs joined with the Serbian military to halt the move toward independence. After engineering the control of Kosovo, Milosevic used his appeal to Serbian nationalism (a belief that a particular nation is superior to other nations) to attract support of Serbs in Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina. Croatian Serbs attempted to establish an autonomous (the right to political independence) Serbian cultural society in Croatia. However, this effort only served to increase public support for a Croatian nationalist government that reaffirmed the sovereignty of Croatia. As a result, the long history of ethnic differences among the Serbs, Bosnian Muslims, and Croats exploded into ethnic war over who would govern whom and what territory would be controlled. All three feared dominance by the other. They believed that dominance by one of the others would mean forced changes in their ethnic traditions. During the winter of 1991-92, the Yugoslav National Army built artillery camps around Bosnian government-controlled areas, including the city of Sarajevo. The Serbian leader put in place by Milosevic created a Serbian national assembly in place of the Bosnian parliament. Bosnian leaders held free elections in their controlled areas. The vote was nearly unanimous for independence from Yugoslavia. In response, Serbian paramilitary groups began setting up barricades in Sarajevo and taking control of sections of Bosnia. The Yugoslav National Army also began using Bosnian territory to conduct offensive operations against Croatia, while secretly arming Bosnia Serbs and disarming the local Bosnian defense forces. The resulting war was brutal on all sides. Serbian forces tortured, raped, and murdered Croats and Bosnian Muslims in Serb-controlled regions. Croats and Bosnian Muslims fought back with equal brutality. Homes and businesses were looted and destroyed. Churches including hundreds of mosques, museums, public buildings, architectural and historical landmarks, and cemeteries, all symbols of ethnic identity, were destroyed. Included was the Oriental Institute in Sarajevo, which had housed and preserved thousands of valuable documents and artifacts chronicling the Ottoman history of Bosnia. On April 6, 1992, Bosnia-Herzegovina joined Croatia and Slovenia in gaining international recognition. The total disintegration of the Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

303

Multi-Ethnic Conflict: Yugoslavia

The once beautiful city of Sarajevo, which hosted the televised 1984 Winter Olympics, was reduced to a death trap with residents living in basements. MR . TE UN VO ET EN.

former Yugoslav federation was nearly complete. In only one year after the fall of Soviet influence the previous six Yugoslav states became five independent countries. Only Serbia and Montenegro remained together as one nation called Serbia. The new nations of Slovenia and Macedonia proved somewhat stable, but conflict raged among the Serbs, Bosnians, and Croats in the other three nations of Serbia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, and Croatia. The ethnic war would eventually be the bloodiest war in Europe since World War II. During the following three years of war the fighting grew more unpredictable. Local paramilitary bands formed, some no more than groups of thugs, and fought neighborhood to neighborhood. It was frequently difficult to tell who—Serb, Croat, or Bosnian—was fighting whom. The once beautiful city of Sarajevo, which hosted the televised 1984 Winter Olympics, was reduced to a death trap with residents living in basements. It was destroyed. After two years of the fighting that began 304

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Multi-Ethnic Conflict: Yugoslavia

in Bosnia in 1992, more than two hundred thousand Bosnians died and two million more became refugees.

The West steps in During the rise in tensions in 1991, Western nations began looking upon the chaotic situation in Yugoslavia with increasing concern. In June 1991 U.S. secretary of state James A. Baker (1930–) visited the region and declared U.S. support for a unified Yugoslav federation. At that time, Baker stated that the United States would not recognize an independent Croatia or Slovenia. However, the United States would also oppose any use of force to prevent their secession (withdrawal from political control). Months prior to the recognition of these independent states, in September 1991 a conference of European nations fashioned a plan for peace and presented it to the various combatants. The plan was called the Carington-Cutiliero Plan after its authors, Lord Carrington (1919–) of Great Britain and Portuguese ambassador Jose Cutiliero. The specific aim of the conference was to prevent Bosnia-Herzegovina from slipping into violent conflict already involving Croatia. The proposed plan offered a revised system of government in which power was shared among ethnic groups. It eliminated a Yugoslav centralized government. The local ethnic communities would self-govern. For example, Bosnia-Herzegovina’s districts would be classified according to ethnicity. The various groups initially accepted the plan, but before long Bosnian Muslim leader Alija Izetbegovic (1925–2003) decided to withdraw his support and the plan died.

United Nations’ involvement Despite attempting to stay personally removed from involvement in the fighting in early 1992, Milosevic was still seen as the culprit. Many in the West began placing blame for the fighting and violence on Milosevic. He was described as a modern-day Hitler in pursuit of creating what was called greater Serbia, just as Hitler sought an expansion of Germany across Europe. In response to the violence, the United Nations (UN; an international organization founded in 1945 composed of most of the countries in the world) imposed a full-scale embargo (a government order preventing trade of goods with a particular foreign country) upon Yugoslavia. Troops under the flag of the United Nations enforced the embargo. After the first fighting that took place in Bosnia in the spring of 1992, the frontlines became relatively fixed though the continued fighting was very bloody. In 1993 the United Nations established clearly marked Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

305

Multi-Ethnic Conflict: Yugoslavia

locations under its protection called safe havens. The UN established these places near the cities of Sarajevo, Gorzˇade, and Srebencia.

Two more peace plans In early 1993 UN special envoy Cyrus Vance (1917–2002), who had earlier served as U.S. secretary of state in the late 1970s, and European Community leader Lord Owen (1938–) began peace negotiations with the warring sides in Bosnia. Vance and Owen proposed dividing Bosnia into ten semi-autonomous (partially independent) regions. The UN supported the plan, but the Serb-dominated Bosnian assembly totally rejected it. This plan was the last peace proposal calling for a united, ethnically mixed Bosnia-Herzegovina. A later plan fashioned by Lord Owen and Vance’s replacement, Norwegian foreign minister Thorvald Stoltenberg (1931–), called for dividing Bosnia into three separate independent states. This proposal allotted to Bosnian Serbs 52 percent of the land, 30 percent to Muslims, and 18 percent to Bosnian Croats. This alternative, offered in late July 1993, was also rejected.

NATO military arrives With all peace negotiations failing, in 1994 the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) became involved in the conflict. NATO is a military defense alliance established in April 1949 among Western European and North American nations. Showing its resolve to keep Serbian forces out of Bosnia, NATO jets shot down four Serb aircraft when the Serb planes violated airspace that the UN had identified as offlimits to warring aircraft, known as a ‘‘no fly zone.’’ Despite the NATO presence, the Serbs continued their offensive and began air attacks in November 1994 against Bosnian government installations and areas that the UN had earlier declared as safe. Following a NATO air raid on a Serb air base in Croatia, Bosnian Serbs seized nearly 450 UN peacekeepers as hostages. They also fired missiles at two British aircraft patrolling under the command of NATO. Despite these Serbian actions, UN undersecretary Kofi Annan (1938–) refused a request from NATO to intensify air attacks.

A short-lived ceasefire In December 1994 the warring factions in Bosnia agreed to a temporary ceasefire. Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic (1945–) invited former U.S. president Jimmy Carter (1920–; served 1977–81) to meet with 306

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Multi-Ethnic Conflict: Yugoslavia

leaders of the warring sides. Carter agreed to attend as a private citizen, not as a representative of the U.S. government. Bosnian president Alija Izetbegovic announced that Bosnia would agree only to a short ceasefire. A longer ceasefire agreement would appear as if his government was accepting the territorial gains made by the Serbs. During the ceasefire in February 1995 a group of five nations proposed another peace plan for Bosnia. The group consisted of France, Germany, Great Britain, Russia, and the United States. They requested that Milosevic recognize the international borders of Bosnia and Croatia and accept a division within Bosnia that would give 49 percent of Bosnia’s territory to Bosnian Serbs. At that time, the Serbs held 70 percent of the country’s land. In return for his cooperation, the group of nations assured Milosevic that international sanctions (formal restrictions) against Yugoslavia would be lifted. Milosevic rejected the offer.

Ethnic violence escalates After lasting only four months the ceasefire negotiated by Carter was abruptly broken in March 1995 when the army of Bosnia and Herzegovina launched an offensive against Serb forces. Later that month, American newspapers revealed the contents of a report made by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). The report concluded that 90 percent of the ethnic cleansing taking place in Bosnia was by the Serbs. Later that spring, Bosnian Serbs began seizing weapons from UN safe areas and once again taking peacekeepers as hostages. In July 1995 the Muslim community of Srebrenica in eastern Bosnia-Herzegovina fell to the Serbs who then perpetrated horrible crimes against the people of that town. Nearly eight thousand men and boys were separated from their wives, sisters, daughters, and mothers and killed by Serb soldiers. Following the executions, the dead were buried in mass graves and later dug up and reburied in other graves in a futile attempt to cover up the crime. Even into the twenty-first century many Serb groups continued to deny this act of genocide ever took place. Another bloody event also soon took place that summer in Croatia. In August 1995 Croats attacked the Serb-held Krajina region inside Croatia. They drove out approximately 170,000 Serbs in just three days. This action was said to be the greatest act of ethnic cleansing during the fighting in the former Yugoslavia at that time. Violence continued. On August 28 a Sarajevo marketplace was the target of a bomb, killing thirty-seven people. In reaction to the bombing, on September 1 General Bernard Janiver of France, commander of UN forces Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

307

Multi-Ethnic Conflict: Yugoslavia

A Muslim woman cries in front of her destroyed house in a villager near Srebenica in 2002. # R EU TER S/ CO RBI S.

in the former Yugoslavia, told the head of the Bosnian Serb military, General Ratko Mladic (1943–), that the Serbs must stop any further attacks and withdraw from Sarajevo. NATO declared this same order as an ultimatum (a final demand followed by a penalty if not met) and announced a deadline of September 4. On September 5, supported by an order from the UN Security Council, NATO planes began bombing Serbian-held positions. With this air cover, Bosnian Croat, Croatian, and Bosnian Muslim forces captured large areas of land previously held by Serbs.

Dayton Peace Accords With the more intensive NATO air strikes, the Bosnian-Serb leadership quickly decided to give Milosevic authority to negotiate on their behalf at peace talks held in Dayton, Ohio, at the Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in November 1995. Serbs, Bosnian Muslims, and Croats were all represented at the talks. Croatian president Franjo Tudjman (1922–1999) and Bosnian president Izetbegovic represented their interests. Assistant 308

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Multi-Ethnic Conflict: Yugoslavia

Secretary of State Richard Holbrooke (1941–) represented the United States. The conference lasted three weeks. The resulting Dayton Peace Accords led to an agreement on Bosnia and eastern Slovenia, and the remaining Serb holdings in Croatia. The borders of Bosnia were not changed. However, the republic was formally recognized as consisting of two parts—a Muslim-Croat federation and a Serbian republic. The terms of the agreement called for peace to be enforced by sixty thousand NATO troops, known as IFOR (Implementation Force). The Dayton Peace Accords were initially agreed to on November 21 and the full, formal agreement was signed on December 14. The agreement formally ended the conflict in Bosnia.

War crimes tribunal Ultimately two hundred thousand Bosnian Muslims, Croats, and Serbs were killed during these several years of ethnic conflict. Over one million had fled their homes. The world was dismayed to see a seemingly civilized region transformed into a bloody ethnic battlefield. The United Nations responded by establishing the first international tribunal or court in 1995 to prosecute war crimes. The UN War Crime tribunal was permanently located in The Hague, Netherlands. The tribunal indicted twenty-one Serbs for crimes against humanity for actions taken in the war in Bosnia. Only one of the twenty-one individuals indicted was then in custody. One of the accused faced an additional charge. Zeljko Meakic (1964–), a former commander of a concentration camp (large prison camp run by the Nazis where prisoners endured overcrowding, malnutrition, disease, and brutality), was accused of genocide in connection with the mass killing of Muslims and Croats during the war. This was the first time an international war crimes tribunal had formally charged an individual with genocide. Because the Serbians agreed so quickly to peace terms after NATO air strikes, many in the West now saw Milosevic as a figure who would stabilize the region. U.S. president Bill Clinton (1946–; served 1993– 2001) even supported Milosevic’s presidency of Serbia despite a growing resistance in the general region to Milosevic’s leadership. The reaction of Milosevic and the Serbs to peace also caused Western nations to wrongly assume that the reaction of Serbs would be the same when the powder keg that was Kosovo exploded in 1999. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

309

Multi-Ethnic Conflict: Yugoslavia

Developing ethnic conflict in Kosovo Serbia includes the once independent region called Kosovo. In Serbia’s southwestern corner two million Albanians called Kosovo home in the 1990s. Serbs made up 10 to 15 percent of Kosovo’s population. Immediately southwest of Kosovo is the independent country of Albania. Both Serbs and Albanians claimed ancestral rights to Kosovo. They each claimed their ancestors were the first to settle the area. In the mid-1980s Albanians in Kosovo began a separatist (seeking to form a new nation from one currently existing) movement in response to growing religious and ethnic tension between Christian Serbs and Albanian Muslims. In 1989 Albanians tried to win greater governing rights of Kosovo. Milosevic, who had just risen to power as president of Yugoslavia of which Serbia was a member state, denounced these efforts. In retaliation he announced changes in the Kosovo government in March 1989. Most state employees who were Albanian were removed from their jobs. Approximately 115,000 Albanians were displaced from employment and replaced by Serbs. After political changes proposed by the Serbs were ratified (formally approved) in a public referendum across the republic of Serbia, Kosovo’s political institutions were disbanded altogether by Milosevic. In 1990 Milosevic completely abolished the autonomy of Kosovo. Milosevic ordered the Serbian military to close down Albanian businesses, hospitals, schools, and newspapers. The Albanian-language newspaper was banned from publishing, and television and radio broadcasts in Albanian were shut down. The university in Kosovo was purged (eliminated) of Albanian professors and Albanian students were expelled. He also imposed a curfew and declared a state of emergency due to violent demonstrations and the deaths of twenty-four people.

Resistance to Serb dominance grows in Kosovo Resistance to Milosevic’s actions grew in Kosovo. The Democratic League of Kosovo led by writer Ibrahim Rugova (1944–2006) advocated peaceful resistance to the disappearance of Kosovo autonomy. Rugova called for the boycott of public elections, resistance to the compulsory (required acceptance) Yugoslav military draft, refusal to pay taxes, and establishment of separate schools and other institutions for Albanians in Kosovo. A shadow Kosovo government (a government waiting to take over control from another government) was established and in a Kosovo 310

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Multi-Ethnic Conflict: Yugoslavia

referendum held in late 1991 Rugova was elected its president. Serbia declared the election illegal and voided the result. Largely thanks to the civil disobedience practiced by Rugova’s followers, Kosovo avoided the violence that at the time characterized Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina even though many Albanians within Kosovo were extremely frustrated. Frustration increased when the 1995 Dayton Accords, which ended the war in Bosnia-Herzegovina, did not address the political status of Kosovo. Rugova had lobbied the United Nations and the West for a peacekeeping force in Kosovo, but was largely ignored.

The Kosovo Liberation Army Continuing ethnic repression and systematic violence at the hands of Serbs motivated many Albanians to conclude that armed resistance was necessary to change the situation. In 1993 Kosovo Albanians formed the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA). KLA members began attacks against the Serbian police called the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia police (FRY). KLA activities continued through the following years including four attacks against Serbian civilians in April 1996. Serbs accused the KLA of terrorism. Despite the growing violence, nations outside of the region remained little concerned and did not come to the aid of the ethnically oppressed Albanians. The notion that the Dayton Accords had solved the region’s problems was widespread and believed by many foreign governments in the West.

Kosovo’s president, Ibrahim Rugova. AP I MA GE S.

The situation grew dire in 1997 as both sides became embroiled in what amounted to a guerilla war (irregular hostilities) against one another. Serbian authorities decided to deploy Serb armed forces against not only the KLA, but Albanian citizens. The result was more bloodshed and continuous reprisals. By the summer of 1998 over 300,000 Albanians had fled Kosovo for Macedonia. This threatened Macedonia’s tranquility and the peace of its surrounding neighbors. A ceasefire was attempted in Kosovo, but it failed as Serbs ignored international pleas to stop the violence. The FRY had begun an ethnic cleansing of Albanians remaining in Kosovo. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

311

Multi-Ethnic Conflict: Yugoslavia

NATO forces take action again NATO decided to take action in 1999 when it became clear that genocide and other atrocities were being committed in Kosovo. The organization attempted to set up a military peacekeeping force to forcibly contain both sides while scheduling a peace treaty conference at Rambouillet outside of Paris. NATO also threatened to launch air strikes should the Serb forces continue their violence against Albanians. The talks at Rambouillet saw little success. On March 18, 1999, the Albanian, American, and British delegations signed the Rambouillet Accords. This agreement called for NATO to administer Kosovo as an autonomous province of Serbia, place thirty thousand troops on the ground, and operate with immunity (protected from legal requirements) from Serbian law. Serbia and Russia, which also participated in the international conference, refused to sign the accords. Following the Rambouillet conference, the genocide campaign in Kosovo intensified. From March 24 to June 20, 1999, the FRY murdered thousands of Albanians. The precise number may never be known; however, 3,000 Albanians were still missing in 2006. Thousands more Albanians fled to Macedonia and Albania. By April 1999 it was estimated that over 800,000 people had left Kosovo. In reaction to the violence, NATO began air strikes in Kosovo in late March targeting Serb encampments in Kosovo and other strategic locations. The United States was the primary member of the NATO air force. Some 38,000 combat missions were flown by mid-June. The goal of the air strikes was to remove the Serb forces from Kosovo and make it possible for the displaced Albanians to return.

Kosovo fighting ends By early April Milosevic saw that NATO air power was too much to overcome. In addition, the nations of NATO began seriously contemplating a ground invasion of Kosovo to finish the campaign. Finally, Finnish and Russian peace negotiators convinced Milosevic to end the violence and accept a military presence in Kosovo under UN leadership but administered by NATO. NATO casualties during the campaign were extraordinarily limited. No deaths were recorded as a result of combat operations. The alliance lost only three helicopters, thirty-two unmanned vehicles, and five aircraft, all of them American. Similarly, the Serbian armed forces sustained 312

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Multi-Ethnic Conflict: Yugoslavia

few deaths and loss of vehicles and planes. However, around 1,500 civilians were killed during the NATO air raids and other operations. By the end of 1999 nearly all of the over 800,000 Albanian refugees (people who flee in search of protection or shelter) had returned to Kosovo. However, much of the Serb population fled in fear of reprisal attacks. The number of Albanians killed by the Serbs remained unknown. Apparent mass graves were found on Serbian military bases. Many bodies were also found in the Danube River. The largest mass grave was found in the nearby Bulgarian village of Dragodan. It became evident that many of the bodies in the mass graves were earlier removed in an attempt to cover up the atrocities.

International tribunal at The Hague formed In 1993 the UN Security Council established an international tribunal at The Hague in the Netherlands to prosecute war crimes allegedly committed during the conflict in Bosnia-Herzegovina. The tribunal was known as the International Court Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY). It had jurisdiction (legal authority) over crimes committed in Yugoslavia since 1991. The maximum sentence the court could impose was life imprisonment. The court began its operation on November 7, 1993. It first indicted (formal criminal charges) a former Serb commander of a detention camp located in Bosnia. The commander was indicted for crimes against humanity. Milosevic was indicted in May 1999 for crimes against humanity in Kosovo. He was the first sitting head of state in history to be indicted for war crimes. Milosevic’s Bosnian Serb army commander Mladic was also indicted. Later indictments were issued for violating the customs or laws of war, breaches of the Geneva Convention (international law addressing humanitarian concerns) in Croatia, and genocide in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Milosevic attempted to gain another term as president of the muchreduced Yugoslav Federation in September 2000 but lost. He contested the election result, but a mass demonstration in Belgrade on October 5, 2000, eroded Milosevic’s remaining authority. The newly elected president took office the next day. The Serbian government arrested Milosevic in April 2001 on charges of corruption and handed him over to the ICTY, an act Milosevic and his supporters claimed was illegal.

Trial of Milosevic The trial of Milosevic began in February 2002. Because of Milosevic’s position as a head of state, his war crimes trial received a great deal of Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

313

Multi-Ethnic Conflict: Yugoslavia

Slobodan Milosevic’s war crimes trial received a great deal of world attention. AP I MA GES .

world attention. Milosevic accused the tribunal of attacking him in an evil and hostile manner. He refused to recognize the jurisdiction of the tribunal, a claim that gained support among many Serbs in his homeland. They viewed the indictment as a violation of national sovereignty. During the trial, however, Milosevic sat and listened to testimony from Bosnians and Croats that supported the indictments. The prosecution case took two years to review the wars in Croatia, Bosnia, and Kosovo. During the presentation of the prosecution’s case, Milosevic became increasingly ill, suffering from high blood pressure and serious bout of influenza that worsened his heart condition. The trial was delayed periodically due to his declining health. Finally, in 2004 it was time for Milosevic to present his defense. His defense attorneys, however, attempted to resign because Milosevic was uncooperative with them. After numerous delays Milosevic’s trial ended abruptly on March 11, 2006, when he was found dead in his jail cell. The Hague tribunal at the 314

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Multi-Ethnic Conflict: Yugoslavia

time was reviewing his request to further delay the trial in order for him to travel to Russia for medical treatment to relieve high blood pressure and heart difficulties. Some on the tribunal were not convinced that Russian officials could prevent Milosevic from escaping once he arrived there. Following his death questions arose as to whether Milosevic was poisoned as he often suggested he would be. However, medical examination of his body found no irregularities in his bloodstream. It appeared that Milosevic died solely from complications resulting from his deteriorating heart condition. The ICTY handed down its final indictment in 2005. The ICTY had indicted 161 people since it began in 1993. It planned to conclude all trials in 2008 and all appeals of its rulings by 2010.

For More Information B O O KS

Bell-Fialkoff, Andrew. Ethnic Cleansing. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 1999. Cohen, Lenard J. Serpent in the Bosom: The Rise and Fall of Slobodan Milosevic. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 2002. Judah, Tim. Kosovo: War and Revenge. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2000. Lieberman, Benjamin. Terrible Fate: Ethnic Cleansing in the Making of Modern Europe. New York: Ivan R. Dee, 2006. Naimark, Norman M. Ethnic Cleansing in Twentieth-Century Europe. Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press, 2002. Sell, Louis. Slobodan Milosevic and the Destruction of Yugoslavia. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2002. Weine, Stevan M. When History Is a Nightmare: Lives and Memories of Ethnic Cleansing in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Piscataway, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1999. Woodward, Susan L. Balkan Tragedy: Chaos and Dissolution after the Cold War. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 1995. WEB SIT ES

‘‘A Brief History of Ethnic Cleansing.’’ http://www.foreignaffairs.org/ 19930601faessay5199/andrew-bell-fialkoff/a-brief-history-of-ethniccleansing.html (accessed on November 22, 2006). ‘‘The Dayton Peace Accords on Bosnia.’’ University of Minnesota Human Rights Library. http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/icty/dayton/daytonaccord.html (accessed on November 22, 2006). ‘‘Milosevic Trial Public Archive.’’ http://hague.bard.edu/ (accessed on November 22, 2006).

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

315

16

The Arab-Israeli Conflict

he land located along the eastern shore of the Mediterranean Sea is at the center of a long-standing conflict between Arabs and Jews. Both groups of people claim territorial rights over this relatively small piece of land measuring approximately 10,000 square miles, about the size of the state of Maryland. These claims are rooted in history and seek to establish who can rightfully say that this territory is their homeland (a group’s native land).

T

The land in question has gone by various names: Palestine, Israel, and Judea, depending on which group held control. The struggle for the land has often degenerated into violence and bloodshed that has passed down through many generations. The origins of the Arab-Israeli conflict are extremely complex and difficult to understand given the differing claims and counter-claims made by Arabs and Israelis, as each has interests in controlling this region of the world. This conflict is based in religion and politics as well as the strong human desire to have a secure homeland. Because Palestinian Arabs and Israelis strongly feel that they each deserve a nation on the same land to the exclusion of the other, each group often demonstrates its hatred and mistrust for the other. These attitudes are expressions of prejudice so deeply held that Palestinians and Israelis have often participated in horrific acts of violence against each other. While the Arab-Israeli conflict is a struggle over a small piece of land with few natural resources, it has ignited a clash in the larger Middle East and the countries where Islam (the major religious faith of Muslims in the world) is the predominant religion. Indeed, the Arab-Israeli conflict has at times caused the world’s superpowers to choose sides against each other. Therefore, the struggle between Palestinian Arabs and Jews has threatened to spill over into a much larger global conflict. This longstanding conflict began with the establishment of Israel as an independent state in 1948. 317

The Arab-Israeli Conflict

WORDS TO KNOW Diaspora: The dispersal of Jews to other countries after being forced to live outside their traditional homeland. Holocaust: Literally meaning a burnt sacrifice, the program pursued by the Nazis to eradicate Jews from the world leading to the murder of six million European Jews, Gypsies, Catholics, and homosexuals.

nationalism: One nation promotes its interests over the interests of other nations. refugee: A person seeking safety in a foreign country to escape persecution. Zionism: Movement that arose with the aim of reestablishing a Jewish state in Palestine.

The land of historic Israel and Palestine has been repeatedly invaded and conquered over the past 2,500 hundred years. According to history Hebrew tribes entered this land in the thirteenth century BCE . The abbreviation BCE refers to the time before the Christian era on calendars, or before the time of the birth of Christ around two thousand years ago. From the eleventh century to the sixth century BCE , these tribes were known as the Israelites, and they ruled the land. At the end of this period, the Israelites (or Jews) were conquered and at times carried away as slaves by the Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, and Greeks. In 168 BCE , the Jews overcame the control of the Greeks and established an independent Jewish state called Judea. By 63 BCE , the Romans were the unwelcome occupiers of Judea. In the year 135, most all of the Jews were expelled from Judea by the Romans as the result of a violent uprising led by a Jewish revolutionary named Bar Kochba. The following are two historical timelines that give an overview of historic Israel’s or Palestine’s development to its current political arrangement. From these timelines, several key features provide a solid understanding of the Arab-Israeli conflict. It is important to remember that the Israeli side believes the chronology should begin early in the history of historic Israel, while the Arab side believes the proper starting point for the chronology should begin in the late nineteenth century. The chronology Israelis think is most accurate and fair would include the following events: • 1800 BCE : Abraham migrates to Canaan (ancient name for land of Palestine) • 70 CE : Romans destroy Jerusalem and much of the Jewish homeland; beginning of the Diaspora 318

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

The Arab-Israeli Conflict

• 135: Bar Kochba revolt suppressed by the Romans; Jews expelled from Palestine • 632: Islamic armies conquer large areas of land, including Palestine • 691: Dome of the Rock mosque built on the site of the Jewish Temple destroyed by the Romans • 1516–1918: Ottoman Empire rules over Palestine • 1860–1904: Life of Theodor Herzl, founder of the Zionist movement • 1882: First group of Jews migrate to Palestine • 1947–48: Warfare between Jewish and Palestinian communities begins • 1948: Israel declares itself to be an independent state • 1956: Outbreak of war between Israel and neighboring Arab countries • 1964: Founding of the Palestine Liberation Organization • 1967: Outbreak of the Six-Day War between Israel and neighboring Arab countries • 1973: Outbreak of the Yom Kippur War between Israel and neighboring Arab countries • 1978: Camp David Accord signed, involving U.S. president Jimmy Carter, Egyptian president Anwar Sadat, and Israeli prime minister Menachem Begin • 1982: Israeli invasion of Lebanon • 1987: Outbreak of intifada • 1988: Declaration of the independent state of Palestine • 1989: Yasser Arafat elected president of Palestine • 2000: Outbreak of intifada • 2004: Death of Yasser Arafat • 2006: Hamas wins surprising election in Palestine The chronology Arabs think is most accurate and fair would include the following events: • 1882 Beginning of modern Jewish immigration to Palestine • 1897: First Zionist Congress • 1917: Balfour Declaration issued Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

319

The Arab-Israeli Conflict

• 1918: All of Palestine occupied by Allied forces • 1936: Arab revolt against British rule and Zionism • 1939–45: World War II and the extermination of six million Jews (Holocaust) in Europe • 1947: Palestine problem submitted to the United Nations • 1948: Israel declares itself as an independent nation; war breaks out in Palestine • 1950: West Bank united with Jordan; Gaza Strip administered by Egypt • 1956: Outbreak of war between Israel and neighboring Arab countries • 1964: Founding of the Palestine Liberation Organization • 1967: Outbreak of war between Israel and neighboring Arab countries • 1973: Outbreak of war between Israel and neighboring Arab countries • 1978: Camp David Accord signed, involving U.S. president Jimmy Carter, Egyptian president Anwar Sadat, and Israeli prime minister Menachem Begin • 1982: Israeli invasion of Lebanon • 1987: Outbreak of intifada • 1988: Declaration of the independent state of Palestine • 1989: Yasser Arafat elected president of Palestine • 2000: Outbreak of intifada • 2005: Death of Yasser Arafat • 2006: Hamas wins surprising election in Palestine It can be readily seen that the division between the Palestinian and Israeli perspectives is centered on the beginning of the chronology. While Israelis think a much longer view of history gives the right answers to the questions regarding the status of Israel, Palestinians believe that a more just approach is to keep the discussion in the modern period. These differing points of view have proven to play a key role in the attempts to create peace between Israelis and Palestinians by discovering who has rights to the land. Therefore, coming to a conclusion about whether the Arabs or Israelis have a stronger set of claims to Palestine depends in part on one’s view of history. This means trying to 320

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

The Arab-Israeli Conflict

answer the question about who are the legitimate residents of Palestine based on who lived there first.

The development of Zionism Although the Jews were systematically removed from Judea by the Romans, many Jews clung to the dream of returning to their homeland to reestablish the nation of Israel. This idea gathered strength in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Led by the thoughts of Leon Pinsker (1821–1891), a Russian Jew, and Theodor Herzl (1860–1904), a Jewish journalist residing in Austria, many Jews urged creating a Jewish state in Palestine. This movement became known as Zionism. Zionism is defined as the reuniting of Jewish people in Palestine. The idea of Zionism, named after a hill in biblical Jerusalem named Zion, grew through the nineteenth century. Zionism was prominent in Eastern Europe where persecution against Jews was the strongest. Zionist ideals were powerful enough to cause many European Jews to migrate to Palestine.

Jewish journalist Theodor Herzl. C OUR TE SY O F TH E LI BR AR Y OF CON GR ESS .

The growing number of Jews arriving in Palestine caused increasing strife and tension between the immigrants (people who leave their country of origin to reside permanently in another) and the Palestinian Arabs, who were the long-standing residents of the area. Generally, Arabs were not opposed to Jewish emigration to Palestine so long as it was not rooted in political motives. They did not want Jews to build up political power to rule over Arabs or establish a separate country. The greatest numbers of Arabs living in Palestine were Muslims (followers of Islam) who conquered the region in the seventh century. Because the Jews living in Palestine adhered to Judaism, the stage was set for the Arab-Israeli conflict to take on its religious characteristics. These religions have many common roots. Islam and Judaism (as well as Christianity) regard such important religious figures as Abraham, Moses, and the Hebrew prophets as key to their respective faiths. But the conflict between Jews and Arabs has intensified in part because both Judaism and Islam claim a God-given right to the land of Palestine. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

321

The Arab-Israeli Conflict

Fall of the Ottoman Empire From the sixteenth to the early twentieth century, Palestine was ruled by the Ottoman Empire. This empire was Turkish in origin and existed from 1299 to 1922. At the height of the empire’s strength it ruled the Middle East, parts of North Africa, and even a portion of southeastern Europe. The Ottomans aligned themselves with Germany during World War I (1914–18). After Germany and its allies were defeated, control of Palestine was in the hands of Great Britain.

British promises to the Arabs and Jews As reward for siding with Britain and its allies during the war, promises were made to both Zionists and Arabs that they would have their own homelands. Sir Henry McMahon (1862–1949), the British high commissioner in Egypt, exchanged letters with a ruler on the Arabian Peninsula promising that a new Arab nation would be formed from the lands of the former Ottoman Empire. Simultaneously, a similar promise was made to the Jews in the form of the Balfour Declaration (1917). This declaration reads as follows: His Majesty’s Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use his best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being a clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.

With the approval of the League of Nations (a world political body dedicated to resolving disputes between nations that was later replaced by the United Nations), the British enacted the principles of the Balfour Declaration and partitioned (divided) Palestine into two separate regions. For this reason, many Arabs believe they have been treated in a prejudicial way by strong western countries. For them, this was cause to think that many westerners see Arabs as an inferior group of people. The larger portion of land became known as the Emirate of Transjordan (now the modern nation of Jordan). The remaining territory, bordered by Lebanon and Syria in the north and Egypt in the south, was still called Palestine. The Arab-Israeli conflict has mostly taken place in this limited territory. Prior to World War II, Great Britain maintained a policy designed to limit the number of European Jews migrating to Palestine. However, this policy was only partially effective. After World War II ended, the world became aware of the Holocaust. Many people began to believe that it was 322

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

The Arab-Israeli Conflict

necessary to create an independent Jewish state. The Holocaust, literally meaning a burnt sacrifice, was the program pursued by the German Nazis to primarily eradicate Jews from Europe. The Holocaust led to the murdering of six million European Jews in addition to millions of other peoples, such as Gypsies, homosexuals, and Catholics. In 1947, the United Nations passed Resolution 187, dividing Palestine into two new states, one for Jews and one for Arabs. In 1948, the Jewish state of Israel came into existence. This move angered not only the Palestinian Arabs but Arabs in other countries surrounding Israel.

Israel at war with the Arab world From 1948 to 1949, Israel fought a war against its Arab neighbors as a direct result of declaring its independence in 1948. This war is sometimes called the Israeli War of Independence. While the Israelis were greatly outnumbered, they were successful in defeating the combined armies of Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq. The fighting ended in 1949 with the signing of the Rhodes Armistice (a ceasefire agreement), an agreement to at least temporarily stop fighting but did not give Arab recognition of Israel’s right to exist. The conclusion of the war officially affirmed the borders of the Jewish state and added more territory to Israel. It also created a significant refugee (people seeking safety in a foreign country to escape prejudice or persecution) problem. About seven hundred thousand Palestinians were displaced from their homes. Many Palestinians fled or were expelled from Israel after the Rhodes Armistice was signed. Similarly, about nine hundred thousand Jews fled or were expelled from the Arab countries that fought against Israel. Of this number, about six hundred thousand migrated to Israel while the remainder moved to Europe or the United States.

The continuing Arab-Israeli conflict While the Rhodes Armistice ended open warfare between Israel and its neighbors, most Arabs did not accept the principles of the armistice that included areas that should be free of military forces, called demilitarized zones. Rather, the conflict reemerged as a guerilla war where Palestinians led raids against Israel, often attacking and killing innocent Israeli citizens. The guerilla war continued into the twenty-first century. This led to a series of reprisals in the form of Israeli attacks against Palestinian military targets. These acts of revenge maintained a cycle of sustained violence between Israelis and Palestinians. However, following 1948, Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

323

The Arab-Israeli Conflict

Egypt, led by President Gamal Abdel Nasser, took complete governmental control of the Suez Canal. # BE TTM AN N/ C OR BI S.

several conventional wars also contributed to the continuation of the Arab-Israeli conflict. The 1956 War The first in the series of these wars was fought in 1956

from October 29 to November 6. For a variety of reasons, the Israelis believed Egypt was preparing to make war against Israel. Egypt, led by President Gamal Abdel Nasser (1918–1970), nationalized (took complete governmental control of) the Suez Canal. The Egyptians blocked Israeli ships that were passing through the canal. The canal was vital for world trade because it connected the Indian Ocean with the Mediterranean Sea. Prior to its nationalization, the canal was jointly controlled by Great Britain and Egypt. In response to Egypt’s military buildup and nationalization of the Suez Canal, Israel launched an attack into the Sinai Desert (Egyptian territory) while Great Britain and France took control of the canal by force. Finally, a ceasefire was arranged by the United Nations with the 324

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

The Arab-Israeli Conflict

backing of both existing world superpowers: the United States and the United Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). But Israel’s military success left the country in control of the Sinai Desert and the Gulf of Aqaba. This gulf provided direct access to the Indian Ocean for Israel. Israel agreed to retreat from this captured territory only after the United Nations guaranteed Israel’s continued access to these vital waterways. The 1967 War In 1967, Israel again went to war, this time against Syria, Egypt, and Jordan. This war is sometimes referred to as the Six-Day War because it was fought between June 5 and June 10. The war was in part fought in the Sinai Desert. Egypt’s President Nasser again closed the Gulf of Aqaba to Israel after compelling United Nations troops to leave Egyptian territory. This move allowed Nasser to mobilize his troops in the Sinai Desert in preparation for war against Israel. Israel again defeated the Egyptian military. It also captured the Old City of Jerusalem (sometimes referred to as East Jerusalem) from Jordan and the Golan Heights from Syria. While Israel eventually retreated from the Sinai Desert due to pressure from the United Nations, it retained control of all of Jerusalem.

Yasser Arafat. A P IM AGE S.

The 1973–74 War The next war between Israelis and Arabs was fought

from 1973 to 1974. The war began on October 6, 1973, the date of a very important Jewish religious holiday called Yom Kippur. Egypt and Syria launched surprise attacks against Israel on two fronts that day. Often this war is referred to as the Yom Kippur War. At first this war did not go well for Israel. Other Arab countries, including Libya, joined in the struggle along with Israel’s established enemies, Syria, Jordan, and Egypt. As things grew difficult for the Israelis, the United States stepped in and supplied Israel with large quantities of sophisticated weapons. This aid greatly increased Israel’s military capabilities and gave it the power to push its enemies back inside their own borders. The 1982 War In 1978, the Palestine Liberation Organization or PLO (see box) based in southern Lebanon (Israel’s immediate neighbor to the north) attacked Israel. Israel responded by sending its troops into Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

325

The Arab-Israeli Conflict

Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and Hamas

Lebanon to create a buffer zone of about 5 miles to prevent further attacks from PLO guerillas. While the United Nations sent a peacekeeping force into this region, it did not stop the fighting.

The PLO was created in 1964 as a political organization to support the creation of an independent Palestinian state. After the ArabIsraeli war of 1967, Yasser Arafat emerged as the president of the PLO. The PLO was not really a singular organization but was made up of various political parties that had differing perspectives on how to view and respond to Israel. While the PLO officially renounced terrorism and recognized Israel’s right to exist in 1988, it was not clear that every group under the umbrella of the PLO believed that terrorism should be abandoned.

In an effort to eliminate the PLO bases in southern Lebanon, Israel attacked with the full weight of its military might in 1982. Ultimately, the PLO guerillas were forced to leave Lebanon and were dispersed into several Arab countries. A plan was brought forward by the United States to end hostilities. Israel withdrew all its forces from Lebanon in 1985. Further conflict between Israelis and Palestinians was in the form of two distinct intifadas (uprisings), one lasting from 1987 to 1993 and another in 2000 (see box).

The most prominent PLO group was the political party known as Fatah. Until January 2006, Fatah was the dominant party in the Palestinian parliament. But another party known as Hamas came to power and held the majority of seats in the Parliament. Hamas still retained the view that justice and peace could only be established in the Middle East when the state of Israel was destroyed. Many believe that the political victory won by Hamas undermined the possibility of peace between Israelis and Palestinians. Others thought that Hamas’s win at the polls would force it to moderate its political views and renounce terrorism as well as recognize that Israel has a right to exist.

In all wars fought between Israelis and Arabs, there has been a series of agreements and armistices, with little effect on the Arab-Israeli conflict. Most of the wars and their treaties achieved little to resolve the political roadblock between Arabs and Israelis. They did nothing to decrease violence between the two populations, either.

The worldwide importance of the Arab-Israeli conflict

The Arab-Israeli conflict has never been not seen by most of the world as having an impact only in the lives of Arabs and Israelis. A majority of the world’s leaders have historically seen the ArabIsraeli conflict as one that has implications for the security of the world. Many have feared that this conflict could spill over the borders of the Middle East as well as cause confrontations between countries that have historically supported one side or the other. This was clearly the case when tensions rose between the world’s two superpowers at the time. The United States supported Israel and the USSR supported the Arab cause in the 1973 war between Israel and its Arab neighbors. The Israelis received military aid from the United States and the Arabs received military aid from the Soviet Union.

326

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

The Arab-Israeli Conflict

Intifada Intifada is the Arabic word meaning ‘‘uprising.’’ The intifadas have usually been in response to a perceived Israeli act of injustice that harmed the Palestinian cause. In the modern conflict of Israel and Palestine, this term usually referred to two specific events called the first (1987–93) and second intifadas (2000–05). The first intifada took place as a revolt against the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. This uprising was also driven by Palestinian citizens who were facing the humiliation of having to show identity documents and special permits as they traveled into Israel to provide much-needed labor. Palestinian workers went on a general strike

and got into violent confrontations with Israeli police and soldiers. The second intifada was economic in nature. Israel sought to secure its borders against terrorist acts by blocking Palestinians from working in Israel. This intifada was made worse when an Israeli leader named Ariel Sharon (1928–) took a group of followers to the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. It was rumored that Sharon actually went inside the Dome of the Rock mosque that sits on the Temple Mount, perhaps in defiance of Islamic beliefs. This mosque is one of the holiest sites for Muslims around the world; regular people are forbidden to enter it. Angry Palestinians responded by creating a more violent and bloody uprising.

Much of the world’s oil reserves are found within the borders of Arab countries such as Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Kuwait, and a traditional Muslim country like Iran. Iranians are not ethnically Arab but support the Arab cause against Israel because most Iranians are Muslim. These countries and others showed sympathy for the plight of Palestinian Arabs. Their oil wealth gave them great economic leverage in advancing the Palestinian cause. Since many western countries depended on Middle East oil to meet their energy needs, they were compelled to give attention to the difficulties faced by Palestinian Arabs. On the other hand, Israel had its strong supporters too. For example, the United States, Great Britain, and France were firmly resolved to support Israel’s right to exist within secure borders. These countries have at times given Israel key military hardware, such as artillery shells and combat aircraft, to block attempts by Arab countries to destroy Israel. In return Israel has been a faithful ally helping countries such as the United States retain its influence in the Middle East. Because the world has a keen interest in resolving the deeply felt tensions between Israelis and Arabs, many attempts have been made to arrive at a fair and long-lasting peace in this region of the world. Arab nationalism (promoting the creation of new nations) and political Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

327

The Arab-Israeli Conflict

Zionism laid claim to the same land placing two nationalistic movements in direct conflict. Nationalism is often behind the attempt of one nation to promote its interests over the interests of other nations. When nationalist attitudes become too strong, the ideals of one nation become more highly valued than the ideals of other nations. This means there is a greater opportunity for prejudice, hatred, and mistrust to arise. Because of these nationalist attitudes, there have been many attempts in recent history to create a just and lasting peace between Israelis and Palestinians, such as the 1998 Camp David Accords and the 2003 Geneva Accord. However, nothing resolved the conflict. Both sides tried to make their claims to the land the strongest not only against each other but by appealing to the court of public opinion around the world. For example, a list of the kinds of claims that each side made have the following characteristics. On the Jewish side: The continuous presence of Jews in Israel for four thousand years. The persecution of the Jews of the Diaspora (see box), and the Holocaust as the climax of this persecution. The fulfillment of God’s promise in the return of the land to the chosen people. The phenomenal contribution of the Jews to the development of the land and the welfare of the world. Arab failure to make peace with the Jews when they were willing to negotiate for peace. The importance of the present and future security of Israel for the Jewish and Western worlds. But Palestinian Arabs have their claims as well and oppose the Jewish side by saying: For two thousand years, since Roman times, Palestinians have been a majority in historic Palestine, which is now Israel. The establishment of Israel has been at the expense of the Palestinians who have been displaced through wars and other forceful means. Palestinians are now ready to compromise and accept a share of the land, but Israel refuses to negotiate for peace. Palestinians belong to Palestine. They do not wish to be sent away to other Arab countries. Palestinian nationhood is as valid as Zionist nationhood, if not more so when viewed in terms of a common history, language, and culture. 328

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

The Arab-Israeli Conflict

The two million Palestinians that live in the occupied territories are not treated as equal citizens since they are not free to choose their own system of government. In the background of these claims as to who are the rightful residents of Palestine is the belief that people from the other side are bad and repulsive, while those on ‘‘our’’ side are good. Many people in the world, including many Israelis and Palestinians, had hoped that moderate voices would come to the forefront recognizing of the rights of both the Palestinians and Israelis. Palestinians and Israelis have held the common human vision of wanting to live in their own land in peace and security with the hope that justice will prevail.

The basic Israeli perspective Israel insists that peace is impossible until Palestinians first recognize Israel’s right to exist. This means that Israel maintains a strong and modern military to defend itself against what it thinks is the ultimate Palestinian goal, namely to destroy the state of Israel. Until those who govern the Palestinians as well as other Arab and Islamic countries publicly declare that Israel has a basic right to exist as a secure nation, there can be no permanent peace between Palestinians and Israelis, according to the Israeli government.

The basic Palestinian-Arab perspective Most Arabs think Israel cannot make a legitimate historical claim to have a separate Jewish state since doing so displaces Palestinians from their homeland. Though in the long past Jews did have control of the area, this did not mean that Jews who have lived in other parts of the world for nearly two thousand years now have a right to return to Palestine and create a new Jewish homeland. Further, some Israelis believed that they had the right to expand their territory by building settlements in the West Bank. This area immediately on the west side of the Jordan River has been the homeland for a large number of Palestinians at least since World War I. Palestinian Arabs also believed that the United Nations had generated many resolutions (Resolution 194, Resolution 242, and Resolution 446) designed to protect Palestinian rights that Israel had ignored.

Possibilities for peace Geneva Accord and the Road Map for Peace The Geneva Accord of

November 2003 was developed and written by representatives of Palestine Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

329

The Arab-Israeli Conflict

Terrorism often took the form of suicide bombing especially against Israeli citizens. A P IM AG ES.

and Israel in order to bring an end to hostilities between Israelis and Palestinians. The accord became the official document recognizing the right of Palestinians and Israelis to have independent statehood. As provided in the American Task Force on Palestine website (http://www.americantaskforce.org/ geneva.htm), the Geneva Accord stated that it aspired to the view that ‘ . . . both peoples need to enter an era of peace, security, and stability.’’ Out of the Geneva Accord arose the hope that Israelis and Palestinians would cooperate and commit themselves to coexist side by side as good neighbors, that they would aspire to the well-being of Palestinian and Israeli citizens. The Geneva Accord also had a goal of not only reconciling Palestinians and Israelis but of promoting normal, peaceful relations between Israel and other Arab states. 330

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

The Arab-Israeli Conflict

The Road Map to Peace initiative was brought forward in a speech by U.S. Republican president George W. Bush (1946–; served 2001–) on June 24, 2002. With the support of many countries in Western Europe, Russia, and the United Nations, the initiative called for a two-state solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict. The Road Map to Peace called for the Palestinian leadership to move decisively toward ending terrorism. Terrorism often took the form of suicide bombing especially against Israeli citizens. Israel was also challenged to take strong steps to support the emergence of a stable and secure Palestinian state by ending its occupation of historic Palestinian territory.

Developments in the early twenty-first century In April 2002, Israel began construction of a security barrier to keep suicide bombers from making their way into Israel from the West Bank. The Israelis believed the security fence was necessary for the protection of its citizens. However, human rights groups, Palestinians, and much of the world complained that the barrier cut across territory that had been declared to be Palestinian by international law. This was another case of mounting tensions between Israelis and Palestinians.

Diaspora The Diaspora is a term usually applied to Jews who have been forced to live outside their traditional homeland. In historic Israel, Jews were often expelled or taken into captivity by empires that conquered them. The Babylonian, Persian, Greek, and Roman empires are examples of nations that participated at different times in the Jewish Diaspora. This term evokes strong emotions, as it is often employed by Zionists to support the view that Jews have a right to return to their traditional homeland to recreate an independent Jewish state. In the early twenty-first century, many Palestinians viewed themselves as victims of a Diaspora at the hands of Jews who have displaced them from their traditional homeland. Because of this turn of events, many Palestinians were forced to live in other Arab countries such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon. Because Palestinians and Israelis believed they were the genuine victims of displacement and exile, both sides were committed to actions that led to violence and retaliation.

In January 2006, a radical Palestinian group known as Hamas (see box) won the majority of seats in Palestine’s parliamentary elections. Hamas gained this political victory over the PLO (see box). The PLO had been the controlling political party in Palestine since 1967. When PLO president Yasser Arafat (1929–2004) renounced terrorism and recognized Israel’s right to exist, many world leaders held high hopes for eventual peace between Israelis and Palestinians. However, a part of Hamas’s charter called for the destruction of Israel. In the view of many, this meant the prospects for peace between Palestinians and Israelis were greatly reduced unless Hamas recognized Israel’s right to exist. Several European countries that give financial assistance to the Palestinians threatened to discontinue this aid unless Hamas renounced terrorism and recognized Israel’s right to exist. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

331

The Arab-Israeli Conflict

Violence in the region escalated through much of 2006. Israel continued its occupation of Palestinian Arab territories and conducted raids into Arab neighborhoods to arrest or kill Hamas leaders. In addition, Israel launched a massive bombing and artillery attack on neighboring Lebanon that lasted weeks. The attack was in reaction to the Lebanese government harboring Hezbollah, an anti-Israeli Arab group. Peace for the region seemed as remote as ever.

For More Information BOOKS

Cattan, Henry. The Palestine Question. New York: Croom Helm, 1988. Cohen, Michael J. The Origins of the Arab-Israeli Conflict. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1987. Gelvin, James L. The Israel-Palestine Conflict: One Hundred Years of War. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005. Khouri, Fred J. The Arab-Israeli Dilemma. 3rd ed. New York: Syracuse University Press, 1985. Lesch, Ann M, and Dan Tschirgi. Origins and Development of the Arab-Israeli Conflict. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1998. Wasserstein, Bernard. Israelis and Palestinians: Why Do They Fight? Can They Stop? New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2003. WEB SIT ES

‘‘The Geneva Accord.’’ American Task Force on Palestine. http:// www.americantaskforce.org/geneva.htm (accessed on November 29, 2006). ‘‘Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO).’’ FAS. http://www.fas.org/irp/world/ para/plo.htm (accessed on November 29, 2006).

332

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

17

Racial Segregation in the American South: Jim Crow Laws acism is the belief that the physical characteristics of a person or group determines their capabilities and that one group is naturally superior to other groups. Racism has been a major factor of society in the United States throughout its history. Racial prejudice has even been central to the development of American laws, basically legalizing white dominance over others.

R

The historical plight of black Americans presents a classic example of what happens when a group becomes defined as weaker and less intelligent and overall, less valued. As time passes, those prejudices become long-lasting behavior patterns carrying over from one generation to the next. They became highly resistant to challenge by social movements and even new laws banning discrimination (treating some differently than others or favoring one social group over another based on prejudices) against the minority. Discrimination means one group enjoys an undeserved advantage over another group with the same capabilities. For example, some groups may freely attend certain prestigious schools or obtain better paying jobs while others are not. In the twenty-first century, blacks are still recovering from centuries of prejudice against them. Injustices in the present have strong roots in the past.

A long history of racism Racism was prominent during the colonial period in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries when the North American colonies were a part of the worldwide British Empire. Britons had traditionally associated dark skin color with negative behavioral traits such as evil and filth. Colonists brought this prejudice with them to North America when they crossed the ocean to settle in the seventeenth century. By the late seventeenth century, race became the basis of slavery (people being held captive and treated as property in order to perform 333

Racial Segregation in the American South: Jim Crow Laws

WORDS TO KNOW boycott: A protest by not buying certain products or using certain services until demands are met. freedom rider: A civil rights activist who rides on interstate buses to test their compliance with court orders to end segregation on buses and bus facilities. segregation: Using laws to separate whites and blacks.

sit-in: When black activists walk into an establishment such as a restaurant for whites-only and refuse to leave until they are served or the business closes. slavery: People being held captive and treated as property in order to perform free labor.

free labor). Blacks did not come to the United States by choice but were brought to North America through an international slave trade. Forced into a life of slavery, they were captured by European slave traders and shipped to the New World in trade for sugar, rum, and various goods that were then shipped back to Europe. The colonists had severe labor shortages and an immediate and pressing need to clear the forests of the Eastern Seaboard from Georgia north through New England and plant crops. The Africans provided a large and free labor pool. They also provided a social group that to which the predominately white western European colonists could feel superior. Whites could gain social status by becoming planters and slave owners. The prejudice shaped colonial laws that banned intermarriage and considered slaves not as humans, but as property with no rights. Any child of mixed blood (one white parent, one black) was considered black and forced to live as a slave, among slaves with few exceptions. Throughout the 1700s, Britons and their colonists were convinced that slavery was an essential element to national prosperity and world power. To justify slave trade, black Africans were dehumanized, often referred to as black cattle. The prejudiced attitudes held by the colonists focused on what they considered the uncivilized and un-Christian nature of the black Africans. They held a widespread belief reinforced by popular writings and religious sermons that Africans were naturally inferior to white Europeans.

Only part-human Through the American Revolutionary War (1775–83), Americans won their freedom from British rule and a new nation of the United States of America, as officially named in 1777, began taking shape. However, 334

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Racial Segregation in the American South: Jim Crow Laws

freedom was not extended to the black slaves. Even Thomas Jefferson (1743–1826), who authored the Declaration of Independence in 1776 and included the famous phrase that ‘‘all men are created equal,’’ came from a wealthy Virginia planter’s family and was himself a slave owner. In fact, in the late twentieth century it was discovered that Jefferson probably had six children with a slave woman, Sally Hemings. He freed all six of the children, but never Hemings herself. By the 1780s, slavery was being phased out of the Northern states. But Southern states stubbornly hung on to slavery as a cornerstone of its agricultural economy. The plantations relied heavily on the free labor and they could not economically survive without it. Slavery was such an emotional topic that it was not discussed during the Constitutional Convention held in the summer of 1787 in Philadelphia. There the nation’s Founding Fathers shaped a new national government and system of justice. Many of them were slave owners who privately thought, or hoped, that slavery would just slowly fade away for the sake of the country. When the topic of black slaves did enter into the discussion in the convention, it was related to how the national census (a regular count of people in a country) should be taken. A key question was whether blacks should be counted. The census was to be crucial for determining how many members of the U.S. House of Representatives could be sent from each state, therefore it would determine how much political influence each state would hold. If slaves were to be counted, then the Southern states would have greater political power in relation to the Northern states. If not counted, the Southern states would have less. The debate raged for days before convention participants reached a compromise. Black slaves were to be counted as three-fifths of a person. Blacks were still not full humans in the eyes of the law. Southern delegates to the 1787 Convention also won a compromise that the new U.S. government could not abolish the importation of slaves for at least twenty years after adoption of the new Constitution. During the next two decades, public pressure continued to increase to prohibit slave trade on U.S. shores. As soon as it could do so, Congress responded, in 1808 with legislation banning U.S. participation in international slave trade.

Growth of slavery The first census ever taken in the United States occurred in 1790. It showed that 757,000 blacks lived in the United States, of whom 700,000 Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

335

Racial Segregation in the American South: Jim Crow Laws

The emergence of the cotton gin meant that more slaves were needed to pick the crops because the work once done by hand was now done much faster by machine. # B ETT MA NN/ CO RBI S.

were slaves. Over 22 percent of American families owned at least one slave. The hopes that slavery would fade out of American life were dashed only a few years later. In 1793, American inventor Eli Whitney (1765– 1825) developed a much-improved cotton gin, a machine that separates cotton fibers from seed. The cotton gin made cotton a highly marketable crop in the South; its emergence meant that more slaves were needed to pick the crops because the work once done by hand was now done much faster by machine. New cotton fields spread across the Deep South and slavery boomed. Despite a ban on the importation of new African slaves, the black population in the United States grew to approximately 4.5 million by 1860. Some 90 percent of blacks in America were slaves. However the number of slave owning families had dropped to 10 percent. Large cotton plantations had overpowered smaller farms. Prior to the American Civil War (1861–65), black slaves were at the bottom of a caste system (a very strict division of a society). At the top were rich plantation owners. In the middle were merchants, small 336

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Racial Segregation in the American South: Jim Crow Laws

farmers, and laborers. Slaves lived in housing provided by their owners. The owners also provided food and clothing. The quality of these basic necessities varied widely depending on the owner. The field laborer worked normally from sunrise to sunset. Ten or more slaves lived in a single room shack. The beds consisted of straw and old rags and the floors were dirt. Black families tried to maintain connections with one another, but that often became impossible as the slaves were sold like property on a regular basis. Slaves had no right to marry, vote, own firearms, own property, learn to read or write, possess books, testify in court against whites, or speak abusively toward whites.

The rise of Jim Crow Slavery ended in 1865 with the South’s defeat in the Civil War. However, the life of black Americans improved little. Three amendments were added to the U.S. Constitution guaranteeing rights to freed slaves. Slavery, though outlawed, was merely replaced with racial discrimination and injustice that was upheld legally by Black Codes (laws restricting rights of blacks). The Black Codes denied freed slaves the right to vote, to possess any form of weapon, and to leave a job and move elsewhere. They were considered servants now instead of slaves. Disobeying a Black Code could lead to imprisonment. Efforts by the federal government to rebuild the South’s economy and society in the 1870s, called Reconstruction, abolished the Black Codes though open racial prejudice and discrimination persisted. When Reconstruction ended in 1877, Southerners began passing new laws enforcing racial segregation (separation of black people from whites) known as Jim Crow laws. It was the Jim Crow laws through which the beliefs about the inferior nature of blacks were perpetuated throughout much of the twentieth century. The term Jim Crow comes from a racist fictional character popular in America in the early 1800s. The character, played by a white person with blackened face, expressed racial prejudice against black Americans depicting an uneducated, poor rural black person. Racial prejudices led to these discriminatory measures passed by state and local governments that sought to keep blacks at a lower social and economic position. Jim Crow laws strictly enforced public racial segregation in almost every aspect of Southern life. The segregation laws did not exist in the North, but racial discrimination by Northerners was widespread nonetheless. For example, blacks could not buy houses in the Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

337

Racial Segregation in the American South: Jim Crow Laws

same neighborhoods as whites. Economic and educational opportunities for black Americans were greatly restricted.

Separate but equal To contest the growing number of Jim Crow laws, a black shoemaker named Homer Plessy (1862–1925) boarded a train in New Orleans, Louisiana, and defiantly found a seat in a railroad car reserved for whites. Refusing to get off when commanded by the conductor, Plessy was arrested for violating segregationist laws. The case went to the U.S. Supreme Court, where his defense lawyer argued that the law violated the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution, which granted freedom to slaves, and the Fourteenth Amendment, which maintains that a state cannot deny privileges to people without applying fair lawful procedures known as due process of law. The Court in Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) ruled against Plessy and upheld laws enforcing segregation in railway car accommodations on the condition that the facilities were of equal quality. This decision became known as the ‘ separate but equal’’ principle—the cornerstone of Jim Crow laws. However, the facilities were usually far from equal; those for blacks were always much inferior. For example, restrooms for blacks were filthy and often little more than outhouses. Also, black entrances to public facilities were usually, if not always, in the rear or the alley. With the introduction of motorized buses in the 1920s, seats for blacks were located in the hot and crowded back rows and the stink of exhaust fumes prevailed. In reaction to Jim Crow laws, various scientists refuted the notion of inferiority of the black race, or even the very existence of true races. In futility, they claimed that genetics was too complex, that one group gradually blends into another with no sharp break. Their perspectives were generally ignored by the public and politicians and racial prejudice continued.

The inhumanity of Jim Crow By 1915, all Southern states had some form of Jim Crow laws. Blacks could not eat in the same restaurants, drink out of the same water fountains, watch movies in the same theaters, play in the same parks, or go to the same schools as whites. Blacks had to sit in the back of buses and streetcars and give up their seats to whites when instructed to do so. Blacks could not nurse whites in hospitals. Signs reading ‘‘Colored Only’’ or ‘‘White Only’’ could be seen everywhere. 338

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Racial Segregation in the American South: Jim Crow Laws

Blacks could not eat in the same restaurants, drink out of the same water fountains, watch movies in the same theaters, or go to the same schools as whites. # B ET TMA NN/ CO RB IS.

In addition to laws, there were certain unwritten social expectations. For example, a black man was not to shake hands with a white man and he could not make eye-contact with a white woman or else he would be accused of highly inappropriate sexual advances. When speaking, blacks were expected to address whites as ‘‘Mr.,’’ ‘‘Sir,’’ or ‘‘Ma’am.’’ Jim Crow laws also blocked most blacks from voting in public elections. Local authorities charged fees, called poll taxes which most blacks could not afford, and required blacks to pass literacy (reading and writing) tests not required of whites. Deprived of a formal education, most blacks could not read and write well and failed these tests. In addition to voting barriers in general elections, blacks were excluded from Southern politics in other ways. Southern states introduced the ‘‘white primary.’’ The Democratic Party, the only real political party of power in the South, claimed their primaries to select candidates for various officers were private events. They banned participation by blacks. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

339

Racial Segregation in the American South: Jim Crow Laws

By 1910, this practice was used in every Southern state. As a result of voting restrictions and exclusion from primaries, blacks had little political influence in the South. In addition to legal and social restrictions, terrorism by white supremacists was also used to discourage blacks from voting. These combined measures were very effective. In Louisiana, more than 130,000 blacks were registered to vote in 1896. By 1905, that number dropped to just over 1,300. If blacks violated Jim Crow rules, they could expect swift and perhaps brutal punishment, such as whippings or even death. According to a report published by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) in 1919 titled Thirty Years of Lynching in the United States: 1889–1918, 2,522 black Americans were lynched—hanged, burned alive, or hacked to death—between 1889 and 1918. Lynching was the most violent form of discrimination. Offenses the victims were accused of were usually minor, such as stealing a cow, attempting to register to vote, or speaking out for equality. Often there were allegations of sexually assaulting a white woman or talking back to a white person. Rather than receiving a fair trial, blacks were lynched by white mobs. Of course, many victims were innocent. Lynching was a major means used during this period to control blacks. However, blacks were not the only victims of lynching; whites sympathetic to blacks were as well. Ida B. Wells-Barnett (1862–1932) became a leading African American advocate to outlaw lynching. Though she traveled the world speaking out against it, lynching would continue into the 1960s. As prejudice, discrimination, and violence against blacks increased, a call to action by black leaders spread. An outspoken critic of the segregationist policies and racial prejudice was sociologist and activist W. E. B. Du Bois (1868–1963) at Atlanta University. In 1905, Du Bois and other black leaders met in Niagara Falls, Canada, to map out a strategy to fight prejudice in America. It became known as the Niagara Movement. Their focus was broad including voting rights for blacks, right to good education, better job opportunities, equal treatment as whites before the law in courts, and an end to Jim Crow laws. They had limited effectiveness due to lack of funds, but did establish a foundation for other groups to come along. Meanwhile, Southern hostility toward blacks boiled over on several occasions. Major race riots broke out in 1906 in Brownsville, Texas, and Atlanta, Georgia, and in 1908 in Springfield, Illinois. Alarmed, black leaders gathered again and in 1909 established the NAACP to fight 340

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Racial Segregation in the American South: Jim Crow Laws

Rather than receiving a fair trial, blacks were lynched by white mobs. COU RT ESY OF T HE L IB RAR Y O F CO NGR ES S.

lynching and other racist activities. The organization would be highly influential throughout the twentieth and into the twenty-first centuries. The primary focus of the NAACP was legal action against racism, educational programs for black adults and children, and encouraging voter participation. World War I (1914–18) created new jobs in various war industries, such as shipbuilding, and other factories in the North. Hundreds of thousands of blacks left the rural South in what became known to as the Great Migration. Black Americans arrived in the industrial North looking for good-paying war industry jobs. The Great Migration would last into the second half of the twentieth century. The National Urban League, founded in 1910 by George E. Haynes (1875–1960), the first African American to earn a doctorate degree from Columbia University, social activist Frances Kellor (1873–1952), and others, helped blacks adjust to city life. However, many never found the economic betterment they were seeking. They were unskilled and uneducated and relegated to jobs as laborers and servants, much as they had been in the South. The growing numbers of poor blacks crowded into Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

341

Racial Segregation in the American South: Jim Crow Laws

Members of the KKK dressed in white robes for secrecy and to create fear. A burning cross was it symbol of terror. # GR EG SM IT H/C OR BI S.

cheap, deteriorating housing areas in the inner cities of the North called ghettos. These communities became known for their poverty and high crime rates. The growing black population in the North also led to conflicts with whites that included rioting in several cities between 1917 and 1919. In the summer of 1918, racial conflicts in Chester and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, led to ten deaths and sixty injured. That was only a prelude to 1919, when twenty-five race riots erupted across the United States, 342

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Racial Segregation in the American South: Jim Crow Laws

leaving about one hundred people dead. During these years, membership in the Ku Klux Klan (KKK), a white supremacist hate group, also grew rapidly and continued following the war. The KKK was founded only a few years earlier in 1915 in the Southern state of Georgia. It continued to grow in the 1920s to a membership of four million. Klansmen dressed in white robes for secrecy and to create fear. A burning cross was its symbol of terror. In the 1930s the KKK greatly declined in popularity only to come back in the 1960s in some Southern states in reaction to the fight for civil rights protections for blacks.

Last hired and first fired Difficult conditions for blacks in America would only get tougher in the 1930s. When the value of stocks (partial ownership in a company) dropped sharply in October 1929, the United States—and later much of the world—entered a severe economic crisis known as the Great Depression (1929–41). Many people lost their jobs as production plummeted. Times became tougher yet for American blacks and prejudice increased dramatically through the 1930s. As related by authors Robin D. G. Kelley and Earl Lewis in the 2000 book To Make Our World Anew: A History of African Americans, the saying ‘‘Last Hired and First Fired’’ applied to black Americans, who were the first to be let go at factories and other businesses. Racial discrimination increased even more during tough times. Black Americans began to see some hope in the New Deal programs of Democratic president Franklin D. Roosevelt (1882–1945; served 1933–45). The New Deal was a set of federal programs established in the 1930s to bring economic relief to those most affected by the Depression. Though not specially designed for blacks, this population benefited from the programs, though in the Jim Crow South discrimination affected the distribution of benefits. Roosevelt organized a group of black advisors that became known as the Black Cabinet. Among them was William H. Hastie (1904–1976), who would become the first black federal court judge. However, many blacks were frustrated that the president was not more dedicated toward ending Jim Crow policies. The president did not want to loose political support of Southern politicians for his economic programs. The person in the White House most admired by blacks was President Roosevelt’s wife, first lady Eleanor Roosevelt (1884–1962). Eleanor was outspoken about the underprivileged, particularly the conditions in the American Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

343

Racial Segregation in the American South: Jim Crow Laws

Musicians Duke Ellington, left, and Louis Armstrong. AP I MA GE S.

South. Being less politically restricted than her husband, she publicly favored dismantling Jim Crow laws. As jobs became available with the arrival of World War II (1939–45), more than two million blacks moved from the rural South to the North, again to find jobs in war industries to leave behind Jim Crow. Much to their dismay, they still faced pronounced prejudice and discrimination because many Northerners shared Southerners’ attitudes about the abilities of blacks. Blacks were usually hired for jobs such as janitors at factories rather than on the actual assembly lines where war materials were made. Black leaders called for a march on Washington in 1942. Desperately not wanting to see a controversial political protest in Washington while trying to keep a unified war effort underway, Roosevelt issued an executive order forbidding racial discrimination in government agencies and the war industries. Still, more than a million blacks serving in the U.S. military served in largely segregated units. Segregation in the military would not end until 1948 when U.S. president Harry S. Truman (1884–1972; served 1945–1953) signed another executive order requiring equal treatment for all races. 344

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Racial Segregation in the American South: Jim Crow Laws

Black Contributions During Jim Crow Despite the oppressive laws and policies of the Jim Crow era, during the 1920s an exceptionally gifted group of black authors produced literature that all Americans could appreciate. They wrote of their experiences in the rural South as well as Northern cities. Most of the authors were located in Harlem; therefore, the period from 1919 to the mid-1930s became known as the Harlem Renaissance. The group included Langston Hughes (1902–1967) and James Weldon Johnson (1871–1938). Black musicians also gained considerable fame. In 1914, bandleader W. C. Handy (1873–1958) composed the ‘‘St. Louis Blues,’’ one of the first Blues songs to become a popular hit. The Blues was a form of music first made popular by black American musicians in the early 1910s. The music derived from spiritual songs and often portrayed a depressed outlook. Handy became known as the father of Blues. Jazz was also born during this period from black folk ballads. Louis Armstrong (1901–1971) and Duke Ellington (1899–1974) became the nation’s leading jazz musicians. Other noted black leaders of the time included labor leader A. Philip Randolph (1889–1979), who founded the first black union, the Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters. Also capturing the headlines were such black athletes as track runner Jesse Owens (1913–1980) and heavyweight boxers Jack Johnson (1878–1946)

and Joe Louis (1914–1981). The Harlem Renaissance helped build a foundation for the later civil rights movement by demonstrating the cultural contributions that black Americans were capable of making. It also provided inspiration for future black artists in America. Later in the Jim Crow era, other firsts came for black Americans. Blacks became accepted in sports after Jackie Robinson (1919–1972) shattered the color barrier when he joined and starred with the Brooklyn Dodgers major league baseball team in 1947. Robinson became a larger than life hero and a symbol for blacks throughout America into the twenty-first century. U.S. diplomat Ralph J. Bunche (1904–1971) became the first black to receive the Nobel Peace Prize in 1950. The Nobel Peace Prize is a prestigious annual award given in Oslo, Norway, to a person who has made notable achievements in promoting peace and goodwill in the world. Gwendolyn Brooks (1912–2000) was the first black to win the Pulitzer Prize in 1950 for a collection of poems published in the 1949 book Annie Allen. In 1955, Marian Anderson (1897–1993) became the first black singer to play a leading role in New York City’s Metropolitan Opera. In 1963, actor Sidney Poitier (1927–) became the first black to win an Academy Award as best actor for his role in the film adaptation of Lilies of the Field.

Legal victories During the war years, the NAACP increased its legal efforts in the fight against Jim Crow racial discrimination. It won several Supreme Court rulings, including a 1944 ruling in Smith vs. Allwright that the Southern white primary was illegal. Other anti-discrimination activities also took place during the war. In 1943 the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE), founded the previous year in Chicago to combat racial segregation Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

345

Racial Segregation in the American South: Jim Crow Laws

through non-violent means, supported a sit-in (the act of entering an establishment such as a restaurant and peacefully refusing to leave in protest of their prejudicial policies) in a racially segregated Chicago restaurant. Following the war, the NAACP gained new members as black servicemen returning home were again shocked by the blatant cruelty of the Jim Crow prejudice and discrimination that was still going on in the United States. A new group of young lawyers saw more legal successes between 1948 and 1951, including decisions against discrimination in higher educational institutions and in housing. In 1948 the Supreme Court ruled in Shelley v. Kraemer that restrictions could not be placed on real estate to forbid its sale to people on account of race. In Sweatt v. Painter the Court ruled that blacks could not be denied entrance to a state university law school on account of race. The biggest legal victory for the NAACP against Jim Crow laws came in the 1954 U.S. Supreme Court decision of Brown v. Board of Education. A lawsuit challenged a local school board decision in Topeka, Kansas that denied black student Linda Brown, a third-grader, from attending the allwhite public school, which was the school nearest her home. Several other similar instances had occurred in other states, and they were all combined into a single Supreme Court case. The resulting Court decision overturned the 1896 Plessy decision. The ‘‘separate but equal’’ principle was no longer valid. The Brown decision stated that racially segregated public schools were illegal. The ruling did not provide a specific time by which schools had to desegregate, a fact that kept some schools segregated for another decade. Much to the frustration of black Americans, the ruling only applied to schools and not other public places such as theaters, restaurants, and places of employment. The Brown decision posed dramatic implications. Black Americans were inspired to seek an end to other Jim Crow segregationist laws and to end all discriminatory practices as soon as possible. However, in the Jim Crow South, whites resisted the Court ruling. School employees who helped black children enroll at white schools were fired. A Virginia school system closed all of its public schools to avoid integration and sent their white children to private schools.

Growth of the Civil Rights Movement Blacks, frustrated by the slow pace of change following the Brown decision, decided they had to fight for their rights. Protests against Jim Crow laws became widespread and used strategies such as sit-ins. 346

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Racial Segregation in the American South: Jim Crow Laws

Protestors would walk into hotels, restaurants, and libraries where blacks were not allowed and sit down, quietly refusing to leave when asked. In one famous incident, four black college students sat at a Greensboro, North Carolina, lunch counter. Refused service, they sat there for hours until the restaurant closed. Sit-ins spread across the South. As businesses increasingly feared losing income, ‘‘White Only’’ signs began coming down. Protests spread to other areas of discrimination in the South. In August 1955, Rosa Parks (1913–2005), a seamstress and secretary for the local chapter of the NAACP in Montgomery, Alabama, was arrested for not giving up her seat to a white man on a Montgomery city bus. Local Jim Crow laws and traditions required blacks to sit toward the back of buses and give up their seats if the white section was full and whites wanted seats further back. Parks, with her bag of groceries, was tired of giving in. Her arrest triggered a boycott (to stop buying a certain product until demands are met) of the Montgomery buses by blacks, who comprised almost 70 percent of the bus riders. For 382 days, the boycott persisted, significantly reducing the revenue of the city bus department. Blacks rode in carpools, took taxis, or walked. In some instances, police arrested carpool drivers and charged them with picking up hitchhikers, which was illegal in Alabama. Bombs were thrown at the homes of black leaders. The boycott ended when the city bus department changed its policy shortly after Parks, defended by NAACP lawyers, won a Supreme Court decision that ruled bus segregation was illegal. It was another major victory against Jim Crow laws segregating public transportation. The boycott was the first organized mass protest by blacks and catapulted their leader, Martin Luther King Jr. (1929–1968), a young Montgomery Baptist minister, into the national spotlight. Protests against Jim Crow laws paved the way for a broad social movement known as the Civil Rights Movement. Activists included whites as well as blacks, and all sought equal rights for black Americans. It was also known as the Black Freedom Movement. Following the Montgomery boycott, King and other leaders formed the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) in 1957 to coordinate work of the various civil rights groups around the South. Preaching nonviolent resistance to Jim Crow laws and other discriminatory policies, King pressed forward, challenging long held segregationist traditions. Resistance to school desegregation in the Jim Crow South continued. Three years after the Brown decision, there were still no blacks attending schools with whites anywhere in the South. In 1960, when a six-year-old Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

347

Racial Segregation in the American South: Jim Crow Laws

girl enrolled in a white school in New Orleans, parents withdrew their white children in her class. She was the only child in her classroom for over a year. In defiance of a federal court order, Arkansas governor Orval E. Faubus (1910–1994) sent the state’s National Guard to block the entrance of black students into a Little Rock high school. U.S. president Dwight D. Eisenhower (1890–1969; served 1953–61) responded by mobilizing federal troops to enforce the court order to integrate the schools. In response, school officials closed the high school for two years rather than admit blacks.

New organizations Continued frustration over persistent prejudice and discrimination brought cries for more aggressive steps than those promoted by the NAACP and SCLC. In 1960, black and white college students organized the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC). The SNCC sponsored protest marches, boycotts, sit-ins, and other confrontational action against Jim Crow laws and policies. These actions served to increase national public awareness about the social barriers black Americans faced. The Supreme Court in December 1960 ruled that bus and railroad companies traveling across state lines could not impose racial segregation on the vehicles or in waiting rooms, water fountains, and restrooms. To test the compliance with the new ruling, another activist group the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE) organized Freedom Rides in the spring of 1961. Both black and white activists rode two buses from Washington, D.C., to New Orleans. They encountered considerable hostility from whites along the way. Some were beaten and one bus was bombed and burned. The Freedom Riders received considerable attention in the news. Through the summer more than three hundred Freedom Riders were arrested in the South. Many were convicted of disturbing the peace and sent to jail for weeks. In 1962 and 1963, the spotlight fell on segregation at Southern universities. James Meredith, a student at nearby Jackson State College, applied for law school at the University of Mississippi and was rejected. He went to court challenging his rejection. The Supreme Court ruled that the school must admit him. When the state governor took steps to block Meredith’s entrance, President John F. Kennedy (1917–1963; served 1961–63) sent federal marshals to enforce the court ruling. However, the marshals came under attack and a riot broke out on campus, killing 2 348

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Racial Segregation in the American South: Jim Crow Laws

A Freedom Rider bus goes up in flames after a fire bomb was tossed through a window in 1961 in Alabama. AP I MA GES .

bystanders and injuring about 375 students, federal marshals, and others participating in the riots. Despite the problems concerning his acceptance as a student, Meredith graduated from the university in 1964. In 1963, Alabama governor George Wallace (1919–1998) attempted to block the entrance of blacks at the University of Alabama. This time, Kennedy sent National Guard troops to help the students. In a speech at the door to the university building, Wallace denounced federal efforts to support the civil rights of blacks. Kennedy angrily responded on a nationally televised address calling segregation morally wrong.

The fight over Jim Crow escalates In the spring of 1963 the SCLC organized marches and sit-ins in Birmingham, Alabama protesting lingering Jim Crow policies. On May 2 thousands of schoolchildren took part in one march. The Birmingham police arrested some six hundred children. The following day police used high-powered fire hoses knocking down marchers including children. Police also unleashed dogs on the marchers. News of the events brought more protesters and news coverage to Birmingham. The KKK bombed homes and churches of black people. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

349

Racial Segregation in the American South: Jim Crow Laws

Alabama governor George Wallace attempted to block the entrance of blacks at the University of Alabama. AP IM AGE S.

Violence spread elsewhere in June 1963 as civil rights activist Medgar Evers (1925–1963) was murdered in Jackson, Mississippi. Evers had organized various protests, including sit-ins, and was helping blacks to register to vote. KKK member Byron de la Beckwith (1920–2001) was arrested and charged with murder. Two juries found him not guilty. In 1994—thirty-one years after Evers’s murder—Beckwith was convicted and sentenced to life in prison. Discrimination spurred by Jim Crow laws was gradually being overcome in some areas but violence was escalating in others. Discrimination persisted in many other areas untouched by protests and legal challenges. Pushing for stronger federal action, King and other black leaders, including labor leader A. Philip Randolph (1889–1979), Roy Wilkins 350

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Racial Segregation in the American South: Jim Crow Laws

Black Power During the turbulent 1960s, black groups formed, eager to take more militant action than what Martin Luther King Jr. had preached. Disappointment mounted over the lack of change in American society’s prejudice since the Jim Crow era. Activists advocated forming allblack communities and using violence in reaction to discriminatory practices. Among the groups were the Black Muslims and the Black Panthers. The Black Muslims had formed in 1934 under the leadership of Elijah Muhammad (1897–1975), who advocated creation of a black nation within the United States. By the 1960s, Malcolm X (1925–1965) assumed the leadership role of the Black Muslims and pressed for blacks to fight back as well as separation of the races. He was assassinated in 1965 by members of the Nation of Islam, a religious organization that promoted improved social and economic conditions for black Americans, with whom Malcolm X had political feuds. Inspired by the ideas of Malcolm X, Huey P. Newton (1942–1989) and Bobby Seale (1936–) founded the Black Panthers in 1966 shortly after Malcolm X’s death. The organization initially promoted violent revolution against government authorities. After numerous clashes with police leading to the deaths of some Black Panthers and imprisonment of others, the Black Panthers became less violent. They began providing job training classes for blacks and other peaceful programs. Also in 1966, members of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) including Stokely Carmichael (1941–1998) and H. Rap Brown (1943–) formed the Black Power Movement to more militantly combat racial

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Malcolm X. AP IM AGE S.

violence. They sought to increase the political power of blacks. One way was to take political and economic control of their communities away from whites and promote a black culture. The movement stressed that ‘‘black is beautiful’’ to increase self-respect and pride in the black communities. In addition, the terms ‘‘Negroes’’ and ‘‘colored people’’—relic terms from the Jim Crow era—were replaced by such terms as black Americans, African Americans, and AfroAmericans. Trouble followed Brown in later years. After serving five years in prison for robbery in the 1970s he was convicted in 2002 for the killing of a black sheriff’s deputy in a grocery store he owned in Atlanta, Georgia, and was sentenced to life in prison.

351

Racial Segregation in the American South: Jim Crow Laws

(1901–1981) of the NAACP, James Farmer (1920–1999) of CORE, and Whitney M. Young Jr. (1921–1971) of the Urban League, organized a massive protest march on Washington, D.C. On August 28, 1963, over two hundred thousand blacks and whites descended on the nation’s capital. The highlight of the March on Washington was a series of speeches given from the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. Most notable was King’s appeal for racial equality in America, in which he stated that he had a dream that one day all Americans would enjoy equality and justice. King’s words came to symbolize the goals of the Civil Rights Movement. Perhaps in response to the March, a month later in September 1963 a bomb went off at a black church in Birmingham on a Sunday morning killing four young girls. Following the March, President John F. Kennedy proposed civil rights legislation to end the Jim Crow era discrimination. However it attracted strong opposition in Congress. Following Kennedy’s assassination in November 1963, President Lyndon B. Johnson (1908–1973; served 1963–69) pressed forward with the legislation leading to passage of the landmark Civil Rights Act in July 1964. The act prohibited discrimination in all public places and called for equal opportunity in education and employment. It also authorized the federal government to withhold funds from school districts that refused to admit blacks. Enforcement was difficult because of the lack of cooperation of local authorities in many areas as racial prejudices persisted. The act was a major statement against Jim Crow laws. King won the Nobel Peace Prize that year for his effective nonviolent strategies.

Right to vote Despite the major gains made in civil rights, many officials in the Jim Crow South still resisted enforcing federal laws and court rulings, including the right to vote. Voter registration drives (efforts to register people eligible to vote but not yet registered with local authorities) to register blacks began in 1963 in Mississippi, Alabama, and Georgia. The voter registration drives escalated in the summer of 1964, nicknamed Freedom Summer due to the belief that the ability to vote would lead to greater social justice and freedom from prejudiced governmental policies and laws. SNCC held Freedom Schools, teaching blacks to read and write so they could pass literacy tests required to vote. In June, three 352

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Racial Segregation in the American South: Jim Crow Laws

Protests against local authorities in Alabama escalated, leading to three deaths and hundreds of beating victims. AP IM AGE S.

voter registration activists two of whom were white were kidnapped and murdered in Mississippi. They were missing for forty-four days until their bodies were found buried in a dam. The deaths spread much fear among blacks in the South that they might face violent deaths if they dared to register to vote. However, the crime proved a rallying point for the civil rights movement and greatly increased public awareness elsewhere in the nation about the persecution minorities faced in the South. Eighteen suspects were arrested, but only seven were convicted. In January 1965, King journeyed to Selma, Alabama, to help erase voting rights barriers. The resulting protests against local authorities escalated, leading to three deaths and hundreds of beating victims. On March 7, police on horseback clubbed protestors, dramatizing Southern resistance to equal rights. Eight days later on March 15, President Johnson introduced a voting rights bill to Congress. To bring national attention to the bill, King began a massive four-day march on March 20. Thirty thousand protesters walked from Selma to the state capitol building in Montgomery. They were protected by federal troops mobilized by President Johnson. Another fifty thousand supporters joined the Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

353

Racial Segregation in the American South: Jim Crow Laws

marchers in Montgomery. In another historic speech to the crowd and national media, King demanded that blacks be given the right to vote without unjust restrictions posed by Jim Crow laws and policies. In reaction to the harsh scenes portrayed on the national news programs of peaceful protesters being beaten by Southern law authorities, the American public pressed for further legal safeguards against racial discrimination. Later that year on August 6, Congress passed the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The act banned the poll tax as a voting requirement and placed close federal oversight over Southern voting practices such as voter registration. Any changes in state voting laws had to be approved by the U.S. Department of Justice, and federal officials supervised voter registration where problems had existed in the past. One million black Americans who had never been allowed to cast their ballot before, voted between 1965 and 1968.

Affirmative action In 1965, President Johnson continued to ease discrimination. Declaring it was not enough to end legally enforced discrimination, he pressed to end Jim Crow discriminatory social customs through affirmative action programs. These programs, some directed by the federal government, were to open up opportunities in education and employment long denied to minorities. Affirmative action programs required that employers and schools favor minority and female applicants in an effort to create a more socially diverse workforce or student body. In setting examples of his new policy, Johnson appointed Robert C. Weaver (1907–1997) as secretary of housing and urban development in 1966. Weaver was the first black cabinet member in the United States. The following year, Johnson appointed Thurgood Marshall (1908–1993), a former NAACP lawyer, as the first black member of the U.S. Supreme Court.

Legacy of Jim Crow Despite the major political gains, the lasting effects of Jim Crow remained strong. Many black Americans resided in inner-city slums and faced abusive policing. They enjoyed little change from the earlier decades in terms of prejudice and discrimination. The resulting frustration exploded into violence in the mid-1960s. A series of riots occurred in various cities beginning in Harlem in 1964. In 1965, the South Los Angeles community of Watts rioted killing thirty-four, injuring nine hundred and 354

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Racial Segregation in the American South: Jim Crow Laws

Martin Luther King Jr. at a Tennessee hotel shortly before his assassination. A P IM AG ES .

causing $40 million in damage. Four thousand rioters were arrested. Major riots also occurred in Detroit and Washington, D.C. President Johnson established a commission to study the riots and determine the causes. In a report issued in March 1968, the commission focused on racial prejudice promoted by the Jim Crow era that led to persistent segregation, poor housing, high unemployment, few educational opportunities, and hunger. The report stated that the United States was becoming two societies, one black and one white. The commission recommended major federal programs to address the needs of black America to recover from Jim Crow discrimination. Only a short time after the report was released, King was assassinated on April 4 in Memphis, Tennessee. He was there to support a strike by city workers. Riots erupted in response to the assassination in almost one Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

355

Racial Segregation in the American South: Jim Crow Laws

hundred communities. In response, Johnson pushed through the Civil Rights Act of 1968, which included the Fair Housing Act. The housing act prohibited racial discrimination in the rental and sale of most housing in the United States.

Recovery from Jim Crow Laws banning discrimination aided by affirmative action programs ended the Jim Crow era in the late 1960s. The actions of courageous activists and government leaders contributed to a significant increase in black student enrollments in previously all-white schools. The 1970s saw the high school enrollments of black youth increase from 1.8 million in 1970 to 2.2 million in 1979; students and college enrollment rose from 600,000 to one million from 1970 to 1979. In addition, the number of black-owned businesses grew from 185,000 to 235,000 during the same time period. During this period, a black studies movement developed, increasing awareness and appreciation of black heritage to further the psychological and social healing from Jim Crow prejudices. With blacks’ right to vote protected, the number of blacks elected as government officials rose sharply by the late 1970s. Before long, blacks were elected as mayors of cities including Tom Bradley (1917–1998) of Los Angeles who became one of the first black American mayors of a major city in 1973. Despite these gains, the fight against racial prejudice and discrimination in America continued into the twenty-first century.

For More Information BOOKS

Chafe, William H. Remembering Jim Crow: African Americans Tell About Life in the Segregated South. New York: W. W. Norton, 2001. Collier, Christopher. Reconstruction and the Rise of Jim Crow, 1864–1896. New York: Benchmark Books, 2000. Darby, Jean. Martin Luther King. Minneapolis: Lerner Publications, 1990. Horton, James O., and Lois E. Horton. Slavery and the Making of America. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005. Kelley, Robin D. G., and Earl Lewis. To Make Our World Anew: A History of African Americans. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000. National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. Thirty Years of Lynching in the United States: 1889–1918. New York: Negro Universities Press, 1969. Packard, Jerrold. American Nightmare: The History of Jim Crow. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2002. 356

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Racial Segregation in the American South: Jim Crow Laws

Wormser, Richard. The Rise and Fall of Jim Crow. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2003. WEB SIT ES

National Civil Rights Museum. http://www.civilrightsmuseum.org/ (accessed on November 29, 2006). ‘‘The Rise and Fall of Jim Crow.’’ pbs.org http://www.pbs.org/wnet/jimcrow/ (accessed on November 29, 2006).

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

357

18

Native Americans

ative Americans are the indigenous peoples of the United States. Indigenous peoples are the first or earliest inhabitants of a region. As with indigenous populations in many other parts of the world, indigenous peoples differ in skin color and ethnic customs from the dominant society that assumed control of their lands sometime in the past five hundred years. The term Native American is commonly used to refer to American Indians living within the United States. However, it also includes Hawaiians and some Alaskan Natives not considered American Indians. Therefore, American Indians refers to most Native Americans in the main continental United States plus some native groups in Alaska.

N

The complex legal standing of Native Americans in the early twentyfirst century resulted from governmental laws and policies that built up over centuries. By the twenty-first century over five hundred Native American tribes were officially recognized by the federal government. Although many similarities existed among them, each tribe had its own unique cultural and legal history. Their overall relationship to the U.S. government for over two centuries followed a pattern shifting between periods of support for tribal self-government and economic self-sufficiency to periods of forced Indian inclusion into the dominant white society, known as assimilation. This relationship began taking shape during the seventeenth century. European colonists, who settled along the Eastern Seaboard, negotiated treaties with the local indigenous groups. These colonists brought with them a long-established international policy that treated individual native groups as politically independent nations. During early colonial settlement natives were dying in large numbers from violent conflicts and diseases their immune systems had no resistance to, which were introduced by the colonists from the Old World (the Eastern Hemisphere). Where native groups were able to persist at their settlements, in the 359

Native Americans

WORDS TO KNOW assimilation: Forced inclusion into the dominant society. indigenous: The first or earliest inhabitants of a region. sovereignty: A nation’s ability to govern its own internal affairs.

termination: A tribe no longer having the U.S. government representing its best interests and providing special social services. trust: Holding and managing something of value for the benefit of another person or organization.

treaties the colonists recognized the Indian right of possession to lands they were occupying and using. In return the colonists received promises of peace and security. As a result of these treaties, the tribal groups were internationally recognized as nations well before the United States gained its independence as a nation from Great Britain. This process of formal recognition established the basis for future U.S.–Indian relations from the very beginning of U.S. existence into the early twenty-first century as American Indian communities made a strong economic and political recovery from centuries of prejudice and oppression.

The arrival of European settlement Contact between Western Europeans and Native American societies in North America began in the seventeenth century as the first European colonists settled along the East Coast. The early colonists found numerous Native American settlements across the landscape. Consistent with the European doctrine of discovery used by early explorers in claiming New World lands, the colonists claimed exclusive right for the area they settled to negotiate with peoples who still occupied those lands. At first the small numbers of colonists were outnumbered and vulnerable to hostile attack by the more numerous Indians. Though outnumbered, the colonists carried forward the ethnocentricism (believing one ethnic group’s way of life is superior to all others) that dominated Europe for centuries. They intended to carry civilization as known in Europe to the rest of the world’s populations while helping themselves to the wealth of natural resources available in native-held lands. At first however, the colonists eagerly signed treaties of peace and friendship with 360

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Native Americans

A drawing of Indians trading furs with colonists. COU RTE SY OF THE NAT IO NAL ARC HI VES OF CAN AD A.

Indian groups to ensure their own safety. However, the balance of strength changed as the number of colonists steadily grew and the Indian population along the coast rapidly declined. By the mid-1700s the coastal native population had been dramatically reduced by war, isolated skirmishes, disease, and starvation. Many surviving Indian peoples moved west of the Appalachian Mountains away from the colonial settlements. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

361

Native Americans

In the 1783 Treaty of Paris ending the American Revolution (1775– 83), the newly independent United States gained a claim to lands between the Appalachians and the Mississippi River from Britain. The United States now had the right to negotiate with tribes residing in this western region for the actual possession of their lands for new American settlement. However, racial prejudices of American citizens toward Indian peoples were strong. Not only were Indians considered uncivilized, they had also sided with the British during the Revolution. Now they were considered a defeated enemy. As a result, settlers poured across the Appalachians to settle the fertile Mississippi and Ohio River valleys regardless if the appropriate treaties acquiring possession of the land were completed or not.

Establishing U.S.–Indian relations Adding to the growing conflicts on the American frontier, the Articles of Confederation governing the young nation through its first years largely left Indian relations to the individual states. The new and very weak central government could only take actions that did not get in the way of the states’ activities. Greater decisiveness to address the chaos came soon when the Second Continental Congress adopted the Northwest Ordinance in 1787. The Ordinance formally established the Northwest Territory from lands west of the Appalachian Mountains. Having no funds to finance military conflicts with Indians, the Ordinance attempted to secure peaceful and orderly relations with Indians. While asserting its claim to the newly gained lands from Britain, the Ordinance recognized existing Indian right of possession to those lands. The Ordinance prohibited private individuals and local governments from negotiating treaties or buying these lands directly from Indians. Only the federal government could now negotiate treaties with tribes in that region and guide overall relations with Indians. The policies defining U.S.–tribal relations by the Northwest Ordinance were carried forward into the new U.S. Constitution, adopted in 1789. An example of Congress’s broad powers over Indian relations was Article I, section 8, clause 3 of the Constitution. This clause gave the federal government sole authority to regulate all trade not only with foreign nations and between individual states, but also with Indian tribes. The Constitution also recognized the importance of treaties with Indians. According to Article VI Indian treaties ratified (approved) by the U.S. Senate have the same legal force as federal laws and have priority over state laws. One of the first actions of the new U.S. Congress in 1790 was passage of the Indian Trade and Intercourse Act. The act formed the basis for 362

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Native Americans

U.S.–Indian relations for the next two centuries. It gave Congress broad powers over Indian peoples including control of all interaction between Indians and U.S. citizens. Like the Ordinance, it prohibited states or private citizens from purchasing land from Indians. In addition, any merchant selling to Indians without first receiving government permission could face criminal penalties. The 1790 act started a new era of treaties. Their primary purpose was removing Indians out of the way of the constantly expanding U.S. settlement. In 1800 the native population still possessed three-fourths of what would later be the United States. Between 1790 and 1871 the U.S. Senate ratified over 370 treaties with Indian nations. The treaties not only served to acquire lands, but to gain Indian allegiance to the newly formed nation instead of Britain which had maintained friendly relations with many of the tribes prior to American independence. The treaty process clearly reflected the prejudices of the government negotiators and the society they represented. The treaties largely took place in English and normally in an atmosphere of extreme duress for the tribes. U.S. officials chose which tribal members to negotiate with. Usually those selected had no real tribal authority to sell (cede) tribal lands. The United States always purchased the lands for prices well below fair market value, only a few cents an acre for good farmland. The treaties also promised annual payments to the tribes and delivery of agricultural equipment and other basic necessities, such as blankets to protect against winter cold. These payments and goods frequently never appeared. The treaty process gave the newly established democratic nation a false sense of fairness in the face of bitter prejudice shown by U.S. settlers toward the Indians and the blatant conquest of Indian lands. The treaty process made this transfer of land appear more peaceful and voluntary. Regardless of whether the U.S. government had negotiated treaties for removal of Indians from their land, the new settlers moved in anyway, clearing the natural woods and plowing agricultural fields. Game and natural foods the Indians had relied upon for centuries vanished. In some cases the settlers moved into areas reserved in treaties for Indian use only. The pioneers of predominantly white European ancestry only wanted the dark-skinned Indians out of the way, either peacefully or not.

Hostile conflicts U.S.–Indian relations through the nineteenth century involved numerous skirmishes and battles. The Indians peoples suffered a heavy loss in Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

363

Native Americans

life. Much bitterness developed, particularly owing to the brutal handto-hand combat that these battles frequently involved. The U.S. Army possessed more advanced military technology and a larger supply of arms and ammunition making the outcome of U.S. conquest inevitable. Fighting the outnumbered and outmatched Indians produced new American heroes including future U.S. presidents William Henry Harrison (1773–1841; served 1841) and Andrew Jackson (1767–1845; served 1829–37). The Indian peoples repeatedly stiffened their resistance to the continued loss of their homelands to American settlers. On different occasions new Indian leaders promoted a return to traditional beliefs and ways of life, called revitalization. They rejected American goods including alcohol and other undesirable American habits.

The civilization program The U.S. government constantly sought ways of avoiding conflicts with Indians and protecting lives of its citizens. In the early nineteenth century the government introduced a program to civilize indigenous peoples. Displaying prejudices toward ethnic lifestyles of natives, the U.S. leaders wanted to turn Indians from hunters into farmers in order to civilize them. The government provided agricultural implements and spinning wheels to encourage the farming lifestyle. The Office of Indian Affairs (later Bureau of Indian Affairs) in 1824 was created to administer government Indian policies. However, surprisingly to the ethnocentric Americans, Indians consistently showed a stronger determination to maintain their traditional economies. Indians did not find this new European way of civilized life acceptable. Many Indians sought wage labor in the newly established frontier towns. However, there exclusion from residing in these communities based on racial prejudice made it difficult. States mounted legal challenges to U.S. recognition of tribal sovereignty and the exclusive control over Indian relations held by Congress. Sovereignty represents a nation’s ability to govern its own internal affairs. States wanted to gain control over Indian relations. As a result, U.S. Indian policy became further defined by three landmark Supreme Court decisions between 1823 and 1832, known as the Marshall Trilogy after legendary Supreme Court chief justice John Marshall (1756–1835). The Court’s opinions expressed in Johnson v. McIntosh (1823), Cherokee Nation v. Georgia (1831), and Worcester v. Georgia (1832) reaffirmed 364

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Native Americans

A painting of The Trail of Tears, the forcible removal of the Cherokee Indians to the West. THE GRA NGE R C OLL EC TIO N, LTD .

the tribal right to occupy and govern its own lands that were free from state jurisdiction (the geographic area over which law enforcement or courts have legal authority) on their own lands, referred to as Indian Country, and defined a U.S. moral trust responsibility to the tribes. Marshall called tribes domestic dependent nations. The trust obligations meant the United States was responsible for Indian health and welfare and their economic well-being. The Marshall Trilogy established the legal status of the Indian tribes in the United States. Unfortunately for Indian peoples at the time, these legal principles were not well received by the U.S. population. Even President Jackson ignored the Court’s rulings and pressed on with harsh Indian policies. Before long, the U.S. government abandoned efforts to civilize Indian peoples. Instead, it adopted policies to isolate Indian peoples including even forced removal. The 1830 Indian Removal Act led to mass relocations of those surviving Indian peoples still remaining east of the Mississippi River. Under this policy, the United States forcefully removed members of the Five Civilized Tribes (Choctaw, Seminole, Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

365

Native Americans

Cherokee, Creek, and Chickasaw) from the Southeastern United States to the newly created Oklahoma Indian Territory. Thousands of deaths directly resulted from initial long-term detention followed by the 1,800mile, six-month march known as the Trail of Tears.

Reservation period Through much of the nineteenth century American settlement continued its relentless march westward under the highly prejudiced notion of Manifest Destiny. Under this idea, U.S. citizens believed they had a God-given right to spread its influence across the North American continent to the shores of the Pacific Ocean. This expansion involved removal of Indian peoples they considered uncivilized and not making good use of the land by farming. Following the acquisition of the Southwest from Mexico and the opening of the Oregon Trail to the Pacific Northwest in the 1840s, Indian removal policies of the 1830s continued into the 1870s. Through more treaties, tribes exchanged land, water, and mineral rights for promises of peace, security, healthcare, and education. The western treaties created a vast reserve system in which surviving Indian peoples could exclusively exercise their inherent (acquired at birth) rights within certain defined territories, called reservations. The reservations were usually located in remote areas judged unsuitable for white settlement. In 1871 Congress officially closed the treaty period with more than 650 treaties signed and 370 ratified into law. Signing these treaties was one matter for the U.S. government, honoring them was another. Many believed that the dwindling native populations in the late nineteenth century would eventually cease to exist altogether. Consequently, some U.S. leaders considered the treaties only a temporary measure. Instead, these reservations formed the basis for Indian communities and governments into the twenty-first century. With Congressional action in 1871 Indian removal was considered essentially complete. However, with discoveries of new goldfields in the 1860s, the remote reservation lands increasingly looked attractive to prospectors and settlers. Some of the last treaties forced tribes to greatly reduce the size of reservations promised in earlier treaties. Throughout the nineteenth century Indians were banished from towns and relegated to remote reservations. A system for policing Indians developed largely outside the normal U.S. court jurisdiction. Indian agents working for the Office of Indian Affairs had ready access 366

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Native Americans

to the U.S. military and exercised broad authority. They routinely detained individual Indians for a wide range of alleged actions. Finally advocates for Indians took a case to federal courts. In 1879 a federal court ruled that Indians off-reservation were persons as defined in the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. They had the same constitutional due process (legal protections through established formal procedures) and equal protection rights (all persons treated fairly before the law) as U.S. citizens. The ruling meant the U.S. Army could no longer exercise broad authority to detain Indians while off the reservation without full civilian constitutional protections.

Assimilation policies By the 1880s, many believed the only chance of survival for Indians was through integration into society. A major period of forced cultural assimilation began with the General Allotment Act of 1887. To a large degree this act marked a return to the highly prejudiced desire of civilizing Indian peoples. Believing the indigenous tradition of communally owning land was a major cultural barrier to Indians adopting Western ways, Congress passed the Allotment Act, also known as the Dawes Act. The act authorized the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) to divide communal reservation lands into smaller, privately owned parcels. The agency allotted 160-acre parcels to families and 80-acre parcels to single adults over eighteen years of age. Indians receiving allotments also received U.S. citizenship supposedly to speed their assimilation. U.S. policymakers reasoned that if they owned their own property, Indians would most likely become farmers and adopt the U.S. social values. Given the dramatic decrease of the Indian population before 1887, a large amount of reservation land was left over after each tribal member or family had received their allotment. The BIA declared those unallotted lands as surplus and sold them to non-Indians. Often these were the more agriculturally productive lands on reservations. In addition to the loss of these so-called surplus lands, much allotted land went into forfeiture (was lost) when many Indians could not afford to pay taxes on their often remote, unproductive desert properties. This land, too, went to nonIndians eventually. Even when land was productive, markets were usually still too distant to deliver produce in this era before refrigerated railway cars. As a result, the allotment policy was an economic disaster for Indian peoples. The size of Indian Country in the United States decreased from 138 million acres in 1887 to just 48 million acres by 1934. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

367

Native Americans

As part of its assimilation policies, Congress later passed the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924. The act granted all Indians citizenship. The act also made Indians citizens of the states in which they resided.

More legal challenges The legal status of Indian tribes once again became a topic of the U.S. Supreme Court in the early twentieth century. Some of these decisions focused on the results of the early prejudices associated with the early treaty negotiations. In Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock (1903) the Court ruled that Congress has the plenary (absolute) power to take away tribal rights. However, the federal trust responsibility identified by Supreme Court chief justice Marshall eighty years earlier required careful exercise of this absolute power, using it only when Congress believed it was beneficial to Indian peoples. In United States v. Winans (1905), the Supreme Court established the Reserved Rights Doctrine. The doctrine meant that tribes retain inherent rights until explicitly taken away by Congress. For example, a tribe retains its hunting and fishing rights even if its reservation is taken away by Congress unless legislation specifically states that the rights are no longer valid. In Winters v. United States (1908), the Supreme Court ruled that the creation of reservations through treaties also carried with them implied (unwritten) water rights (right of a user to a particular water source) necessary to support residential and economic use of the reservation. The decision, known as the Winters Doctrine, remained central to water rights negotiations into the twenty-first century involving tribes, private landowners, and public agencies, particularly in Western states. To resolve legal disputes over how treaties are to be interpreted, the Court created the doctrine known as ‘‘canons of construction’’ in its 1908 Winters ruling. This doctrine stated that courts should always interpret unclear treaty language from the tribal perspective.

Renewed hope at survival It is estimated the peak Native American population was perhaps as high as ten million people prior to the arrival of European explorers and settlers in the Western Hemisphere in the sixteenth century. The population plummeted to less than 300,000 by the 1920s, at its lowest point. By the late 1920s American Indians had been stripped of almost all their traditional lands. Surviving Indians were isolated on remote 368

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Native Americans

reservations or in rural communities, trapped in oppressive poverty with few opportunities for an education and poor access to health services. Highly prejudiced government programs prohibited them to practice ancient Indian traditions. A 1928 study by the Brookings Institution, The Problem of Indian Administration, documented in detail the dire situation of Native Americans in the United States. In the midst of this desperate situation, hope came in 1933 when newly elected president Franklin D. Roosevelt (1882–1945; served 1933–45) named Harold Ickes (1874–1952) as secretary of the interior. Ickes was a champion of civil liberties and not prejudiced against traditional native cultures. Ickes appointed John Collier (1884–1968), a leading critic of earlier federal Indian policies, to serve as U.S. commissioner of Indian affairs. Collier recommended an end to assimilation policies and Congress responded. Under the guidance of Ickes and Collier, the 1930s became a turning point in American Indian history. The decade was marked by the Great Depression, a major decline in the nation’s economy. Numerous federal programs of the Roosevelt administration designed to help those Americans suffering the most from hunger and unemployment were collectively known as the New Deal. Those programs aimed more directly toward Native Americans became known as the Indian New Deal. Using the 1928 report as a guide, Collier reformed the governmental policies guiding American Indian affairs. The U.S. Office of Indian Affairs (later renamed the Bureau of Indian Affairs or BIA) now promoted the continued political and cultural existence of tribes. American Indians would not be forced to blend into the dominant American white culture. Importantly, social services available to Indians were improved. Collier wanted to provide tribes a way to pursue economic development while maintaining their individual tribal cultures. To achieve this goal he guided through Congress the Indian Reorganization Act (IRA) of 1934. Still based on Western society racial prejudices, the act gave tribes an option of adopting written constitutions establishing democratic forms of government and forming federally chartered corporations. In creating an IRA government, a tribe could receive federal funds to purchase land, start businesses, and receive social services. Some 252 tribes held elections to decide whether to create an IRA government. Of these 174 tribes voted to accept IRA conditions. However, ultimately only 92 tribes actually adopted IRA constitutions. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

369

Native Americans

John Collier with Blackfoot Indians. Collier served as commissioner of Indian affairs. # BE TT MAN N/ COR BI S.

Other tribes chose to organize new governments under their own tribal rules. Despite its limited acceptance by tribes, the IRA stopped the ongoing loss of American Indian lands and provided a major source of funds for tribes to pursue economic recovery. The IRA took a big step toward increasing tribal economic and political independence. On the other hand, the IRA-established tribal governments often clashed with the tribe’s traditional leaders causing strife within tribal communities. Nonetheless, some tribes with a sufficient land base and marketable natural resources, such as timber, developed a strong economy and prospered during this period. Collier orchestrated other reforms. To improve education and health services, Congress passed the Johnson-O’Malley Act in 1934. The act authorized the federal government to pay public school districts for expenses related to educating Indian children in their classrooms. 370

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Native Americans

In 1935 Congress created the Indian Arts and Crafts Board to encourage American Indians to produce traditional as well as contemporary arts and crafts. The Board adopted standards for Indian crafts to guarantee their value. Indians could also now trademark their designs. The Board established galleries where Indians could market their crafts. The locations were in Washington, D.C.; Montana; South Dakota; Oklahoma; and at the World’s Fair in San Francisco, California, in 1939 and 1940. In New Mexico the New Deal’s Works Progress Administration (WPA) hired artists and musicians to teach Indian crafts and traditions that had been almost lost. A small group of Indian artisans whose influence would grow later in the twentieth century emerged from these governmental programs.

Assimilation through termination Thousands of Indians served in the U.S. military abroad during World War II (1939–45) while others worked in defense plants. Much like African Americans at the time, their exposure to mainstream society during the war made life on poverty-ridden reservations less acceptable as they returned from active duty or the assembly line following the war. A population shift from reservations to cities began. Meanwhile, the U.S. Indian policies took another turn away from promotion of Indian traditions. As the population trend toward cities increased, special interests longing for valuable Indian-owned assets persuaded Congress to shift policy back to assimilation, this time known as termination. Termination of a tribe meant ending its special trust relationship with the U.S. government and converting tribal reservation lands to private lands. Access to federal health and education services was also curtailed. The assimilation policies in the 1950s were designed to increase integration of Indian peoples into mainstream U.S. society. The government created the Adult Vocational Training Program and the Employment Assistance Program to promote urban relocation. From 1952 to 1972 the government sent over one hundred thousand Indians from reservations to urban job placement centers. The percentage of Indians living in cities expanded from only 10 percent in 1930 to almost 30 percent in 1960. Approximately one hundred tribes were selected for termination through acts passed by Congress. As in the allotment period, much Indian land was sold to non-Indians or became public lands including Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

371

Native Americans

National Forests. The economic base for those Indian communities was devastated. Also as part of termination, Congress passed Public Law 280 in 1953. The act expanded state jurisdiction onto tribal lands in selected states. Tribal sovereignty was decreased even further.

A return to tribal support Congressional support for the termination policies did not last long. Once again U.S. Indian policy took another dramatic shift. The 1970s saw renewed support for tribal government independence. What was referred to as the tribal self-determination era began in which the tribes could govern their own internal affairs. Changes in support of tribes began again in the 1960s. Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act exempted Indians from job discrimination in certain circumstances. For example, the BIA could favor Indian applicants in filling jobs within the agency. The 1974 Supreme Court ruling in Morton v. Mancari affirmed that the federal government can treat American Indians differently from other U.S. citizens, despite antidiscrimination laws, when applying for jobs in the BIA. The Court ruled that when a government agency acts to protect Indian interests and promote tribal sovereignty, then tribes are considered political groups, not racial or ethnic groups. Other legal distinctions for Indians were also identified. To ensure consistent civil rights protections within the individual tribes Congress passed the Indian Civil Rights Act (ICRA) of 1968. The act extended most of the U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights (first ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution recognizing certain rights and protections) to Indian peoples. These individual rights and protections included free speech protections, free exercise of religion, and due process (designated to protect the legal rights of individuals) and equal protection of tribal government laws. The act did not extend to Indians the prohibition on government support of a religion. Tribal governments were free to promote their own tribal religions. The biggest boost in support of tribal sovereignty and self-sufficiency came in 1975 when Congress passed the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act. The act gave the BIA and other agencies authority to transfer responsibility for administering certain tribal programs to the tribes. The programs must be those federal programs benefiting Indian peoples, such as programs providing health and education services to tribal communities. 372

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Native Americans

As the Indian population shift from reservations to cities progressed, problems of racial discrimination and poverty became prevalent for urban Indians. Underemployment led to homelessness, rampant substance abuse, and unusually high injury, disease, death, and infant mortality rates. To provide support for the expanding Indian urban population, Indian centers, clubs, and churches appeared in many cities. In 1976 Congress passed the Indian Health Care Improvement Act to address the urban Indian plight by bringing increased healthcare services to Indians.

Resurgence gains momentum With the resurgence of some tribal economies in the 1980s and resulting improved living conditions on reservations, Indians began moving back to their rural tribal communities from the cities. The educations and skills they acquired in mainstream society further propelled Indian Country resurgence. As the wealth of some tribes increased, questions and issues related to tribal membership and rights, claims to Indian ancestry or tribal affiliation, and intellectual property issues (who has the right to represent Indian interests to the mainstream society) became key areas of concern. Determining who was Indian had increasingly important financial and legal consequences. Individuals could gain tribal membership through birth or marriage and may have substantial non-Indian ancestry. However, a person of total Indian ancestry who never establishes a relationship with a tribe cannot claim legal Indian status. Because of tribal sovereignty, each tribe was responsible for determining the basis for its membership. Generally, an Indian could be anyone having some degree of Indian ancestry, considered a member of an Indian community, and promoting himself as Indian. Congress continued passing acts protecting tribal rights and interests, including the American Indian Religious Freedom Act (1978), the Indian Mineral Development Act (1982), the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (1990), and the Indian Self-Governance Act (1994). The 1994 act amended the earlier 1975 Self-Determination Act making more federal government services to tribes subject to tribal administration.

A key player on the national scene By the late twentieth century, a special branch of law in the U.S. legal system had even become recognized, referred to as Indian law. In the early Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

373

Native Americans

twenty-first century 554 tribes were formally recognized as sovereign nations located within the boundaries of the United States. These tribal governments oversaw about 56 million acres, or just over 2 percent of lands within the United States. In 2000 approximately two million Native Americans lived on 314 reservations and in cities. More than 250 native languages were still spoken in Indian Country. The percentage of Indians living in cities grew to 56 percent by 1990. The majority of American Indians now lived in urban areas. Despite the population shift, the reservations in Indian Country remained the focus of native pride and political identity separate from American white culture. Issues of tribal sovereignty persisted into the new century related to natural resource management and economic development. By the beginning of the twenty-first century tribal lands held much of the last remaining deposits of natural resources in North America. Ongoing issues involved water rights, forest management, restoration of fish runs, mineral development (including gold, copper, zinc, oil and gas, uranium, and coal), cleanup of heavy-metal poisoning left from earlier mining activity, and management of major waterways including the Columbia, Snake, Colorado, and Missouri rivers. Legal conflicts frequently pitted private interests and state governments against tribal governments with the federal government weighing in on various sides depending on the circumstances behind the particular dispute. Tribal governments and their peoples continued to enjoy a unique legal status. Under the sovereignty concept, tribes could form and reorganize their own governments, determine tribal membership, regulate individual property, manage natural resources, provide health services, develop businesses, regulate commerce on tribal lands, collect taxes, maintain law enforcement, and establish tribal court systems. Members of federally recognized tribes were both U.S. and tribal citizens, simultaneously receiving benefits and protections from federal, state, and tribal governments.

Indian gaming A new era of tribal economics arrived in 1988 when Congress passed the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. By the end of the twentieth century, onethird of the 554 federally recognized tribes operated some form of gaming establishment. Annual revenue was estimated at $6 billion. Due to tribal sovereignty, casino revenues were tax free. However, agreements with individual states required by the act often provided some funding to states to pay for increased community needs due to their popular businesses. 374

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Native Americans

By the end of the twentieth century, one-third of the 554 federally recognized tribes operated some form of gaming establishment. AP IMA GE S.

These needs included improved roads and sewers and expanded police capabilities in the communities. The financial success of the individual gaming businesses varied greatly. The most notable success in gaming was the Foxwoods Casino and Resort, operated by the Mashantucket Pequots of Connecticut, a tribe of only five hundred members. Comprised of three million square feet plus a high-rise hotel and twenty-four restaurants, in 1998 it was the largest tribal facility in the country. By the late 1990s the tribe was making over $1 billion a year through its casino and other businesses. It had become the largest employer in New England and largest landowner in Connecticut with the land purchases the tribe made. Similar stories unfolded elsewhere in the country though normally at a lesser scale. The Coeur d’Alene Tribe of northern Idaho with its newfound gaming income built a $5 million wellness center and a 8,000-bed hospital. For the Ojibwa of Minnesota, who built two lavish casino and hotel complexes in the early 1990s including the Grand Casino Mille Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

375

Native Americans

Lacs, unemployment fell from 46 percent to less than 10 percent. Housing for tribal members improved and the tribes acquired new lands. The Oneida of Wisconsin became the largest employer in the Green Bay area due to gaming and other business ventures.

Other economic gains Gaming revenues first went into education, housing, health and elder care, and law enforcement. But as wealth accumulated, investments in a wide range of developments grew. In addition, donations were made to local non-Indian community needs. Indian gaming successes gave rise to a new generation of Native American entrepreneurs. Economic issues involving casino development usually grabbed the public’s attention, but tribes were also investing in a diversity of other long-term business ventures. Economic investments involved billions of dollars. Many of these new business leaders saw gaming as a means to establish long-term more diverse tribal economies involving non-gaming developments. Tribal acquisitions ranged from golf courses to industrial parks. Unemployment rates in many areas plummeted. Their goal was a lasting increase in quality of life. Tribes also built new cultural centers to help reconstruct tribal identities lost over the centuries of oppression from dominant societies. They focused on lost languages, songs, dances, and other traditions.

A prejudiced reaction The substantial economic gains some tribes were able to achieve brought a backlash from the federal and state governments and the general public. Issues of economic development and tribal sovereignty became increasingly intermixed. With incomes growing for some tribes, opposition rose to the tax-free and largely regulation-free status of tribes. Many complained that tribal businesses operating free of state taxes and regulations had an unfair competitive edge against non-Indian businesses. The concept of tribal sovereignty came increasingly under attack. Tribal leaders responded that this challenge only represented what tribes had faced for centuries: whenever Indians gained something of value, the dominant white society wanted it. Opposition grew against placing more land in trust for tribes as tribes purchased more lands. When lands are placed into federal trust they become exempt from local taxation and zoning requirements since they are not privately owned. 376

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Native Americans

Members of the American Indian Movement at a rally with the founder of the AIM, Dennis Banks, holding his daughter. MS . I LKA HAR TM AN N.

Tribes began spending millions of dollars in donations to political parties and hiring lawyers, lobbyists, and public relations firms. Some tribes have even opened lobbying offices in Washington. During the summer of 1999, Indian peoples filed a class-action lawsuit against the BIA alleging over two centuries of misuse of Indian assets held in trust by the U.S. government. They were asking for tens of billions of dollars in payment. The lawsuit captured national headlines in the following years as major changes were made in the way the government administered tribal programs.

Prejudice and poverty remained Despite dramatic economic gains by some tribes in the late twentieth century, by 2000 Indian reservations overall still had a poverty rate of 31 percent, six times the national average at the time. Health and education needs were high. Almost 60 percent of Native Americans lived in substandard housing while large numbers were homeless. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

377

Native Americans

American Indian Movement The civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s, which made progress toward ending certain forms of racial discrimination of African Americans, inspired Indian activism and radicalism including growth of what became known as the Red Power movement. Among various organizations was the American Indian Movement (AIM) in the summer of 1968 by Dennis Banks (1937–) and others on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation, an Indian community long known for its poverty and isolation. AIM was formed to protect traditional ways of the Indian communities and inspire a cultural rejuvenation. Specific issues included from alleged heavy-handed police actions against tribal members and government takeover of Sioux lands in the Black Hills of South Dakota for gold mining. AIM was more confrontational than most social activist organizations of the time. They confronted government agencies and organizations that sought to marginalize American Indians. AIM caught national attention in November 1972 when AIM members seized the Washington, D.C., headquarters of the BIA in

protest of the agency’s policies. Twenty-four were arrested. The following year a gun battle erupted between Banks and approximately two hundred AIM members and FBI on the Pine Ridge Reservation at Wounded Knee, South Dakota. The standoff lasted seventy-one days. Three tribal members were killed. In 1975 more violence erupted between AIM members and FBI leading to the deaths of two tribal members and two FBI agents in separate incidents. AIM member Leonard Peltier (1944–) was convicted in 1977 for the murder of the agents and became a symbol of American Indian radicalism as he served a life sentence in prison. AIM remained active in the early twenty-first century advocating American Indian interests. Their involvement included the protest of schools and sports teams using indigenous caricatures as mascots and protests of the Lewis and Clark Bicentennial celebrating U.S. exploration of the American West in the early nineteenth century. Another early leader of AIM, Russell Means (1939–), ran for governor of New Mexico in 2001.

American Indians in the United States suffered higher rates of tuberculosis, liver disease, cancer, pneumonia, diabetes, suicide, and homicide than the general U.S. population. In many tribes amputations, blindness, and dialysis were a way of life as diabetes is rampant. The Indian Health Services (IHS), a U.S. federal agency, provided health care for about three-fourths of the two million Native Americans in the United States. Health care was provided at both reservation health centers and in urban clinics. Recognizing the hopelessness and despair still prevalent in much of Indian Country, in March 2000 the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights recommended formation of a federal task force to seek solutions. In April 2000 President Bill Clinton (1946–; served 1993–2001) visited the Navajo Nation to stress how the American 378

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Native Americans

economic boom of the 1990s had bypassed some Native American communities. Almost 40 percent of Navajo households were still without electricity, 70 percent were without telephones, and the unemployment rate was 50 percent. Despite foreign incursions of epic proportions into their native lands over the past five centuries, Native Americans refused to just disappear. Though isolated on poverty-stricken reservations and in inner cities for much of two centuries, the Native population had rebounded in population size as well as economically and politically.

For More Information B O O KS

Dowd, Gregory. A Spirited Resistance: The North American Indian Struggle for Unity, 1745–1815. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1992. Matthiessen, Peter. In the Spirit of Crazy Horse. New York: Penguin Books, 1992. Washburn, Wilcomb E., ed. Handbook of North American Indians: History of Indian-White Relations. Vol. 4. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution, 1988. Wilkinson, Charles F. American Indians, Time, and the Law: Native Societies in a Modern Constitutional Democracy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1987. WEB SIT ES

American Indian Movement. http://www.aimovement.org/ (accessed on November 29, 2006). National Congress of American Indians. http://www.ncai.org/ (accessed on November 29, 2006).

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

379

19

The Holocaust

olocaust (a program of genocide pursued by Nazi Germany during World War II to rid Europe of Jews and others leading to the murder of eleven million people including six million Jews) refers to the systematic killing of almost six million Jewish men, women, and children by the German government under approval of German dictator, or ruler, Adolf Hitler (1889–1945). Hitler directed this massive and centrally organized plan of murder during World War II (1939–45). World War II was a global conflict between the Axis powers of Germany, Japan, and Italy, and the Allied powers led by Britain, the United States, and the Soviet Union. Hitler intended to racially purify Germany by ridding nation of its Jewish population in addition to Roma (Gypsies), ethnic Slavs of eastern Europe, and others considered undesirable. Race refers to a segment of the world’s population that is socially identified by certain physical characteristics, usually skin color but also hair texture, eye shape, or some other physical trait.

H

For Germany, a primary goal of the war was the extermination of all Jews in Europe. The Holocaust lasted from 1933 to 1945, with the most intense activity occurring in the war years between 1942 and 1944. The killing was carried out using the most advanced technology available to kill as many people as possible. As stated by author Martin Gilbert in his 1986 book The Holocaust: A History of the Jews of Europe during the Second World War, the German leaders referred to the mass murder of Jews as ‘‘the final solution of the Jewish question.’’ The term holocaust is derived from the Greek word holokauston that refers to a sacrifice, burned in whole, to God. The word was used since the late nineteenth century to describe major disasters. However, since World War II the term has been solely associated with Nazi (a political party in Germany more formally known as the National Socialist German Workers’ Party led by Adolf Hitler from 1920 to 1945) Germany’s genocide of Jews since the dead bodies were burned in 381

The Holocaust

WORDS TO KNOW anti-Semitism: Prejudice against members of the Jewish faith. concentration camp: A location set aside to hold detainees, such as prisoners of war, refugees, or political prisoners, usually in crowded conditions. crime against humanity: A criminal offense in international law that refers to murderous actions on such a large scale that it affects the global population as a whole.

Jews and others, leading to the murder of eleven million people including six million Jews. Nazi: A political party in Germany more formally known as the National Socialist German Says Workers’ Party led by Adolf Hitler from 1920 to 1945.

genocide: A deliberate destruction of a political or cultural human group.

prejudice: A negative attitude, emotion, or behavior towards individuals based on a prejudgment about those individuals with no prior knowledge or experience.

Holocaust: A program of genocide pursued by Nazi Germany during World War II to rid Europe of

scapegoat: A person or people blamed or punished for the things done by others.

whole in crematoriums and open fires. Genocide is a planned, systematic attempt to eliminate an entire targeted group of people by murdering all members of that group. Long-standing prejudice (a negative attitude towards others based on a prejudgment about those individuals with no prior knowledge or experience) against the Jews allowed Hitler and the Nazis to pursue the Holocaust. Prejudice against Jews extended back for centuries in ancient Europe. This prejudice, both religious and racial forms, became known as anti-Semitism (prejudice against members of the Jewish faith). The term ‘‘Semites’’ comes from a biblical term referring to ancient peoples of the Near East, including early Israelites, who spoke languages related to Hebrew. Even though Semites included Arabs and other peoples besides Jews, in modern times anti-Semitism refers specifically to prejudicial attitudes against anyone of the Jewish faith. Jews who had converted to other religions and no longer practiced Judaism were still victims of antiSemitic prejudice. A basic goal of the Nazi Party was promotion of a pure German race they considered superior to all others, the Aryans. Aryan race refers to people living mostly in northern Europe. They are characterized as tall, blond, and blue-eyed. Though no such thing as an Aryan race actually exists, Hitler promoted it as the master race with the Germans at the top. 382

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

The Holocaust

The Holocaust represents to the world the utter depths to which humans can descend in their treatment of others based simply on prejudice as is typical in genocides. Germans referred to Jews as subhumans. Jews were scapegoats, blamed for many of the problems plaguing Germany in the 1930s. Scapegoats are people blamed for the actions of others. Scapegoating is a major factor in most forms of prejudice. The prejudice against Jews became central to German society and governmental actions.

The rise of anti-Semitism For the past two thousand years since the rise of the Jewish faith, anti-Semitism could be found wherever Jews lived outside the Palestinian homeland located at the eastern end of the Mediterranean Sea. Anti-Semitism in the early Greek and Roman civilizations focused more on religious prejudice. Judaism was based on the worship of a single God. The other societies had different religions in which they worshiped many gods. Jews were seen as different and disloyal.

Nazi leader Adolf Hitler. # B ETT MA NN/ CO RBI S.

Strife between Jews and Christians, followers of Jesus Christ, began not long after the crucifixion of Jesus in about the year 29. With the approval of Jewish leaders, the Roman Emperor killed Jesus, a Jew. By the year 70, Christians, who believed Jesus was the Son of God, were blaming Jews for allowing his death. Jews denied that Jesus was the Son of God, that he was neither a prophet nor divine. Jews believed that God could not be separated into different parts, but is a unified whole. They were called Christ-killers and considered evil. Jewish-Christian strife continued through the next few centuries as Jews continued to reject the increasingly popular Christian faith. Jewish communities were attacked on occasion. In the predominantly Christian Roman Empire (27 BCE –476 CE ), which included territories from Great Britain and Germany to North Africa, laws enforced prejudices against Jews by restricting their freedoms, such as living in certain areas or pursuing certain occupations. During the eleventh century, Christian crusaders targeted Jews and murdered thousands of them in the name of God. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

383

The Holocaust

Centuries of persecution During the Middle Ages (from the fifth to the sixteenth centuries), Jews were denied citizenship and rights enjoyed by others in most of Europe. They could not become members of craftsmen guilds. In 1096, open violence against Jews broke out in Europe and the Holy Roman Empire. Jews were required to wear yellow badges identifying them as Jews. Jews in some towns were placed in ghettos, separate from the rest of society. (Ghettos were small, run-down sections of cities where Jews were forced to live, usually behind stone walls or barbed-wire fences policed by armed guards.) This practice of segregation (using laws or social customs to separate certain social groups based on some characteristic, such as race, gender, or religious affiliation) continued for centuries in Europe. In the fourteenth century, Jews were blamed for the plague, a very contagious, usually fatal epidemic disease, which killed millions of people in Europe. The Jews were blamed for poisoning the water wells thus causing the disease. As commerce (business) expanded in the late Middle Ages, some Jewish businessmen prospered in trade, banking, and financing. These financial successes increased resentment—along with greater prejudice and discrimination—against Jews. They were expelled from England and a growing number of regions in Europe from the late thirteenth century to sixteenth century. Even in Spain, where Jews were numerous and a key part of society, they were expelled in the 1490s. These series of expulsions from Western Europe led to centers of Jewish life shifting to Turkey, Poland, and Russia. Jewish persecutions in Western Europe continued through the eighteenth century. The French Revolution in 1789 finally lessened discrimination against Jews as equality for all was emphasized.

From religious to racial prejudice With the rise of nationalism in Europe in the nineteenth century, conflicts between countries were largely fueled by racial or ethnic differences rather than religious ones. Nationalism refers to a belief that a particular nation is superior to other nations. Jews began to be persecuted as a race with distinct physical differences, such as facial characteristics or body form, rather than as a religious group. The term ‘‘anti-Semitism’’ was first used around 1873. The new nations sought racial or ethnic purity within their boundaries. Jews were now considered inferior to the Aryan race through propaganda of the Nazi Party as promoted in speeches and 384

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

The Holocaust

books. Anti-Jewish riots called pogroms broke out in western Russia in the 1880s when many Jewish homes were destroyed and their occupants left impoverished, and Jews were restricted in their activities, such as living in rural areas, participating in local elections, or working in certain occupations, such as law practices. These pogroms led to emigration to other countries such as the United States. World War I (1914–18), fought in Europe, led to many population displacements (being forced to leave traditional homelands). This triggered an increase in anti-Semitism as displaced peoples needed a scapegoat on which to blame their misery. In trying to ease tensions, Britain, which gained control of much of the Middle East from Germany following the war, declared a part of the Palestine area as the Jewish National Home in 1917. It also identified an area for Palestinian Arabs. The action only served to inflame hatreds between the two groups, who both claimed the same sacred grounds.

The Nazis gain followers The National Socialist Germany Workers’ Party, called Nazis for short, came to power in Germany in January 1933 with their leader Adolf Hitler. The strongly nationalistic Nazis offered hope for the German public still suffering under difficult economic conditions that began at the end of World War I. Many experiencing poverty and hunger were angry over their nation’s plight. The Nazis promised jobs and food. The Nazi Party was founded on racist ideas that purifying the German population would be a cure for Germany’s ills. Hitler had written of the removal of Jews from Germany as early as 1919, right after Germany’s defeat in World War I. Others discussed the elimination of what they considered worthless people. The Jews, again made scapegoats, were blamed for Germany’s loss in World War I. Hitler’s 1925 epic book Mein Kampf (My Struggle) portrayed the Jews as an evil race that was seeking domination of the world. He praised the virtues of the Aryan race and claimed it was the government’s duty to protect the purity of the race. It was the duty of the Germans to rid their beloved country of the evil Jews, according to Hitler. As Hitler began his rise to power, the book became a best-seller in Germany. Jews were portrayed as a race, not a religious group. Even those who had converted to other religions were still considered Jews by German authorities and the public. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

385

The Holocaust

German girls show their support for the Nazi party, waving Nazi flags by a roadside. # BE TTM AN N/ COR BI S.

Hitler promotes a New Germany Upon assuming leadership, the Nazis immediately began strengthening political control over the country. Jews were considered the chief enemies of the state. In reaction to the growing anti-Semitism in Germany, many countries boycotted (refused to buy goods or services from a business or country until their demands are met) German goods. On April 1, 1933, the German government responded with a boycott of Jewish-owned businesses. On that day, German soldiers were positioned in front of every Jewish business forbidding anyone from going into the stores and businesses. The boycott further escalated anti-Semitism in the country. Only one week later, Germany passed the first anti-Jewish law, the Law 386

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

The Holocaust

for the Restoration of the Civil Service. Under the law Jews were fired from government positions. In addition, by May the government also restricted the number of Jewish students admitted to German schools. On May 10 of that year, anti-Semitic violence escalated as thousands of German students, along with many professors, stormed university libraries and bookstores in cities across Germany. In great bonfires they burned books written by Jews and other authors considered non-Aryan. Any books that were critical of Nazi policies were thrown into the fires. One-third of the books in Germany were destroyed. The first concentration camps within Germany were established in 1933, primarily for political prisoners and those considered undesirable because of their ethnic background or disabilities. A concentration camp is a location set aside to hold detainees, such as prisoners of war, refugees, or political prisoners, usually in crowded conditions. These early camps did not include the gas chambers that came into existence several years later. In September 1935, the Nazi Party at its annual rally in Nuremberg adopted a set of laws that became known as the Nuremberg Laws. One was the Law for the Protection of German Blood and German Honor. The second was titled the Law of the Reich (German government) Citizen. These laws provided a legal definition of a Jew and an Aryan. They were used to categorize people in German-controlled territories over the next several years. Marriage and sexual relations between Jews and others were prohibited. Jews no longer held political and civil rights. They could not vote or hold political office and had no legal protections. Jews also had to register the property they owned with government authorities. They were now simply subjects of the German state. The categorization of Jews was not based on religious beliefs, but on the number of Jewish grandparents a person had. Any Jewish blood at all meant a person was a Jew. Alarmed by the formalization of these policies, Jews began seeking refuge (safety) in other countries. However, most countries, including the United States, were not sympathetic to the growing Jewish plight in Germany due to prevalent anti-Semitic attitudes in their own societies as well as not fully understanding the genocide that was developing in Germany. As with other immigrant groups such as Asians, the government set strict limitations on the number of Jews that were allowed to immigrate into their countries. The small Jewish community in Palestine in the Middle East was most willing to accept Jewish immigrants. Many Jews had little option but to persevere through the growing antiSemitism in Germany. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

387

The Holocaust

Violence begins with escalating anti-Semitism Carefully orchestrated by the German government, violence against Jews erupted on the evening of November 9, 1938, across Germany and German-controlled Austria. Over the next two days, rioters burned or damaged over one thousand Jewish synagogues (places of worship) and damaged almost eight thousand Jewish-owned businesses. Approximately thirty thousand Jewish men between the ages of sixteen and sixty were arrested and sent to concentration camps. This was the first of hundreds of mass arrests of Jews. Around one hundred Jews died from sporadic beatings and shootings. Another two thousand died in the concentration camps over the next three months before their release. Fireman stood by during the riots, primarily making sure fires did not spread to non-Jewish property. The riots became known as Kristallnacht, or the ‘‘Night of Broken Glass.’’ Those arrested were released once their families paid a fine. Three days later, German leaders met to assess the cost of the damage from the rioting. They fined the Jewish community for the damage costs and made them responsible for cleaning up and repairing the damage. Victims were prohibited from collecting insurance payments for their losses. After Kristallnacht the German Jewish population saw there was no hope for them under Nazi rule leading to likely hundreds of suicides. Those Jews who could leave did with some 115,000 emigrating to other European countries or elsewhere including the United States, Palestine, and Asia. Laws already existed that banned Jews from obtaining college degrees, owning businesses, or practicing law or medicine for nonJewish clients. New laws were passed following Kristallnacht, restricting Jews from public places such as theaters and public schools and banning the use of radios and telephones. They also had to sit in separate compartments on trains. Confiscation of property, known as Aryanization of the German economy and begun in 1937, continued. By April 1939, almost all Jewish businesses had closed. The closures were especially devastating to Jews because they were, by and large, merchants. They commonly did not work for other companies or people, but worked in family-owned or Jewish businesses. Without this ability, their incomes were virtually nonexistent. By September 1941, all Jews in Germany were forced to wear a yellow star patch on their clothes in public. Germans were eager to send the Jews elsewhere, even including the prospect of establishing a large reservation (a tract of public land set aside for a special purpose, such as placement of an undesired social group away 388

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

The Holocaust

During Kristallnacht, or the ‘‘Night of Broken Glass,’’ rioters burned or damaged over one thousand Jewish synagogues and damaged almost eight thousand Jewish-owned businesses. # B ETT MA NN/ CO RBI S.

from mainstream society) in Poland. Other options more distant included the possibilities of creating a state of Israel (new sovereign nation with a biblical name) in the Middle East or shipping the Jews to the large island of Madagascar off the coast of Africa. Poland, however, refused to accept more Jews after November 1939 due to the severe anti-Semitic attitudes there and the British navy blocked the Madagascar option. The Germans under Hitler made life so unbearable for German Jews that hundreds of thousands decided to leave the country of their own accord. Between 1933 and 1941, the number of Jews in Germany declined from 500,000 to 164,000. Those who left carried with them only suitcases, leaving all else behind. Those who stayed did not think conditions could get any worse. It was difficult for the Jews to anticipate what was coming in the form of the Holocaust and they had few places to go where they were welcomed. Some Jewish parents, fearing the worst, Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

389

The Holocaust

sent their children away on trains, later referred to as orphan trains when the Holocaust claimed the lives of the parents who stayed behind.

Other targeted groups Others besides Jews who were considered politically undesirable or racially inferior were also targets of Nazi prejudicial policies. These included political opponents, members of the Social Democrat Party, union members, those who refused to serve in Hitler’s army, homosexuals, the physically or mentally disabled, and Gypsies. Around twenty thousand Jehovah’s Witnesses (an international religion) were imprisoned because they refused to serve in the military or hold Hitler in great esteem. (Jehovah’s Witnesses are members of a religious group who oppose war and preach the imminent end of the world.) Approximately twelve hundred of them died in the camps. Nazi police raided gay bars beginning in 1933, arresting male homosexuals. Homosexuals would not be contributing to the reproduction of the master race, so they were deemed useless. Nazis also believed homosexuality could be contagious, like a disease. Females were not targeted since they were not considered a threat to future generations of the German race. Many homosexuals were convicted under anti-gay laws and sent to prison. Some were castrated (had their private parts removed). Others were placed in mental hospitals. About fifteen thousand died in concentration camps, where they were forced to wear special yellow armbands and pink triangles to signify their homosexuality. The mentally and physically disabled were viewed as contrary to Nazi ideas of a master Aryan race. In addition, they posed a burden on society. German leaders believed that eliminating those considered physically or mentally unfit would result in an improved Aryan race. This was the first group to be exterminated (systematically killed) under the 1939 T-4 Euthanasia Program. At first mentally and physically handicapped children were executed by individual lethal injections. Then as the number of victims grew including large numbers of handicapped adults, the Germans began using carbon monoxide gas pumped into rooms referred to as gas chambers. By 1939, six large concentration camps existed where the handicapped were bused. German officials told their families that they were being taken to a place where they would receive improved treatment by the state. Following their execution and cremation, an urn of ashes and a false death certificate were sent to the families. Of course, the ashes were not of the specific individual since the victims were 390

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

The Holocaust

cremated en masse. The practice of extermination using gas chambers and mass crematories began with the T-4 Program. The Germans rounded up the mentally retarded, physically disabled, and others with mental health problems and murdered them in mass numbers. The T-4 Program killed over 200,000 people between 1939 and 1941. Another four hundred thousand were sterilized, or surgically made unable to have children, against their will. Like the Jews, another group that faced brutal treatment was the Gypsies. (Gypsies, also known as Roma, are people of several different tribes that are believed to have originated in India.) By the end of World War II, around 220,000 Gypsies—almost half of the entire Gypsy population—would be exterminated.

The assault on Polish Jews As Germany expanded its control in 1938 and early 1939 over Austria, Moravia, and Bohemia (later the Czech Republic), more and more Jews came under German control. On September 1, 1939, the military invasion of Poland, where many Jews lived, brought the Final Solution to the Jewish Question, or what Nazis wanted to do with the Jewish people, to the critical point. (The Final Solution, devised by high-ranking Nazi officials, involved the murder of every Jew in Europe, regardless of age, gender, or social status.) Poland contained most of Europe’s Jews, almost five million people. Jews in Poland were less integrated into the general Polish society than in Western Europe and were more readily identifiable merely by their appearance. Many lived in rural communities, spoke Yiddish, and dressed traditionally with beards, hats, and long coats. The same was true of Jews in Russia who had distinctive language, customs, and dress. Cruelty by Germans toward Polish Jews occurred immediately upon the German invasion. Dehumanizing tactics such as pulling out by hand or setting fire to Jewish men’s beards were common. Approximately five thousand Jews were killed in Poland in the first two months of German rule before the later death camps were established. With a desire to increase the size of Germany, the Germans sought Polish land by first destroying Polish society so that the German army could take control without opposition. The Nazi army rounded up about thirty thousand Polish intellectuals and political figures. Approximately seven thousand of them were eventually killed. Polish political leaders and priests were also captured and killed. Poland was then divided between Germany and the Soviet Union. About two million Jews lived Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

391

The Holocaust

in the part controlled by Germany. German leaders debated ways to rid the region of Jews. Thoughts of shipping the Jews to the southeast coast of Africa proved impractical because there were too many. On September 21, 1939, the Germans began concentrating Jews into large ghettos located in the oldest and most run-down sections of town where sanitation was very poor. The Nazis selected willing Jews to serve on Jewish councils. They were responsible for governing the ghetto and carrying out Nazi orders. The largest ghetto was located in Poland’s capital city of Warsaw and called the Warsaw Ghetto. It contained around 380,000 people, comprising 30 percent of the Warsaw’s population. The ghettos were like large crowded prisons, as barbed wire fences surrounded them. Schools and religious practice were banned. From 1940 to 1942, extreme overcrowding led to infectious diseases such as typhoid, malnutrition, and poverty during the bitter cold winters. Approximately sixteen thousand died of typhus in the Warsaw Ghetto in 1941. Death from starvation was also common. Many Jews figured this would be their plight for the remainder of the war.

A decision for genocide By early 1941, Hitler and German leaders had decided how to eliminate the Jewish population. They chose genocide. Germany began a program of systematically killing Jews in June 1941 when it invaded its former ally, the Soviet Union. Entering the Soviet territory along with the German army were three thousand men who volunteered to serve in special killing units, called Einsatzgrappen. In a July speech, Hitler encouraged the death squads. Following the main army by two or three days, they were responsible for killing all Jews, Gypsies, and Soviet officers in areas captured by the German army. Their general process was to enter a captured town, round up targeted individuals, take them to the edge of town, and shoot them. The bodies were buried in mass graves at the location where they were executed. In some cases, mobile death vans drove around eastern Europe and Russia, with gunmen killing as they went. It was not uncommon for entire rural villages to be executed. During the summer of 1941, around seventy thousand Jews were killed outside Vilna, Lithuania. On June 30, approximately fourteen thousand Romanian Jews were murdered. In two days in late September, almost thirty-four thousand Jews were killed outside Kiev, Ukraine. Another nine thousand were killed in late October in Kaunas, Lithuania. Over twenty-five thousand were killed outside Riga, Latvia, by early December. 392

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

The Holocaust

Altogether, almost two million Jews, Gypsies, and Soviets were murdered. When the Soviets mounted a counterattack, Nazi special units different from the killing units, whose members were volunteers, dug up as many bodies as possible in the mass graves to burn them and destroy the evidence. During the summer of 1941, the Germans began experimenting with poison gas for mass killings to keep the costs down and to not involve a large number of German troops who were needed at the battle fronts. They used Zyklon-B at the Auschwitz concentration camp in southern Poland, killing 250 hospital patients and 600 Russian prisoners. The experiment was successful and construction of death camps began. Ironically, Zyklon B had been developed by a German Jew during World War I.

Experimenting in Mass Killing When Germany occupied Belarus during its invasion of Russia in 1942, the Germans began experimenting with captured mental patients on how to most efficiently kill multiple people at once. They would stand victims in a line to see how many could be killed by firing a single bullet. They also experimented with dynamite but this proved ineffective by not killing all the victims immediately. Neither approach proved very effective. In October 1941, Germans began experimenting with carbon monoxide gas, using truck exhaust fumes piped into the back of a truck filled with people. By using bigger trucks they were able to kill larger groups in shorter periods of time. This method led to the creation of gas chambers for use during the war.

Creation of extermination centers By the fall of 1941, Hitler and Heinrich Himmler (1900–1945) finalized plans for killing Jews in mass numbers. The Jews were now firmly under German control especially since their avenues for flight to other countries were limited. The Germans also sought to rid Europe of Slavs (Polish, Russian, and Ukrainian peoples) as well as Latvians, Estonians, and Lithuanians. The first to die were the political leaders and most educated of these populations who constituted much of the leadership. Rather than sending out death squads to kill people, the victims would now be transported by train to the seven newly built extermination centers—Auschwitz, Belzec, Chelmno, Majdanek, Sobibor, Treblinka, and Maly Trostenets. All were located in Poland and all were finished by summer of 1942. The extermination centers were designed to make mass killing most efficient using permanently built gas chambers and adjoining crematoriums to burn the bodies. Gas chambers were disguised as showers. It would take only a small number of camp staff to kill tens of thousands of people a month. Carbon monoxide was first used as the poisoning gas. Later Zyklon-B was used. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

393

The Holocaust

SS troops leading Jews in the forcible deportation from the Warsaw Ghetto. N ATI ON AL A RC HIV ES /US HM M PH OTO AR CHI VE S.

Extermination begins Himmler gave the order on July 19, 1942, to begin deporting Jews from the Polish ghettos. Three days later, deportation from the Warsaw Ghetto began. To make the transport of thousands from the ghettos to the death camps go smoothly, the Germans called the process ‘ resettlement’’ rather than ‘ deportation.’’ They promised more food, warmer clothing, and work. Over the following fifty-two days, around three hundred thousand people were transported by rail to the Treblinka extermination camp from Warsaw. The Germans kept detailed records of the killings in thousands of reports. Detailed lists of the victims were compiled and their seized personal property was catalogued and tagged. Germans removed gold teeth from the bodies and sorted the clothing, including shoes and coats. Valuables went into special bank accounts or were sold. The overall value gathered throughout the entire Holocaust was $128 million. Women’s hair was cleaned and woven into gloves and socks for German submarine crews to stay warm. 394

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

The Holocaust

Much manpower was dedicated to the extermination program. At the forefront was the special German military force, the SS (abbreviation of the German word Schutzstaffel), led by Himmler. The SS served as guards and killers. The regular German army ran the camps, formed the ghettos, transported prisoners, and supervised slave labor. Those Germans involved in the Holocaust were not only soldiers, but also civilian clerks and officials as well in addition to physicians, a number of ministries, and local police. Citizens of countries occupied by German forces also helped round up and kill Jews.

The process of extermination The deportations were massive in scale. The Germans used thousands of railway freight cars traveling over hundreds of thousands of track. Up to 130 inmates rode in a single windowless cattle car with no room to sit or lie down for trips that lasted several days. The Germans provided no food, water, or heat. Deportees froze to death in the winter and suffocated in the summer months. In an effort to keep the prisoners disorganized and in shock, German guards orchestrated what appeared to prisoners as a chaotic situation upon arrival of each train at a death camp. The Germans then quickly marched the inmates in large lines, tearing apart families while deciding who would die immediately and who would work in labor camps. The gas chambers were disguised as shower rooms and the victims were handed towels and soap (children received candy), before going in. Therefore, people walked quietly and obediently to their deaths. Once in, the doors were locked behind them and gas piped in. Death occurred within five to forty-five minutes. The bodies were then taken next door to the crematorium to be burned. Thousands of other concentration and labor camps were built through the German-occupied territories of Europe. Life in these camps was brutal, with torture and beatings routinely carried out. An industry was established at every camp to make use of the slave labor. Private industry, including the companies Siemens, Porsche, and Bayer, would buy inmates for the day. Adult males might cost $3.60, while a child cost 90 cents. The labor camps often had no barracks; workers would simply sleep on the bare ground. They had little to eat and no warm clothing. Fighting was common among the prisoners for items such as a stale loaf of bread, a blanket, or a pair of shoes. When they became too weak or sick to work, they were shot or beaten to death. The death camps themselves were built by slave labor. Inmates were literally worked to death. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

395

The Holocaust

Those not killed immediately were shaved of all hair, sent to real showers, sprayed with a disinfectant, and given uniforms of rough cloth and wooden shoes. Each prisoner was assigned an identification number, which was tattooed on the inside of the forearm. Besides Jews wearing yellow patches, prisoners wore color-coded triangular patches. Political prisoners wore red triangles, asocial people (those who did not blend in to German society) black, homosexuals pink, Jehovah’s Witnesses purple, and habitual criminals green. They never received a change of clothes and became infested with fleas and contagious lice. Every action of the Germans was designed to break the spirit of the inmates. In barracks, four to five people slept on a single bench level with a mattress of filthy straw on a wooden plank. Buckets served as toilets. Daily roll call occurred at 4:00 A . M ., and even those who had died in the night were dragged out to be accounted for. Food usually consisted of watery, saltless soup made with rotten vegetables and spoiled meat, and a few ounces of bread. Hunger was persistent. At some camps, gruesome medical experiments were performed on live victims, such as seeing the effects of freezing to death, testing various drugs, and performing amputations without medication. Some prisoners threw themselves into the electrified fences to give themselves a mercifully quick death. Those few who manage to survive did so through bribery and stealing for extra food and clothing.

Killing by the numbers in Poland At Auschwitz, between 1.1 and 1.6 million people were killed. The extermination camp of Auschwitz became the most notorious of the camps for the large numbers of people killed there. Around eight thousand innocent people were killed there each day. It was divided into three camps: a prison camp, an extermination camp, and a slave-labor camp. Upon arrival, Jewish prisoners would be sorted into the camps. Pregnant women, handicapped, sick, elderly, and young children were sent straight to the extermination camp for killing. Those who were able-bodied were sent to the labor camp for work at factories built next to the camp to aid the German war cause. Given insufficient food, shelter, medical care, and clothing, the laborers often worked themselves to death. Those unable to work further were sent to the gas chambers. The prison camp was also used for non-Jewish prisoners. Over 200,000 Gypsies were killed at Auschwitz. The number of deaths also mounted at other Polish camps. Treblinka operated for seventeen months. A staff of 120 killed between 396

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

The Holocaust

Polish children standing behind a barbed wire fence in the extermination camp Auschwitz. US HM M.

750,000 and 900,000. Belzec operated for ten months and claimed the lives of 434,000 Jews. About 250,000 were killed at Sobibor. When the killings ended at both Treblinka and Sobibor, all traces of the camps were removed and farms were built on the sites.

Extermination elsewhere Twenty-one countries were directly affected by the mass killings. Central and eastern Europe were most affected. Besides Poland in eastern Europe, Germany invaded Hungary (in March 1944). Until then, the Hungarian government had refused to transport its Jews to German camps. However, with the change in government, 440,000 Jews were rounded up for deportation. After being initially confined in ghettos, beginning in mid-May they were transported to Auschwitz. The entire process took less than two months and 147 train trips. In addition to those transported on trains, about 20,000 Budapest Jews were shot on the banks of the Danube River and another 70,000 were sent on a death march to Austria. Along the way thousands died of starvation, exposure to weather, or a bullet to the brain. Some countries, in support of Germany, did the killings themselves. Among these were Romania and Croatia whose leaders agreed with Nazi policies. Romanians killed up to 380,000 Jews. At one Romanian Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

397

The Holocaust

Between 1.1 and 1.6 million people were killed at Auschwitz. # B ET TMA NN/ CO RB IS.

concentration camp at Bogdanovka, 54,000 Jews were exterminated between December 21 and 31, 1941. The Croatian government killed up to 390,000 Jews. Other countries tried sending their Jews to safety as quickly as possible when they fell under German control. Denmark did not have a history of anti-Semitism. As a result, it sent almost 7,500 Jews to Sweden in fishing boats in October 1943. Bulgaria also refused to deport the 50,000 Jews living there to German camps as they stayed relatively safely in Bulgaria. The occupation of France was divided between Germany and Germany’s war ally, Italy. The Italians did not pursue mass killing of the four thousand Jews in their region until they themselves were overtaken by Germany. However the French leaders in the German-controlled area, known as Vichy France, assisted in killings. 398

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

The Holocaust

The final count It is estimated that between five and seven million Jews were killed, or 64 percent of the Jews in Europe. This amounted to 35 percent of the world’s Jewish population. The Germans killed three million Jews in Poland alone (over 90 percent of the Jewish population in that country) and over one million in the Soviet Union. Over 70 percent of the Jewish population was killed in Yugoslavia, Greece, the Netherlands, Hungary, Lithuania, Bohemia, Slovakia, and Latvia. Over 50 percent of the Jewish population in Belgium, Romania, Luxembourg, Norway, and Estonia was killed. Over 25 percent of the Jewish population in France and Italy was killed. Overall some nine to eleven million people were killed including non-Jewish peoples. This included millions of Soviet prisoners and Slavic civilians. Among the Jews that died, some researchers figured that over 800,000 died in ghettos, close to two million were shot in open areas primarily in 1941 before the death camps were built, and almost three million were killed in the camps.

Unprepared to fight back Efforts to rescue Jews from the Holocaust were widespread. However, people involved in helping Jews faced death if caught. Some people risked all to aid Jewish families. They generally helped by providing hiding places and food for weeks or longer. Among Germans who sought to save Jews from death was Oskar Schindler (1908–1974), a German businessman who used Jewish slave labor in Poland. He went to great lengths using his exceptional persuasive skills to protect his Jewish workers from persecution. The Jewish population found it almost impossible to defend itself against the massive German war machine. Overall, the Jews were unprepared and did not anticipate the German plan of extermination. Also, the rapid expansion of Germany into Eastern Europe caught everyone by surprise. Various factors discouraged meaningful resistance. Jews had no access to arms. They were often surrounded in their own neighborhoods by anti-Semitic people. The Germans continuously disguised what was going on, and they threatened reprisals against people’s friends and relatives if they resisted. Deceptions included having prisoners send postcards to friends and relatives upon their arrival at camps. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

399

The Holocaust

To stop a rebellion that had started in the Warsaw Ghetto, Nazi troops burned the ghetto to the ground, killing all remaining Jews. # HU LTO N-D EU TSC H CO LLE CT IO N/C OR BIS .

Jews had known a long history of persecution, yet had always recovered. They never had their own nation or an army, and Judaism discouraged fighting their persecutors. They believed whatever travesty was occurring was God’s will and they were martyrs for God. In addition, any form of resistance was essentially suicide against the more numerous, well-armed Nazis and the Jewish faith prohibited suicide. Fear of imminent death did lead to some acts of organized resistance in ghettos and camps including over one hundred armed uprisings. None of the ghetto uprisings was successful. The largest organized Jewish resistance, the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, occurred in April 1943, nine months after the Germans began transporting ghetto inhabitants to Treblinka (see box). Several uprisings occurred in the Treblinka extermination camp in August 1943, at Sobibor in October 1943, and at Auschwitz in January 400

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

The Holocaust

Warsaw Ghetto Uprising On September 5, 1942, the German military began rounding up to deport the last 115,000 Jews left of the original 500,000 that had been crowded into the Warsaw Ghetto. They shipped out approximately 10,000 people each day. When there were only 42,000 Jews remaining, a rebellion erupted. Jews formed the Jewish Combat Organization (ZOB) and busied themselves digging a network of bunkers and secret passageways in preparation for making a last stand of resistance against the Nazis. On January 18, 1943, German troops entered the ghetto to round up more Jews for transport and met gunfire. Fifty German soldiers were killed or

wounded as they retreated. This initial success by the rebels led to increased support of the ZOB as it grew to include around one thousand members. They even received more weapons from the Polish resistance fighters operating nearby. Meanwhile, the Germans regrouped. On April 19, two thousand German soldiers with tanks entered the ghetto. After eleven hours of intense fighting they once again retreated. The Germans cut off gas, electricity, and water and began shelling the ghetto with heavy artillery. The fighting continued until May 16 when the ghetto was burned completely to the ground by the Germans, killing all remaining Jews.

1944. Few prisoners found freedom from all the escape attempts in the ghettos and camps. Most of those who did manage to escape were usually captured, killed by anti-Semitic public, or died of exposure in the unforgiving cold of the countryside. A main point of controversy between Western leaders and surviving Jews was the lack of action by Allied forces, even after intelligence information began filtering to British and American authorities about what was occurring as early as 1941. By the end of 1942, knowledge of the use of gas chambers and the Holocaust in general had become clear. The Allies believed that the problem could not be resolved until the war was over. No action was taken such as bombing the camps or railroad tracks used to deliver the victims. Even the German public, aware of mass killing of Jews but perhaps not about gas chambers, did nothing. In effect, they gave consent if not active support. Even the Catholic Church leadership, which had signed an agreement with the German Nazis in 1933 agreeing to stay out of politics in return for freedom of worship for German Catholics, never publicly criticized the mass killings. One reason given was fear of Nazi retaliation against German Catholics. The Catholic Church, which had a long history of anti-Semitism, had supported Hitler’s rise to power. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

401

The Holocaust

Conclusion of the Holocaust The extent to which Germans tried to conceal the still ongoing Holocaust toward the end of the war revealed the continued dedication they had to the mass killing of Jews. Even in the last months of the war when the Germans knew their cause was lost, they continued the mass killings and worked hard to destroy the evidence. Special German units dug up mass graves and burned the remains. By mid-1944, Allied forces were closing in on Germany. In July, advancing Soviet troops discovered the first major camp, Majdanek. Germans frantically evacuated the various camps as Allied forces approached each one. They forced remaining prisoners to march long distances in the winter conditions toward central Germany. Those who could not keep up with the pace were shot. For example, as Soviet troops were approaching Auschwitz in January 1945, the Germans marched 60,000 remaining prisoners 35 miles before boarding them on trains to other concentration camps. Approximately 15,000 died on the way. American and British forces approaching from the west in spring of 1945 unexpectedly came upon concentration camps. There they discovered gruesome reminders of what had gone on at these camps. At Dachau, the Allied troops found twenty-eight railway cars stuffed with corpses. At Bergen-Belsen, the surviving 60,000 prisoners were in such bad condition that some 28,000 died shortly after being rescued.

Displaced persons At war’s end, the Allied forces found between seven and nine million displaced people living outside their home countries. Displaced persons camps were established according to nationalities for Jews and others. Over six million returned to their home countries. However, over one million refugees refused to return. Some refugees had assisted Nazis during the war and feared retaliation if they returned to their communities. Others did not want to return to territories that were now under Soviet occupation and Communist governments (system of government in which the state controls the economy and a single party holds power). For many Jews, there was no home to return to. The communities were destroyed and families eliminated. Few nations were willing to accept them. In addition, physical recovery from near-starvation was lengthy. Over 250,000 remained in displacement camps for years suffering severe psychological effects from the death camps, the horrific conditions, and extensive loss of friends and family. 402

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

The Holocaust

American soldiers walk by rows and rows of corpses at a Nazi concentration camp. The Army found more than 3,000 bodies, and a handful of survivors. A P IM AG ES.

Increasingly, people looked to the establishment of a Jewish homeland in the British-controlled Middle East region of Palestine. Creation of Israel in 1948 provided a solution to the Jewish refugee problem. The displaced persons camps were finally closed by 1952.

The aftermath of genocide Not surprisingly, the immediate aftermath of the Holocaust was also a very difficult period for survivors. With millions of families broken apart and whole communities destroyed, the search for friends and loved ones was difficult. For the survivors, the Holocaust was not an experience that could be forgotten. Memories of inmates being humiliated, tortured, and Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

403

The Holocaust

killed remained unspeakable. By the twenty-first century, searchable computer databases contained the names of three million Jewish victims. A number of courtroom trials were held over the next several decades related to atrocities associated with the Holocaust. One of the more famous was the Nuremburg trials, held immediately after the war in 1945 and 1946. Nuremburg had been the site of Nazi Party rallies through the 1930s. An International Military Tribunal, a military court, was established in August 1945 by Allied forces in U.S.-controlled section of Germany in Nuremburg. It tried twenty-two high-ranking Nazi officials on charges of various war crimes. One newly established type of war crime was called crimes against humanity. These crimes included various inhumane acts against civilians, such as mass murder, extermination, and enslavement. Over five thousand Germans were convicted of war crimes by 1949. The defendants included physicians, judges, commanders of killing squads and concentration camps, German military leaders, and business leaders who made profits from slave labor. The trials brought the Holocaust to the attention of the world. As a result of the Holocaust, human rights international law grew. The United Nations adopted the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in 1948. The Holocaust trials, which continued through the remainder of the twentieth century, also set a precedent for future war crimes trials conducted by international tribunals, such as cases involving atrocities in Bosnia and Rwanda.

Settling claims The return of property taken by German authorities from Jewish people during the war was a major issue that continued to be debated into the twenty-first century. For example, in the late 1990s, the world learned that Swiss bankers had received gold and other valuables from the German Nazis and kept it. International criticism of Switzerland led to a backlash of anti-Semitic sentiment in the country. The fall of the eastern European Communist governments in 1990 opened new avenues for tracing seized property. Legal struggles over pieces of seized artwork that had been sold and resold developed in several countries. In addition to the recovery of seized property, the German government established a special fund to compensate with payments those who had been subjected to slave labor during the war. However, the funding proved difficult to raise among German companies and the government. 404

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

The Holocaust

Tributes to Holocaust victims Following the war, Germany was divided into two parts, one occupied by the Allied forces and the other occupied by the Soviet Union. This partition into West and East Germany lasted the next several decades. Following the reunification of the two sections of Germany in the 1990s, the German parliament voted in 1999 to build a Holocaust memorial in the capital of Berlin. Pope John Paul II (1920–2005), the first and only pope from Poland, witnessed the Holocaust as a youth. He improved relations between followers of Judaism and Catholicism and became the first pope to visit a Jewish synagogue in 1986. While visiting Israel in 2000, Pope John Paul asserted that anti-Semitism was anti-Christian. By late 2005, about 120,000 Holocaust survivors still lived in the United States. The Los Angeles area included around 10,000, one of the largest survivor groups in the world. They formed The 1939 Club, a reference to the year Hitler invaded Poland and the mass killings began. The club meets regularly and develops its own educational programs to combat antiSemitism and donates money to other organizations that also pursue similar goals.

Holocaust Denial By the twenty-first century, a major issue arose when some public figures claimed the Holocaust never happened or was not nearly as severe as commonly portrayed. These included Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (1956–), who made threatening statements about the continued existence of Israel in 2006. This attitude, known as Holocaust denial, had originally surfaced in the 1960s in France. At the time, oral history projects were busy recording the memories of Holocaust survivors for future generations. Holocaust denial was labeled as another form of anti-Semitism. Several countries made the public expression of Holocaust denial a crime, including France, Poland, Austria, Switzerland, Germany, Belgium, and Romania. To keep alive memories of the Holocaust, in November 2005 the UN General Assembly designated January 27 as the International Day of Commemoration in Memory of the Victims of the Holocaust. This date commemorated the day in 1945 that the remaining inmates of Auschwitz were liberated by Allied troops.

Interest in the Holocaust continued into the twenty-first century. Besides continuing as a major influence on art and literature, two major movies were released in the 1990s that kept the issue at the public forefront: Schindler’s List (1993), which offered a fictionalized account of Oskar Schindler’s life, and Life Is Beautiful (1997), a foreign language romance that won three Oscar Awards. The number of memorials and museums continued to grow. Built in 1993, the United States Holocaust Museum on the Mall of Washington, D.C., serves not only as a memorial to the Holocaust victims, but as a center for public interpretive displays and resources for the study of the Holocaust. The public still wondered how so many seemingly reasonable and educated people could obey such immoral orders in the mid-twentieth century. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

405

The Holocaust

For More Information BOOKS

Altman, Linda J. Hitler’s Rise to Power and the Holocaust. Berkeley Heights, NJ: Enslow, 2003. Des Pres, Terrence. The Survivor: An Anatomy of Life in the Death Camps. New York: Oxford University Press, 1980. Frank, Anne. The Diary of a Young Girl. New York: Doubleday, 1995. Friedlander, Henry. The Origins of Nazi Genocide: From Euthanasia to the Final Solution. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1995. Gilbert, Martin. The Holocaust: A History of the Jews of Europe during the Second World War. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1986. Levi, Primo. Survival in Auschwitz: The Nazi Assault on Humanity. New York: Collier Books, 1993. Sereny, Gitta. Into That Darkness: An Examination of Conscience. New York: Vintage Books, 1983. WEB SIT ES

Holocaust Survivors. http://www.holocaustsurvivors.org/ (accessed on November 29, 2006). United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. http://www.ushmm.org (accessed on November 29, 2006).

406

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

20

Religious Politics: Northern Ireland and England he United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is located in Western Europe. Separated from the mainland continent by the North Sea and English Channel, Great Britain includes England, Scotland, and Wales. West of Great Britain and separated by the Irish Sea, Northern Ireland is located at the northern end of an island mass that includes the modern independent nation of Ireland. England, its capital is London, is the administrative and economic center of the United Kingdom. By the late sixteenth century, England had become the world’s leading military and commercial power. With its superior naval fleet, England took control of countries and regions worldwide. Collectively these holdings, called colonies, were known as the British Empire. England’s worldwide dominance came to an end in the first half of the twentieth century following World War I (1914–18) and World War II (1939–45). Many English colonies, predominately these in Africa and Asia, were granted independence between 1945 and 1951. Ireland became a nation independent of England in 1949. Northern Ireland remained a part of the United Kingdom. Prejudice (a negative attitude towards others based on a prejudgment about those individuals with no prior knowledge or experience) between Irish Catholics and Irish Protestants in Northern Ireland led to centuries of war with England. The suppression of Irish Catholics in Northern Ireland resulted in open rebellion to English rule. Political and religious discrimination (treating some differently than others or favoring one social group over another based on prejudices) divided the country into the twentieth century. The long-running conflict reached its most violent phase between 1968 and 1994. By the time an agreement was reached between the two sides, thousands had died and many more had their lives permanently altered by prolonged disruption of day-to-day life under the constant threat of violence.

T

407

Religious Politics: Northern Ireland and England

WORDS TO KNOW ceasefire: Stopping active hostilities. guerrilla warfare: Irregular fighting by independent bands. internment: To confine or imprison a person without a trial.

stereotyping: An oversimplified prejudgment of others using physical or behavioral characteristics, usually exaggerated, that supposedly apply to every member of that group.

Parliament: The national legislative body in various nations including Great Britain.

History of English rule over Ireland The English government took control of Ireland in the twelfth century, and a long struggle developed between the Irish and their English rulers. The English based their army in Dublin, Ireland’s capital city. An Anglo-Irish Parliament was established by the English conquerors, who held most of the seats of power in the Parliament (government). They allowed only a few native-born Irishmen to participate in the governing body, and those representatives had no real power. ‘ Anglo’’ is a term used interchangeably with the term ‘ English.’’ Wars broke out between the army and the Irish population who were opposed to English rule. By the fourteenth century, Scottish invaders landed in Ireland and allied with local Irish tribal chiefs to weaken English rule. Eventually, English power was limited to an area around Dublin called the Pale. By the mid-fifteenth century, English noblemen living in the Pale of Ireland participated in the Wars of the Roses (1455–85) with hopes of increasing their control. The name of the wars came from the depiction of roses on badges representing the two warring English royal factions. Unsuccessful in their attempts, the wars only further weakened England’s power in Ireland. Nevertheless, in 1495, the English Parliament subjected all of Ireland to their direct command with an act called Poyning’s Law, named after the English-appointed governor of Ireland who sought to secure Ireland under English rule. The social fabric of Ireland further unraveled when the English tried to force their own religion on the Irish. In 1534, King Henry VIII (1491– 1547) formed the Anglican Church, or the Church of England. Citing political and religious differences, King Henry broke ties with the Roman Catholic Church, whose seat of power was in Rome. Henry named himself 408

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Religious Politics: Northern Ireland and England

Orangemen Orangemen belong to a Protestant men’s organization called the Orange Order. Founded in 1795 in Loughgall, Ireland, it is largely based in the province of Ulster and western Scotland, but it is a worldwide organization. Separate chapters are located in England, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United States, and West Africa. Its supporters see the Orange Order as a means to celebrate Protestant culture and identity. Throughout its history, the Orange Order has been associated with politics in Northern Ireland. From the beginning, there was a formal association with the Ulster Unionist Party. The Party was established in 1905 to resist Home Rule, Irish selfgovernment independent from the British Parliament in London. Catholic membership in the party was discouraged. Unionist members were most always Orangemen as well, and Catholics were barred from membership in the Orange Order. The influence of the Orangemen in the government of Northern Ireland was deep and wide-ranging. The Unionist Party was the controlling government from 1921 until 1972. Until 1969, all of the prime ministers of Northern Ireland and all but three cabinet ministers were Orangemen. Eighty-seven of the ninety-five Members of Parliament and every Unionist senator but one was an Orangeman until 1969.

The political connection between the two remained until March of 2005 when most Orangemen transferred their allegiance to the Democratic Unionist Party. The Orange Order holds annual marches or parades along traditional routes on roadways in their chapter’s home town. The first Orange parade was held in 1796 in County Armagh, Ireland. Marches have led to rioting, violence, and death in the twentieth century. In Northern Ireland, problems became more intense when traditional routes for Orangemen parades, with their anti-Catholic theme, took them into housing areas now occupied by Catholics. In 1935, thousands of Catholics were forced to leave their homes in Ulster after rioting sparked by a parade left several dead. Many of the bands hired by the Orangemen for their parades openly advertised their association with paramilitary groups (units formed on a military pattern to wield military force against Catholics). The traditional songs at the Orange parades contain lyrics that are insulting and threatening to Catholics and have led to some serious disturbances. Both sides take their community’s rights very seriously. Protestants declare their right to freedom of speech and Catholics respond with their right to freedom from fear.

head of the new church he created in England. This protest against Roman Catholicism marked the beginning of Protestantism in England. Despite the fact that most of Ireland’s inhabitants were Catholic, England’s King Henry VIII created a Protestant ‘‘Church of Ireland’’ in 1541. Catholic monasteries were abolished and Roman Catholicism was prohibited in England and Ireland. This blatant discrimination against their religion intensified Irish hatred of the English rule. When the English suppressed an Irish rebellion in 1649, they seized much of the land in the northeastern province of Ulster. English and Scottish Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

409

Religious Politics: Northern Ireland and England

Protestants settled this land as part of the large-scale colonization of Ireland. As the Protestants moved into Ireland, many Catholics were driven off their lands. Irish farmers found themselves in a tenant farm system. Under the tenant system, Irish farmers worked the land for English landlords who often lived elsewhere. Landlords took the profits while providing the farmers who rented and lived on their land with bare basic necessities. Continuous open rebellion in Ireland led to the reversal of Poyning’s Law in 1782. That meant Ireland’s Parliament was no longer under direct control of the English Parliament. It was a real step forward for Irish independence but Catholics were still denied the right to hold office. In 1791, an underground movement called the United Irishmen was founded to oppose English rule and fight for separation of Ireland from England. Called separatists, they believed that the only way to get England out of Ireland was by force. England was in competition with rival European powers at that time, and political control of the Irish island was a military necessity for protection from the French navy. Irish separatists looked to England’s enemies for assistance and support. To resist and exercise political power over the Catholics, a Protestant organization called the Orangemen (see box) formed in 1795. By the beginning of the nineteenth century, there was a movement in England to resolve the separatist issue in Ireland. In 1800 the British Parliament passed the Act of Union that merged the kingdoms of Ireland and England into the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. Put into effect on January 1, 1801, they were united under a central parliament and monarchy (royalty line of kings and queens) based in London. Irish politicians were allowed to serve in the English Parliament. In 1829, Parliament passed the Catholic Emancipation Act, overturning all laws directed specifically against Catholics. Further legislation followed further uniting Ireland with the rest of Great Britain. The Parliament passed the Disestablishment Act in 1869 that formally dissolved the Anglican Church in Ireland. British Parliament then passed a series of acts between 1870 and 1903 referred to as the Irish Land Acts to aid tenant farmers. Despite these efforts, Irish independence remained a controversial issue. In Ireland, Catholics supported the rise of the Home Rule movement in the late nineteenth century for self-government. Protestants, who were in the minority on the island, opposed it; they feared Catholic domination. Protestants supported continued English rule. The Home Rule movement was the beginning of a political rivalry between the two groups that continued through the twentieth century. 410

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Religious Politics: Northern Ireland and England

Irish independence At the dawning of the twentieth century, politics in Ireland divided communities between the Unionists and the Nationalists. Unionists were mainly Protestant descendants of Scottish and English settlements, and they wanted to remain under direct rule from London. The Orangemen closely associated with the Unionist Party. Nationalists were largely Catholic descendants of the original Irish population and they desired independence from England. In 1905, Sinn Fein (see box) was organized as a political party to secure Irish independence. Sinn Fein’s roots go back to 1791 when the Catholic underground movement (secretive organized effort) formed the United Irishmen. On April 24, 1916, while England was engaged in World War I, a revolt against English rule broke out in Ireland. The fighting began in the streets of Dublin and spread to other parts of the island before the leaders were caught and executed. Known as the Easter Rising, or Easter Rebellion, it seemed a total failure until the English executed its leaders. The general Irish populace reacted with disgust and anger believing the leaders were unjustly killed. The Easter Rising is credited with paving the way for the eventual establishment of the Irish Free State. In 1916, the Irish Republican Army (IRA) formed to fight for Irish independence. A guerrilla war (irregular fighting by independent bands) began between the IRA rebels and British government forces. When the First World War ended, the idea of Home Rule gained momentum. It was proposed that Ireland be divided into two separate Home Rule areas, northern and southern. Unionists were in the minority on the island but held a majority in the four northern counties of Antrim, Armagh, Down, and Londonderry, in the province of Ulster. The addition of the two Ulster counties of Fermanagh and Tyrone left northern Ireland with a workable economic plan for Home Rule. It seemed like a good compromise to everyone except the hundreds of thousands of Nationalists from Fermanagh and Tyrone, who found themselves included in the northern area with the predominant Unionists. The other three of the nine counties of Ulster were left in control of the south because of their prevailing Nationalist populations. The outcome of the Home Rule proposal in 1920 was that twenty-six counties, in the south of Ireland, would be ruled from Dublin. Six northern counties— Antrim, Armagh, Down, Londonderry, Fermanagh, and Tyrone—would be ruled from Belfast in northern Ireland. Provision was made for both parliaments to eventually join into one parliament for all of Ireland. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

411

Religious Politics: Northern Ireland and England

Sinn Fein Sinn Fein is the oldest political organization in Ireland. Its roots can be traced to the Catholic underground movement of the United Irishmen in 1791. Created to oppose English rule in Ireland, the early leaders believed that only an independent Ireland could guarantee equality and prosperity for the people. The organization evolved over the centuries until it emerged in the twentieth century as Sinn Fein. Sinn Fein is a political party that seeks the unity and independence of Ireland. The theories of the separatist political movement were first published in 1905 under the title ‘‘The Sinn Fein Policy.’’ Sinn Fein takes its name from an Irish Gaelic expression, which translates into English as ‘‘We Ourselves,’’ or ‘‘Ourselves Alone.’’ The modern Sinn Fein party prefers ‘‘We Ourselves.’’ During the 1918 general election in Ireland, Sinn Fein won a landslide victory. It set up a separatist parliament, Dail Eireann (Irish assembly), and proclaimed Ireland a Republic with its own Irish army called the Irish Republican Army (IRA). Following several years of guerrilla warfare, the party split over support of the Government of Ireland Act of 1920. The act divided Ireland with an international land border.

Reorganized in the 1960s, Sinn Fein launched a political campaign to gain support on issues other than separation. The party split once again and the Provisional Sinn Fein emerged as the party known in the late twentieth century. Provisional means temporary or serving for the time being. From the 1970s onward, Sinn Fein took the role of leading advocate for English withdrawal from Ireland. It campaigned on the streets throughout Ireland for a reunited thirty-two-county island. The IRA also experienced a split in 1969 over political differences among the members. One branch took a more political and less violent approach. The other branch that split off called itself the Provisional IRA and continued the same armed strategies of the earlier IRA. It is the group recognized as the IRA today. Sinn Fein combined with the IRA and came to symbolize militant Irish nationalism to the rest of the world. The IRA conducted armed campaigns of violence within England and Northern Ireland until 1994. By the time a peace settlement was reached in 1998, more than three thousand people had been killed, most of them civilians. It was the longest unbroken period of armed resistance in the long and troubled history shared between Irish Catholics and England.

The Government of Ireland Act of 1920 resulted in the creation of the six-county Northern Ireland and provided for Home Rule. An international land border, the only one within the United Kingdom, was established to separate Northern Ireland from the south of Ireland. The act provided for parliaments in Dublin and in Belfast. Northern Ireland chose to remain part of the United Kingdom, and the remaining twenty-six counties of the south and west formed the Irish Free State under the Anglo-Irish Treaty of 1921. These actions failed to end the unrest. Although the Irish had finally gained some independence from England, the long-standing resentment over English domination remained. 412

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Religious Politics: Northern Ireland and England

In 1926, the Fianna Fail party was founded in Ireland with the goal of severing all ties with England. Eamon de Valera (1882–1975), former president of the Irish Republic and member of Sinn Fein, founded the political party. Through the next several years an economic war existed between Ireland and Britain. As an Irish leading official, de Valera stopped paying annual land payments owed to Britain. Britain responded with restrictions on Ireland’s exports to Britain. In 1937, the Irish Free State declared independence as Eire. Eire used its independent status to remain neutral throughout World War II. England suffered heavy losses during the war, both in combat and in sweeping German air attacks on its cities, and was in no position to resist the independence move by Eire. In 1949, Eire was renamed the Republic of Ireland. The Republic of Ireland declared final independence from Britain on April 18, 1949. It then renewed its efforts in the movement to unite Protestant Northern Ireland with the Catholic Republic of Ireland.

Eamon de Valera, former president of the Irish Republic and member of Sinn Fein. CO UR TES Y O F THE LI BRA RY

Two distinct ethnic groups

OF CON GR ESS .

Riot reports of the early twentieth century recorded the ongoing violence between Catholics and Protestants. The reports focused mainly on troubles within Belfast and Londonderry, where most of the bloody conflicts took place. Until the 1960s, most Catholics and Protestants throughout Northern Ireland dealt with problems locally. It had been forty years since the creation of Northern Ireland and, while there was neither unity nor stability, both sides had more or less accepted the reality of the sixcounty province. However, Catholics and Protestants still saw themselves as belonging to distinct groups, and the underlying conflict was rooted in their differences and cultural identity. Northern Ireland Protestants were the majority group and strongly favored by London. There was a high level of stereotyping (an oversimplified prejudgment of others using physical or behavioral characteristics, usually exaggerated, that supposedly apply to every member of that group) between the Protestants and Catholics. Catholics considered the Protestants to be Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

413

Religious Politics: Northern Ireland and England

Signs of Northern Ireland Ethnic Division Northern Ireland ethnic division can be seen in the absence of any universally accepted national symbols as a national anthem or national flag. Northern Ireland lacks an official national anthem. When one is required for an event, ‘‘God Save the Queen’’ is most often played and the English Union Flag is displayed. At the Commonwealth Games ‘‘A Londonderry Air,’’ the old anthem of Northern Ireland, is played while the Ulster Banner, or Red Hand Flag, is flown. The Commonwealth Games are similar to the worldwide Olympics but with even more sports included that are common mainly to the Commonwealth countries, such as lawn bowling and rugby. The Ulster Banner is based on the flag of Ulster and occasionally still flies, even though it lost its official status when the Parliament of Northern Ireland was abolished in 1972. In an attempt to promote unity the Flag of St. Patrick has been raised by some organizations. It too has failed to receive universal approval because it represented Ireland during English rule and it is still used by some English army regiments. Nationalist and Unionist communities fly different flags. Nationalists are those of Catholic descent who desire a reunion with the Republic of Ireland. Unionists are Protestants who desire to

maintain Northern Ireland under British rule. Nationalist communities typically fly the Irish tricolor flag. Local unity is expressed in the green, white, and orange of its banners and signs. Unionist communities fly the red, white, and blue of the Union Flag, the symbol of English identity. A point of tension still exists in the twenty-first century between Unionists and Nationalists in the use of name designations for cities, organizations, and even sports clubs. Choice of names often reveals the cultural, ethnic, and religious identity of the speaker. Unionist supporters call Northern Ireland Ulster while Nationalists most always use North of Ireland, or the Six Counties. The media generally use their community’s preferred term or they mix the use of disputed names in a report. For example, the city of Londonderry may be referred to when introducing a story and then it will be called Derry for the rest of the report. Unionists prefer City of Londonderry, while Nationalists prefer Derry. When the Derry City Council voted to rename the city Derry, unionists objected and it officially remained Londonderry. To satisfy both sides the Council printed two sets of stationery and replies to its correspondence using whichever term the original sender used.

rigid and lacking common sense. Protestants thought the Catholics were arrogant and belligerent in school and other community activities. Fear and distrust of each other led to segregation (using laws or social customs to separate certain social groups, such as peoples distinguished by skin color or religious affiliation) at most levels of society. This separation led to real differences in terms of economic prosperity, education, and political opportunity. Schools were segreated. Even senior citizens’ homes were separated by religion. The church usually organized social activities, so contact between the two religions was limited. Mixed-marriage couples 414

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Religious Politics: Northern Ireland and England

often stopped attending church altogether. Because of prejudice against them, they were not accepted in either circle. Catholics were more likely to be unemployed, paid lower wages, and living in inferior housing. Without obvious physical differences like skin color, discrimination against a stranger was based on other signals. Centuries of discrimination against Catholics had left the majority of them poor members of the working class. Protestants, who identified more with British culture, were much more likely to be landowners or managers who hired and fired the workers. People judged others on the basis of their home address, school attendance, name, appearance, and speech. The organizations one belonged to and even the sports one played were also indicators used in discriminating against another person. The common hostility and fear between the two groups eventually led to a sense of deprivation and discontent by the Catholic minority. The Catholic minority held very little power in government. The state was run on the basis of a Protestant majority with the parliament building located six miles east of Belfast in Stormont, a region populated by Protestants. The Anglo-Irish Treaty in 1921 established the location, and the Ulster Unionist Party had maintained complete control since that time. Individuals from these powerful, upper-class Protestant families were wealthy from businesses as well as land ownership. Protestants from a few individual families controlled the vast majority of Stormont seats under the Unionist party. To the Protestant community, Stormont became a symbol of power; to the Catholic community, it was a symbol of oppression. In the 1950s, the international media began to play a major role in publicizing the views and demands of the Catholic minority in Northern Ireland. The eyes of the world slowly began to focus on the troubled little island.

The troubles As the world watched, the political situation in Northern Ireland became increasingly bitter and violent. Throughout the 1960s, violence between Catholics and Protestants increased at an alarming rate. By 1966, the constant clashes erupted into civil war between the IRA and a Protestant group called the Ulster Defense Association, formed in 1971. Sinn Fein and the IRA increased their efforts to make Northern Ireland part of the Republic of Ireland. The Republic of Ireland did little to deter IRA crossborder raids into Northern Ireland. Working in their favor was the deep cultural division that separated Irish citizens in the north. Catholic Nationalists publicly charged that they faced religious and political Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

415

Religious Politics: Northern Ireland and England

Bomb debris scattered in a street in Belfast. # LE IF S KO OGF OR S/ COR BI S.

discrimination from Protestant Unionists. The long-running conflict between the two sides became known as The Troubles, and it reached its most violent phase between 1968 and 1994. When Sinn Fein and the IRA combined forces in the early 1970s, they created a more militant, or radical, force to fight for Irish nationalism. Using terrorist tactics, such as shootings and bombings, they began a bloody campaign to drive the English out of Northern Ireland. They bombed police stations, army bases, courthouses, buses, and hotels in Northern Ireland and England. Their targets were army, police, and anyone else they saw as cooperating with the English. Hundreds in law enforcement were killed or injured, but many more innocent civilians suffered the same fate. In 1971, the English government began imprisoning as political prisoners those known or suspected of being members of the IRA. English troops were sent to Northern Ireland to reinforce security forces and maintain border controls between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. Despite rising economic difficulties at home, 416

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Religious Politics: Northern Ireland and England

England took control of the government in Northern Ireland in the spring of 1972 and suspended the Ulster Parliament at Stormont. The English presence only increased the violence and political unrest in Northern Ireland. On July 21, 1972, the IRA set off twenty-six bombs in Belfast, killing nine people and injuring one hundred and thirty. Over the next few years, thousands of armed robberies, shootings, and explosions followed. The English responded by searching tens of thousands of homes belonging to IRA suspects. In 1974 the IRA exploded a bomb in the English Houses of Parliament, injuring eleven. Parliament responded with tougher anti-terrorist laws and outlawed the IRA, giving the courts authority to prosecute IRA members and sympathizers. Nonetheless, the violence continued through the year until a ceasefire was agreed upon through secret negotiations between the IRA and English security forces. It lasted until 1975, when the English government ended its internment policy and began criminal proceedings against IRA members guilty of crimes. The troubles continued, and on August 27, 1979, IRA terrorists assassinated British war hero and admiral of the British Fleet, Lord Louis Mountbatten (1900–1979).

Negotiating Peace Sinn Fein became a serious political force in the early 1980s when it campaigned in support of IRA prisoners being held in British prisons in Northern Ireland. Maze Prison was a famous prison located ten miles west of Belfast in County Antrim. In March 1981, IRA members began a hunger strike in Maze that ended only after ten men had fasted to their deaths. The fasts dramatized the cause of Irish unity and brought worldwide attention on relations between England and Ireland. In November of 1981, an Anglo-Irish Intergovernmental Council was established to formalize regular official contacts between English and Irish government leaders to improve communication. The IRA continued its acts of bombing, intimidating, and terrorizing for another decade. In October 1984, English prime minister Margaret Thatcher (1925–) narrowly escaped injury when the IRA exploded a bomb during a government conference in Brighton, England. Thatcher refused to be intimidated and opened the conference on schedule the next morning. Hoping to end the violence in Northern Ireland, the English Parliament approved an Anglo-Irish Agreement, the Ulster Plan, in November 1985. It allowed the Republic of Ireland government to participate as a consultant in Northern Ireland’s political, Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

417

Religious Politics: Northern Ireland and England

Demonstrators march in Belfast on May 4, 1981, carrying portraits of IRA activists currently on hunger strike. # MI CHE L PH IL IPP OT /SY GM A/ COR BI S.

legal, and security matters. In return, the Irish government promised to actively deter IRA cross-border raids into Northern Ireland. The Agreement reaffirmed the Ireland Act of 1949, which gave a legal guarantee that Northern Ireland would not cease to be part of the United Kingdom without consent of the majority of its citizens. Not everyone agreed with the Ulster Plan. The Ulster Unionist Party was openly opposed to it. Peace seemed unlikely as the world watched television footage of explosions and deaths on a regular basis in Northern Ireland. However, in August 1994, the IRA announced a temporary ceasefire and laid down their weapons. An uneasy peace existed until February 1996 when the IRA, unsatisfied that progress was being achieved toward a resolution, announced the end of the ceasefire and renewed violence. In 1997, peace talks began when Sinn Fein sat down to formal negotiations with the British government. The Northern Ireland Peace Talks proceeded slowly because of more 418

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Religious Politics: Northern Ireland and England

The bomb that damaged this hotel in England was intended to kill prime minister Margaret Thatcher and her cabinet in 1984. # BET TM ANN /C ORB IS .

killings on both sides, but they finally produced a settlement that appeared to be a good compromise. That compromise was known as the Good Friday Agreement. On Friday, April 10, 1998, the Good Friday Agreement, or Belfast Agreement, was reached in Belfast. Voters in Northern Ireland and in the Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

419

Religious Politics: Northern Ireland and England

Republic of Ireland approved the Agreement by a large margin with 71 percent supporting it in Northern Ireland and 94 percent in the Republic of Ireland. It provided for an elected Northern Ireland Assembly made up of representatives of all the main parties who would share power on an equal basis. It confirmed the Anglo-Irish Agreement of 1985, which acknowledged that the status of Northern Ireland could only be changed with the agreement of a majority of voters in Northern Ireland. Some serious obstacles remained over the issue of disarming terrorist groups of their store of weapons. Opponents of the Agreement continued with bombing raids. A new Northern Ireland government was finally established at Stormont on December 2, 1999. On July 28, 2005, the IRA declared an end to its campaign and removed its store of weapons from service. This act was performed in accordance with the Good Friday Agreement, and under the watch of the International Decommissioning Body and others. The end of violence and political unrest has opened the two Irelands to economic stability with tourists returning to the beautiful island. Since 1969 over 3,500 had been killed including 1,100 members of the various British security forces. Over 1,800 civilians had lost their lives. Some 47,000 were injured and almost 20,000 imprisoned.

For More Information BOOKS

Christie, Kenneth. Political Protest in Northern Ireland: Continuity and Change. Berkshire, UK: Link Press, 1992. Darby, John, ed. Northern Ireland: The Background to the Conflict. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 1983. Feeney, Brian. Sinn Fein: A Hundred Turbulent Years. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 2003. McColgan, John. British Policy and the Irish Administration, 1920–22. London: George Allen & Unwin Publishers Ltd., 1983. O’Brien, Brendan. The Long War: The IRA and Sinn Fein, 1985 to Today. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 1993. WEB SIT ES

Darby, John. ‘‘Northern Ireland: The Background to the Peace Process.’’ CAIN (Conflict Archive on the Internet)—University of Ulster. http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/ events/peace/darby03.htm (accessed on November 29, 2006). PBS. ‘‘Chronology.’’ Frontline: The IRA & Sinn Fein. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/ pages/frontline/shows/ira/etc/cron.html (accessed on November 29, 2006). ‘‘Sinn Fein.’’ Nidex—Northern Ireland Politics. http://www.sinnfein.org/ index2.html (accessed on November 29, 2006). 420

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

21

Prejudice Against Hispanic Americans

ispanic is a term that generally refers to individuals and groups who possess cultural or genetic links to people of Spanish-speaking origin. Usually this lineage in the Americas is traced to 1450, when Spanish explorers and conquistadors (soldiers) settled much of Central America, Mexico, and the southwestern region of what became the United States. Hispanics are also referred to as Latinos, a term understood to primarily include Mexicans, Puerto Ricans, and Cubans. However, Dominicans, South Americans, and Central Americans are also a part of this group. This chapter will examine the historical experiences of Hispanics in the United States, their fight against prejudice (a negative attitude, emotion, or behavior towards individuals based on a prejudgment about those individuals with no prior knowledge or experience) for equality and civil rights, complicated immigration (the movement of people from one country to another with the intention to reside permanently in the new country) issues that continued into the twenty-first century, and the successes and struggles of a group that has contributed much to the American story.

H

The Mexican-American War Tensions between the United States and Mexico grew steadily in the early nineteenth century as Americans began migrating west. The migration was largely triggered by U.S. president Thomas Jefferson’s (1743–1826; served 1801–9) purchase in 1803 from France of a vast region west of the Mississippi River and east of the Rocky Mountains. Known as the Louisiana Purchase, the addition instantly doubled the size of the United States. The idea of ‘‘Manifest Destiny’’—that the North American continent was a God-given gift to the American people and it was their destiny to expand westward—began to take root during this period. Manifest Destiny was a feeling of national exuberance after 421

Prejudice Against Hispanic Americans

WORDS TO KNOW barrio: Spanish word referring to a neighborhood largely inhabited by people of Hispanic ancestry. bracero: Spanish word meaning worker. discrimination: A major consequence of prejudice by treating differently or favoring one social group over another based on arbitrary standards or criteria.. Hispanic: A term that generally refers to individuals and groups who possess cultural or genetic links to people of Spanish-speaking origin. Hispanics are also referred to as Latinos, a term understood to primarily include Mexicans, Puerto Ricans, and Cubans. However, Dominicans, South Americans, and Central Americans are also a part of this group. immigrant: A person who leaves his country of origin to reside permanently in another.

prejudice: A negative attitude, emotion, or behavior towards individuals based on a prejudgment about those individuals with no prior knowledge or experience. racism: Prejudice against people of a particular physical trait, such as skin color, based on a belief that the physical trait primarily determines human behavior and individual capabilities; social and cultural meaning is given to skin color or whatever other trait is considered important. repatriation: Sending an individual, usually a prisoner of war, immigrant, or refugee, back to his country of origin. segregation: Using laws or social customs to separate certain social groups, such as whites and blacks or women and men.

successfully defeating the British in the War of 1812 (1812–14) and having all the lands of the Louisiana Purchase available for exploration and settlement. The rapid expansion involved both violence and nonviolence alike. In 1835 and 1845, the U.S. government offered Mexico $30 million to purchase California. Both times the offer was declined. Americans became frustrated at their inability to expand the borders of the nation. In addition, many Mexicans living in California resented the Mexican government’s attempts to regulate trade with Americans in the territory. They wanted freedom to conduct business with the Americans as they wished. Frustration, resentment, and disagreement between Americans and Mexicans was nothing new in Texas. After Mexico gained its independence from Spain in 1821, the Mexican government offered people the chance to populate the northern part of the country to provide a buffer from anticipated U.S. expansion efforts. The new settlers had to take an oath of allegiance to Mexico and convert to the national religion of 422

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Prejudice Against Hispanic Americans

Catholicism. Thousands of Americans jumped at the offer. However, the American settlers soon became frustrated with what they saw as the inefficiency and lack of interest in the new frontier settlements by the Mexican government. In 1835, the Texas settlers revolted and gained their political independence as a republic the following year. However, many Mexicans refused to recognize the Treaty of Velasco that had stopped the fighting and gained Texas’s freedom from Mexico. They claimed that the defeated Mexican general Santa Anna (1794–1876) had no legal authority to negotiate or sign a treaty with the Texan forces. The treaty provisions included the removal of the Mexican army from Texas and the return of prisoners and property such as horses and slaves taken by Mexican forces. Violent border disputes erupted. Many Americans sympathized with the Texans while at the same time developing harsh prejudices and stereotypes (oversimplified prejudgments of others using physical or behavioral characteristics, usually exaggerated, that supposedly apply to every member of that group) toward the Mexican people. In 1845, the United States admitted Texas as the twenty-eighth state. The United States now claimed that the southernmost U.S.–Mexican border was the Rio Grande River. The next year, the new border became the issue of an international dispute and war between Mexico and the United States followed. Despite suffering several defeats in major battles and the capture of much of its land, the Mexican government refused to give in. U.S. Army general Winfield Scott (1786–1866) executed what was at that point in time the largest amphibious (by land and water) assault in military history at Veracruz, Mexico, on March 9, 1847. The Americans captured Mexico City in September 1847.

Parts of Mexico join the United States After several months of negotiations formal hostilities between the two nations officially concluded when the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo was signed on February 2, 1848. The treaty’s terms gave the United States the vast territory of Upper California and New Mexico, including presentday Arizona. This area included what are now the states of California, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, and parts of Colorado and Wyoming. In addition, Mexico formally recognized the state of Texas while fixing its southern border at the Rio Grande. The United States paid Mexico $15 million, recognized the prior existence of large land grants made to Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

423

Prejudice Against Hispanic Americans

The Rio Grande flows at the border of Mexico and Texas. Here, two Mexican women hold their children as they cross the river at the border of Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, and El Paso, Texas, in 1983. # DA NN Y LE HMA N/ COR BI S.

settlers by the Mexican government in the Southwest, and offered U.S. citizenship to Mexicans already living in the area. The U.S. government also took responsibility for resolving all claims (formal requests for payment for losses) made by American citizens against the government of Mexico. The U.S. government later revised the treaty, however, and removed the portion about recognizing the earlier Mexican land grants. Nearly five hundred thousand Mexicans found themselves renting their own land from the United States. As American settlers claimed these lands the U.S. court system made it easy for many Americans to evict Mexicans from what had been their land. As a result, many Mexican-Americans became tenant farmers (farmers renting their land from another person) or field laborers working for white landowners. They lived apart in Spanishspeaking enclaves known as ‘‘barrios’’ (the Spanish word for neighborhood). Retail shops and places of entertainment were also segregated, as 424

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Prejudice Against Hispanic Americans

were schools. The schools for Mexican American children lacked the funding and supplies that schools for white children enjoyed. There were also few teachers able to speak Spanish.

Immigration wave and U.S. policy During the early 1900s, the economy of Mexico struggled and became progressively worse. Anger and resentment within the Mexican population toward its government ultimately resulted in the revolution of 1910. The conflict sent Mexico spiraling into political, economic, and social upheaval for a decade. The chaos and lack of job opportunities led thousands of Mexicans to look to the north as a means of escape. Between 1910 and 1930, over 680,000 Mexicans immigrated to the United States. Most settled in the Southwest and found employment as laborers in factories and mines, on railroad lines, farms, and ranches. During U.S. participation in World War I (1914–18) in Europe, thousands of Mexican Americans served in the military under the American flag. Those who stayed behind took advantage of the booming wartime economy. They found employment as highly skilled laborers in construction and industry. While Mexican immigrants made great strides in the United States, housing and employment discrimination (treating one social group differently than another based on arbitrary standards or criteria) against them abounded and continued following the war. Many immigrants formed organizations and labor unions (an organized group of workers joined together for a common purpose, such as negotiating with management for better working conditions or higher wages) to combat prejudice and discrimination. Among those was a coalition group called the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), the oldest Hispanic organization in the United States, formed in 1929. In response to the massive arrival of immigrants, the U.S. government passed legislation to restrict immigration and control legal entry into the country. In 1917, Congress passed a law requiring all adult immigrants to demonstrate the ability to read and write in at least one language. The Bureau of Immigration established the U.S. Border Patrol in 1924 to guard against illegal immigrants filtering across the Mexican border. As a result of the tougher legislation, increased border security, and the onset of the Great Depression (1929–41), Mexican immigration declined. The Great Depression was a severe economic crisis that started in the United States in late 1929 and soon spread throughout the world. Throughout the 1930s, the Depression led to decreased business activity, Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

425

Prejudice Against Hispanic Americans

high unemployment, and social unrest in many places. Only thirty-three thousand Mexican immigrants arrived in the United States during the 1930s while many stayed in Mexico where the economy was growing despite the Depression elsewhere in the world. Still, prejudices against Mexican immigrants ran high. Many Americans believed that Mexican immigrants slowed the economy by holding low-paying jobs while native-born citizens suffered from high unemployment. Because of this growing prejudicial attitude and the potential problems it might cause, the governments of the United States and Mexico cooperated on a program of repatriation (returning immigrants to their original homeland). Despite the program’s objective of returning Mexican Americans to Mexico in a cooperative manner, many were involuntarily (against their will) deported by the United States. Those who were removed from the United States included many who had been citizens for as long as ten years. Their children were American citizens because they were born in the United States. They had no interest in living in Mexico. Many Mexican Americans—most notably in California—were placed in detention camps (guarded temporary camps with minimal provision for life’s necessities). They reported harsh treatment such as beatings at the hands of government officials. By 1939, the United States had deported about 500,000 Mexican Americans. Those who remained faced segregated public facilities and schools that frowned upon use of the Spanish language. With the start of war production in 1939 in preparation for World War II, jobs became available again and the deportation efforts came to a close. No longer needing Mexican workers, the U.S. government attempted a repatriation policy again in the 1950s. This time, the program focused on ‘‘wetbacks’’ (an ethnic slur used to describe illegal Mexican immigrants), immigrants who had remained in the United States after the war to earn higher wages. Mexico eventually pulled out of its agreement to the program because of the often harsh work conditions and racial discrimination the Mexican workers faced. Still, even more illegal immigrants flooded Texas and caused resentment among native-born Texans who were being displaced in the workforce, even if many of the jobs were those they considered too menial for them. In July 1954, the U.S. government used the Immigration and Nationalization Service (INS), the U.S. Border Patrol, and the armed forces to begin a search and seizure operation into homes and businesses to find and remove illegal immigrants from Texas, a strategy named 426

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Prejudice Against Hispanic Americans

The issue of illegal immigrants crossing the border has been a longtime problem. Here, an Arizona man shows his support for boosting funds and troops at the U.S.–Mexico border near Naco, Arizona. # SA UL L OE B/E PA /C ORB IS .

Operation Wetback. The government claimed that over a million illegal immigrants were sent back to Mexico, though no firm figure was ever confirmed. The program wound down late in 1954. The U.S. government continued to patrol the borders into the twenty-first century and sent many illegal aliens back to Mexico and other countries. Yet millions of immigrants successfully got through by crossing the border in remote areas or through illegal smuggling operations. The issue again became the subject of intense national debate in Congress and throughout the nation in 2006.

World War II contributions Despite the difficulties and barriers placed in front of them as a group, Mexican Americans continued to make progress within American society Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

427

Prejudice Against Hispanic Americans

and contribute to the nation’s economy and arts, while gaining a stronger voice in the quest for full equality. As was the case in World War I, Mexican Americans answered the call to service as the United States became involved in World War II. More than three hundred thousand Mexican Americans served in the armed forces during the conflict. Close to five hundred thousand Hispanics served, including fifty-three thousand Puerto Ricans. Hispanics serving in U.S. forces around the world earned thirty-nine Medals of Honor during World War II, more than any other ethnic group. U.S. general Douglas MacArthur (1880–1964) described the 158th Regimental Combat team, a group comprised of mostly Mexican Americans and Native Americans from Arizona, as one of the greatest teams ever sent into battle. Similar to World War I, the manufacturing industry opened new job opportunities for immigrants who were not with the military overseas. In addition, agricultural labor was in great demand during the war years as many American fieldworkers joined the military services and went overseas. Cooperating again on immigrant policy, the United States and Mexico established the bracero program. The program, developed in 1942, allowed braceros (day laborers) to legally enter the United States for seasonal work on farms and railroads. The program continued until 1964, bringing in almost five million workers from Mexico, even though working conditions were known to be often harsh such as working in the fields for long hours for low pay.

Civil rights Hispanics who had served with honor and distinction in World War II had no desire to resume lives filled with prejudice and employment barriers for themselves or their families. Following the war, many political, business, and civil rights organizations formed to help fight discrimination, segregation (using laws or social customs to separate certain social groups, such as whites and people of color) and racism (prejudice against people of a particular physical trait, such as skin color). Two of the more prominent groups were the Mexican American Political Association and the American GI Forum. These early groups grew into larger and more influential groups such as the National Council of La Raza (see box) that organized in the 1950s and 1960s. The plight of immigrant workers in the agricultural industry captured the nation’s attention during the 1950s and 1960s thanks to the 428

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Prejudice Against Hispanic Americans

National Council of La Raza Organizations like the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and the National Urban League helped with passage of civil rights legislation by bringing national attention to the racial prejudice that had long been plaguing African Americans. However, no such organization existed for Hispanics in the United States through much of the twentieth century. Much of the progress of the African American civil rights movement, while certainly improving conditions for racial minorities in general, was not felt as broadly within the Hispanic American community since the focus had been on African Americans. Into this void stepped a group of young Mexican Americans living in Washington, D.C., in the early 1960s. Calling themselves the National Organization of Mexican American Services (NOMAS), they worked to provide technical assistance to the Hispanic civil rights organizations scattered about the country and to bring them together as a united group. Armed with a grant from the Ford Foundation to conduct the first major study of Mexican Americans, NOMAS researchers found that working-class organizations and national advocacy groups needed to grow in order to serve Mexican Americans better. Meetings to organize Mexican Americans led to the formation of the Southwest Council of La Raza in Phoenix, Arizona, in February 1968. It soon grew into a national organization known as the National Council of La Raza (NCLR) in 1972.

NCLR established a national office in Washington, D.C. In the late 1970s, NCLR director Raul Yzaguirre (1939–) was instrumental in developing NCLR’s programs and goals. Yzaguirre secured a continual core funding pledge from the Ford Foundation, a private organization dedicated to ending social injustice in the world. He also expanded the group’s reach to all Americans of Hispanic descent rather than only Mexican Americans, began to acquire federal funds for private development, and assisted Hispanics with such issues as financial counseling. Yzaguirre focused on research and development of social policies aimed at benefiting Hispanics. He started the Policy Analysis Center, which studied issues such as immigration, welfare, education, and health care. The NCLR also began a public awareness effort geared toward presenting a positive image of Hispanics in the mainstream American media. The policy initiatives of the NCLR changed following passage of federal welfare reform legislation in 1996. The legislation gave individual states the power to determine who should receive a broad range of public services. As a result, NCLR shifted many of its programs to the state level while continuing to maintain an influential presence in Washington, D.C., where it opened the Raul Yzaguirre Building as its headquarters. The NCLR’s federal policy initiatives focused primarily on immigration reform legislation.

efforts of Cesar Chavez (1927–1993), who was born in Yuma, Arizona, near the Mexican border. Chavez spent most of his life working on farms for low wages alongside fellow Hispanic immigrants in California, including Dolores Huerta (1930–), who was instrumental in helping Chavez organize. Working conditions were less than adequate. Chavez began organizing workers into a union in order to demand higher pay Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

429

Prejudice Against Hispanic Americans

Cesar Chavez (center) and Dolores Huerta (far right) join other United Farmworkers Union board members at an event. AP IM AGE S.

and better working conditions. This union eventually became known as the National Farm Workers Association (NFWA). It was the first farm workers’ labor union. In 1965, Chavez and Huerta urged cooperation with another union, the Agricultural Workers Organizing Committee, in refusing to work for grape growers in Delano, California. In 1966, the two unions merged to form the United Farm Workers. The group chose a Mexican Aztec eagle as its symbol. The nonviolent strike, modeled upon the techniques and strategies of Indian leader Mahatma Gandhi (1869–1948), lasted five years. It resulted in a nationwide boycott (an organized effort to not buy certain products or use certain services in order to express disapproval with an organization) of California grapes that severely affected the industry. Chavez and the United Farm Workers garnered the support of influential political figures like Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. (1929– 1968) and U.S. senator Robert F. Kennedy (1925–1968) of New York. 430

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Prejudice Against Hispanic Americans

After five years the boycott ended in 1970 as the workers reached an agreement with the growers on improved working conditions. Another grape boycott led by the United Farm Workers in the 1970s led to Congressional passage of the Agricultural Labor Relations Act of 1975. At the time a national public opinion poll showed that seventeen million Americans supported the grape boycotts. The law allowed for a collective bargaining by agricultural workers. Collective bargaining involves negotiations between representatives of employers and workers to reach agreement on working conditions, wages, and job benefits. Chavez remained active in workers’ rights until his death in 1993. Chavez received numerous awards for his leadership including Mexico’s highest award, the Aguila Azteca (The Aztec Eagle), in 1991. Groups such as the United Farm Workers and National Council La Raza continued to advocate for equal rights and beneficial governmental policies on behalf of Hispanic Americans into the early twenty-first century.

Caribbean immigration and migration Puerto Rican migration While the U.S. government was attempting to

curb Mexican immigration in the 1950s through policies such as Operation Wetback, there was significant immigration from Puerto Rico as well as Cuba. While Puerto Ricans were primarily looking for employment, Cubans were fleeing the Communist dictatorship (a form of government in which a person wields absolute power and control over the people) of Fidel Castro Ruz (1926–). (Communism is a system of government where the nation’s leaders are selected by a single political party that controls all aspects of society including all economic production. Private ownership of property is eliminated.) In 1898, the United States claimed the island of Puerto Rico in the aftermath of the Spanish-American War (1898) (in which the United States gained control over the Spanish colonies of Cuba, Puerto Rico, and the Philippines). Puerto Rico’s citizens could enter and exit the United States without restriction. Despite historical animosity (hostile resentment) toward the U.S. government for its indifferent (showing little interest) policies toward the island in the mid-twentieth century, many Puerto Ricans viewed the United States as a land of opportunity. Between 1940 and 1960, economic recessions (period of lesser economic activity) on the island of Puerto Rico motivated over half a million residents to move to the United States in search of employment. Most Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

431

Prejudice Against Hispanic Americans

Puerto Ricans gravitated to New York City in large part because of a campaign by New York mayor Robert F. Wagner Jr. (1910–1991) to recruit Puerto Ricans to work in the city’s factories. By 1960, almost 70 percent of Puerto Ricans living on the American mainland resided on the east side of Harlem in barrios of overpriced, substandard housing. Prejudice-driven discrimination existed. In many restaurant windows signs read ‘ No dogs or Puerto Ricans allowed.’’ Job opportunities proved not as plentiful as Puerto Ricans had hoped. Discrimination and suspicion of Puerto Ricans increased after a pair of Puerto Rican nationalists seeking to establish their country as a separate nation attempted to assassinate U.S. president Harry S. Truman (1884–1972; served 1945–53) in 1950. They acted in protest of American policies toward Puerto Rico. Many other Puerto Ricans settled in large cities such as Chicago to work in industrial factories. Because of the unstable Puerto Rican economy, some 20 percent of the island’s 3.5 million people were living in the United States by end of the twentieth century. For those Puerto Ricans immigrating to the United States, unemployment remained very high. Being U.S. citizens, Puerto Ricans were eligible for welfare benefits. Suffering a high unemployment rate, Puerto Ricans became trapped in a vicious cycle of poverty and joblessness. In addition, the free movement back and forth from the island to the U.S. mainland contributed to a disruption of families and the lack of a foundation upon which to build a steady employment history. As the American economy shifted to a more automated production of goods and services, the demand for lower-skilled jobs lessened. The new centers of employment increasingly left urban areas where Puerto Rican communities existed. Many Puerto Ricans found themselves isolated from the new economic sector and lacking the skills to compete in the new economy reliant on computer technology. Unemployment among Puerto Ricans hovered around 50 percent higher than the national average by the end of the twentieth century. The poverty rate was almost four times higher. Persistent prejudice Puerto Ricans reported that they continued to be victims of prejudice and discrimination, especially by law enforcement officials, in terms of police brutality and sentence discrimination. One of the first Puerto Rican riots in a major city occurred in Chicago in 1966 in response to the city’s police shooting of a Puerto Rican man. The riots lasted two days. Puerto Rican leaders and city officials came together to establish positive programs and communication between members of the community and law enforcement to help prevent further incidents. The 432

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Prejudice Against Hispanic Americans

Puerto Rican community organizations that resulted from the riots allowed community concerns such as education, housing, health, and employment to be addressed. Puerto Ricans remained active in Chicago politics afterwards. Puerto Rican Day parades have been held in the United States since 1958. The largest and most popular is the parade held in New York City every June. Aside from its celebration of Puerto Rican culture, the event has also provided opportunities for clashes with authorities over specific issues. For example, tensions between the Puerto Rican community and the police ran high in 2000 when the parade had an anti-U.S. theme that protested American military testing of weapons off the waters of Puerto Rico. The following year, police presence at the parade was high. Many Puerto Ricans accused the police of assaulting women and the city of reducing the number of marchers allowed in the parade. Groups such as the National Congress for Puerto Rican Rights legally pursued the complaints and publicly advocated equal treatment. The efforts were successful in raising public attention to cases of police brutality against Puerto Rico Americans in New York City and provided a lasting avenue for Puerto Ricans to pursue cases in which they believed they were treated unfairly in the criminal justice system. A movement in both the U.S. and Puerto Rico to make Puerto Rico the fifty-first state of the union has existed since the 1950s. However, Congressional legislation has never gone very far since referendums (votes) held in Puerto Rico have always been won by those favoring the island’s current political status. Since the early 1990s opinions on statehood within Puerto Rico are split nearly down the middle. Into the twenty-first century, inhabitants of the island of Puerto Rico continued to enjoy many of the benefits of American citizenship though they remained ineligible to vote in federal elections. Fleeing a dictator The Cuban experience in the United States has

dramatically differed from nearly any other immigrant group in American history. In 1956, Cuban nationalist Fidel Castro led a guerilla (an irregular military unit invasion of the island nation successfully overthrowing the government of Fulgencio Batista (1901–1973), an oppressive dictator. Castro and his followers believed that the Batista government was influenced too heavily by the United States in matters of business and politics. Castro’s revolt eventually led Batista to abandon his government and his country. In 1959, Castro began transforming Cuba from an island paradise into a stark Communist state. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

433

Prejudice Against Hispanic Americans

Castro pursued the nationalization (placing private business under control of the government) of Cuban businesses and agriculture leading some supporters, particularly the wealthy members of the upper and middle classes, to abandon their belief in Castro’s vision. Castro was now seen as a direct threat to their economic well-being. Castro also began seizing control of U.S. business holdings in Cuba and formed a business and military alliance with the Soviet Union, the bitter global enemy of the United States. Soon Castro had established a dictatorship. Between 1959 and 1962, about two hundred thousand Cubans fled the island for the United States. During the 1960s, the total number of Cuban immigrants in the United States reached five hundred thousand, as Castro’s dictatorship became increasingly totalitarian (a highly centralized form of government that has total control over the population). Cuba was a place where free political speech and demonstrations were met with imprisonment or execution. As Castro’s grip tightened, many Cubans escaped the island on homemade rafts and boats at considerable risk to reach the United States. Cuban immigrants quickly settled mainly in south Florida. Because the first wave of Cubans to land on American shores were educated and wealthy, they adapted very easily to American life. The U.S. government furthered the ease of adaptation by granting political asylum (place of safety from some form of persecution). It offered federal assistance in finding homes, made potential job contacts, and helped businesses get established. Also, Cuban immigrants were the only immigrant group allowed to claim U.S. citizenship after only one year on American soil. Many future Cuban immigrants were relatives of this first group. They found a ready-made network of connections to help them adjust to life in a new country. Taking immediate advantage of the opportunities afforded to them, Cuban immigrants quickly established themselves, most notably in Miami and the surrounding area in Dade County. The economic base was built around banking and small business. Many prominent business owners planned ahead for the day Cuba was once again a free-market nation. Twenty-five percent of all banks and five of the ten most successful businesses in Dade County were owned and operated by Cuban immigrants. The education achievement level among Cuban immigrants matched the U.S. national average. Unemployment and poverty rates were significantly lower than those of other Hispanic groups in the United States. Not every aspect of Cuban immigration to the United States went smoothly, however. In 1980, Castro emptied his prisons of criminals and 434

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Prejudice Against Hispanic Americans

A shrimp boat loaded with Cuban refugees returning from Mariel, Cuba, sails into the Key West Naval Base in Florida in April 1980. A P IM AG ES.

the mentally ill and shipped them to the United States on boats leaving from the Cuban port of Mariel. The United States allowed the boats to dock at Miami, but government officials were shocked at the number of people and criminal element of the passengers. Many of the people, including the mentally ill, were eventually deported back to Cuba while some criminals faced imprisonment in the United States. U.S. policy toward Cuban immigrants stiffened in the mid-1980s. The government announced that only long-term political prisoners and close relatives of Cuban Americans would be granted entry into the United States. This policy was later relaxed. In 1994, thousands of Cuban refugees attempted to land on U.S. soil. They were taken to military bases in the country of Panama and off the coast of Cuba at Guantanamo Bay. Most were settled in the United States, but because of their sheer number, many others were returned to Cuba. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

435

Prejudice Against Hispanic Americans

Despite some of the difficulties involving Cuban immigration, Cuban Americans enjoyed more success and prosperity than any other group of American immigrants. While some in Florida, notably African Americans, objected to the increasing Latinization of Miami, the city and surrounding area took pride in joining American and Cuban culture and business so successfully.

Discrimination as a group While the experiences in America of the different groups that make up the larger population of Hispanics in America vary greatly, some aspects of that experience are common in general and offer a broader perspective. The rapidly shifting American economy of the late twentieth century made it difficult for people without the benefit of higher education to adjust to their new country and move forward. Hispanics were twice as likely to be living at or below the poverty level in America as non-Hispanic white Americans. Only about 6 to 8 percent of Hispanics attended college, and Hispanics earn only about 60 percent of the income that white Americans earn. Elementary and secondary education remained areas of concern for Hispanic Americans into the early twenty-first century. Because many Hispanic children were primarily taught Spanish in the home and perhaps English as a second language in the schools, the barrier between students and teachers remained a problem much as it was during the first wave of significant Mexican immigration to the United States in the early twentieth century. Many educators and administrators supported a bilingual (twolanguage) movement that gained strength in the late 1960s. However, few school districts experimented with bilingual education. It took a 1974 decision by the Supreme Court in Lau v. Nichols to require public schools to address the language problem for all students, not just Spanish-speakers, regardless of their first language. The decision required educators to provide instructions in the student’s native language. Illiteracy rates among Hispanics, which were measured at a beginning elementary education level, were seven times higher than that of white Americans. Several Hispanics felt they were singled out by law enforcement officials because of the ethnic heritage and darker skin. Police harassment was a common complaint at events such as Puerto Rican heritage parades in large cities. Many Hispanics believed U.S. Border Patrol officials and Texas Rangers, a statewide law enforcement agency, dealt with them 436

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Prejudice Against Hispanic Americans

unreasonably. In addition, there was very little affordable legal aid available to Hispanics who had legal problems in the United States aside from the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund. Moreover, many court officials, lawyers, and judges did not speak Spanish. This caused problems at court hearings as confusion sometimes led to harsh consequences, such as tougher sentences than otherwise might occur.

Political and cultural progress While Hispanic Americans have faced prejudice and hardship in the United States, many were still able to take advantage of the opportunities America afforded. They gained seats in the highest councils of American government and business. Alberto Gonzales (1955–) was sworn in as the eightieth attorney general of the United States on February 3, 2005. Prior to being appointed as the nation’s highest-ranking law enforcement official, Gonzales served as counsel to Republican president George W. Bush (1946–; served 2001–) and was a justice of the Supreme Court of Texas. In addition, in November 2004 President Bush nominated Cuban-born Carlos M. Gutierrez (1953–) as secretary of commerce. He was confirmed two months later. Gutierrez had previously served as the youngest chief executive officer in the history of the Kellogg company at forty-six years of age.

Cuban-born Carlos M. Gutierrez, U.S. secretary of commerce during President George W. Bush’s second term. AP IM AGE S.

U.S. senator Mel Martinez also was born in Cuba and fled Communist rule to live in America at age fifteen. He became the first Cuban-born U.S. senator when he took office in January 2005. Robert Menendez (1954–), who grew up as the son of immigrants in tenement housing (older multi-storied apartment buildings often in poor condition), became a U.S. senator representing New Jersey in 2006 after serving in the U.S. House of Representatives. Many Hispanic Americans served in the U.S. House of Representatives and in state legislatures across the nation by the late twentieth century. Governor Bill Richardson (1947–) of New Mexico was perhaps the most Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

437

Prejudice Against Hispanic Americans

prominent Hispanic American state governor in the early twenty-first century having earlier gained national attention as foreign ambassador and U.S. secretary of energy during the administration of Democratic president Bill Clinton (1946–; served 1993–2001). Hispanic Americans also gained wide respect and reverence in American popular culture. Musical acts such as Gloria Estefan, the late Selena, Shakira, and others sold millions of albums. Benjamin Bratt became a popular actor in the early twenty-first century, starring on television and in film. Jennifer Lopez successfully combined a musical career with an acting career. Comedic acts such as George Lopez star in television. As have African Americans, many Hispanic American entertainers have become international celebrities, such as Cuban-born Gloria Estefan in music and actor Jimmy Smits of Puerto Rican heritage in film. However, critics often pointed out that some comedic entertainment did nothing but reinforce negative stereotypes of ethnic groups, perhaps most notably the movies by Cheech Marin and Tommy Chong. While that may have been the case at times, there is no doubt that Hispanics had an increasing presence in the music and entertainment industries while gaining more and more power in politics and business.

The ongoing question of immigration In early 2006, hundreds of thousands of Hispanic immigrants marched in protest rallies across the United States. They were in opposition to legislation before the U.S. Congress that they believed would unfairly restrict immigrants and jeopardize their well-being. At issue was the question of illegal immigration, long a source of contention between immigrant groups and the U.S. government. Frustrated citizens living near the American-Mexican border began volunteer patrols (calling themselves Minutemen in homage to New England patriots of the Revolutionary era) to search for illegal immigrants attempting to cross the border. These groups notified U.S. Border Patrol when they spotted individuals attempting to illegally enter the United States. They did not advocate or practice violence against the illegal immigrants, but their participation and willingness to use their spare time patrolling the border spoke to the passion the immigration issue aroused. 438

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Prejudice Against Hispanic Americans

Many citizens, including legal immigrants and naturalized citizens who had gone through the citizenship process, opposed any sort of amnesty (granting official forgiveness to a large number of people for some illegal act) for illegal immigrants. They wished to impose financial and other penalties on the substantial number of employers who hired illegal immigrants at low wages. However, thousands of immigrants, both documented (holding an official paper allowing entrance) and undocumented, joined together to protest what was perceived as a nationalist passion within the United States against Hispanics. Defenders of the immigrants, arguing that Hispanic illegal immigrants performed work that Americans would not normally do because the wages were so low, charged that Hispanics should not be singled out by anti-immigrant groups simply because of their ethnicity. This been the case throughout history with most immigrant groups. Illegal immigrants numbering about eleven million in the United States in 2006 worked predominantly in service positions, such as cooks, construction laborers, hotel housekeepers, grounds workers, and agricultural laborers. The first mass protest in the spring of 2006 took place in Los Angeles on March 25. Tens of thousands in other large cities, such as Chicago, New York, and Detroit, quickly followed suit. Perhaps the largest rally was held on the National Mall in Washington, D.C., on April 10 of that year. It included prominent speakers such as U.S. senator Edward Kennedy (1932–) of Massachusetts and prominent Hispanic American leaders. Many speeches were delivered in Spanish and marchers waved Mexican flags. Some protestors called for a Reconquista, or taking back of land the United States acquired in the treaty that ended the Mexican-American War. Protestors objected to the passing of a resolution in the U.S. House of Representatives regarding immigration reform. The resolution ignored the wishes of the administration of U.S. president George W. Bush (1946–; served 2001–). Bush called for a guest worker program and a legalization process for illegal immigrants already living and working on U.S. soil. President Bush and others believed that deporting illegal immigrants was inhumane and would drastically impair the economy. Instead, the House language, championed by U.S. representative James Sensenbrenner (1943–), a Republican from Wisconsin, included requirements for a massive fence along the southern U.S. border and an increased border security presence. In September 2006 Congress passed a bill authorizing construction of part of the proposed fence, but did not provide sufficient funds at the time to accomplish the task. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

439

Prejudice Against Hispanic Americans

About a half million Latino workers and immigrants march in downtown Los Angeles on March 25, 2006, to protest against an anti-immigrant federal bill that would instantly criminalize millions of undocumented aliens. # G ENE BLE VI NS/ LA DAI LY NE WS /C ORB IS .

The U.S. Senate considered a compromise bill of its own that would have allowed illegal immigrants two years to begin the citizenship process, but the bill failed to pass.

The continuing lure Hispanics continued to flock to the United States in search of opportunities that were not available in other nations. The high rate of immigration and the high birth rate among Hispanic immigrants made this group the fastest growing minority in the United States. According to the 2000 U.S. Census report, in the 1990s the Hispanic population grew sixty times faster than the total population of the nation. The census indicated that Hispanic Americans had become the nation’s largest minority, slightly passing African Americans. As the immigration debate of 2006 indicated, many non-Hispanic citizens of the United States resented the perception of illegal immigrants 440

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Prejudice Against Hispanic Americans

avoiding the law, the seeming lack of enthusiasm by Hispanics for assimilating into American culture by learning and speaking English, and the apparent willingness of U.S. lawmakers and politicians to not strictly enforce the immigration laws in hopes of attracting votes from the growing Hispanic population. Still others believed that illegal immigrants should be granted amnesty and a chance to participate in the process of becoming a legal citizen of the United States. Use of the English language, historically an important issue, was no less so in the early twenty-first century. Twenty-five states passed legislation making English the official language of those states. A movement was building to pass a constitutional amendment making English the official national language, a symbolic gesture aimed against immigrants. Yet this language issue was merely a sidelight of the overall economic issues that were central to the illegal immigration debate. The Hispanic American experience in the United States has long been one of struggle and triumph, and it continued to evolve into the twenty-first century. While issues such as use of the English language, educational opportunity, access to healthcare, proposed immigration laws, and strong racial and ethnic prejudices continued to pose difficult questions to be resolved by government and citizens alike, Hispanic Americans had broken barriers to personal success and contributed richly to American politics, business, and culture.

For More Information B O O KS

Aguirre, Adalberto, and Jonathan Turner. American Ethnicity: The Dynamics and Consequences of Discrimination. Boston: McGraw-Hill, 1998. Bruns, Roger. Cesar Chavez: A Biography. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2005. Dalton, Frederick J. The Moral Vision of Cesar Chavez. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 2003. Eisenhower, John S. D. So Far from God: The U.S. War with Mexico, 1846– 1848. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 2000. Ferriss, Susan, and Ricardo Sandoval. The Fight in the Fields: Cesar Chavez and the Farmworkers Movement. New York: Harvest/HBJ, 1998. Libal, Autumn. Cuban Americans: Exiles from an Island Home. Philadelphia: Mason Crest Publishers, 2006. Meier, Matt, and Feliciano Ribera. Mexican Americans, American Mexicans: From Conquistadors to Chicanos. New York: Hill and Wang, 1994. Shusta, Robert, Deena Levine, Philip R. Harris, and Herbert Wong. Multicultural Law Enforcement. Englewood, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1995. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

441

Prejudice Against Hispanic Americans

WEB SIT ES

Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund. http://www.maldef.org (accessed on November 29, 2006). National Council of La Raza. http://nclr.org (accessed on November 29, 2006). United Farm Workers. http://www.ufw.org (accessed on November 29, 2006).

442

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

22

Apartheid of South Africa

ntil the discovery of diamonds in 1867, Southern Africa had an agricultural economy (main income is by farming). Then the discovery of gold came in 1886. The newfound wealth drew broad interest from foreign investors and laid the foundations of future apartheid (a formal policy of racial separation and discrimination (treating some differently than others or favoring one social group over another based on prejudices). The struggle for land at the turn of the twentieth century resulted in the creation of the Union of South Africa as part of the British Empire. The South African colonial government (government ruled by a foreign nation) passed laws after 1909 restricting land ownership and residence for all people of non-European ancestry. Later in the twentieth century, following two world wars, the racial tension in the country reached a dangerous level. The government of the nation of South Africa responded by officially adopting the policy known as apartheid. Through apartheid, South Africa became a key example of racial prejudice in the twentieth century.

U

Apartheid, which means ‘‘separateness’’ in Afrikaans, one of eleven official languages spoken in South Africa, began in 1948 and remained in effect for over forty-two years. However, not everyone supported the government and its policy. Within South Africa, the struggle for liberation began with peaceful protests but soon escalated into a campaign of defiance against unjust laws driven by racial prejudices (a negative attitude towards others of a particular physical trait, such as skin color, based on a prejudgment about those individuals with no prior knowledge or experience) and growing oppression. The African National Congress, an organization established in 1912 to promote the rights of black Africans, and other groups opposed to apartheid formed the Congress of the People in 1955 and adopted The Freedom Charter that declared the goals of a future democratic government they sought in South Africa. Decades of violence followed before apartheid was dismantled in the face 443

Apartheid of South Africa

WORDS TO KNOW apartheid: A policy of racial separation and discrimination. boycott: To refuse to have dealings with a person, store, or organization in order to express disapproval. discrimination: To treat differently or favor one group over another on a basis other than individual merit.

racial differences produce an assumed superiority of a particular race. reservation: A tract of public land set aside for a special purpose. segregation: Using laws or social customs to separate certain social groups, such as peoples distinguished by skin color—whites and blacks.

racism: A belief that race primarily determines human behavioral traits and capabilities and that

of international demands. The Republic of South Africa ended the twentieth century without the burden of official apartheid. However, it was faced with an overwhelming task of reconciling and uniting all people equally in South Africa.

Colonial conquest White Europeans first permanently settled in southern Africa in the midseventeenth century when the Dutch established a colony on the southwestern tip of the continent called the Cape. They became known as Afrikaners, a distinct ethnic group in South Africa composed of Dutch colonists and other early settlers from Europe. Afrikaners spoke Afrikaans, which was closely related to the Dutch language. Beginning in the 1830s some of their descendants, primarily farmers, moved into remote areas to escape from expanding British rule and establish new settlements. Those who moved called themselves Boers (the Dutch word for ‘‘farmers’’). They established two republics, Transvaal in the far north and the Orange Free State in the middle of the territory. Early in the nineteenth century, the Cape Province in the south became an English colony, along with the province of Natal on the western coastline. Europe’s colonial powers expressed a renewed interest in southern Africa in the nineteenth century when diamonds were discovered at Kimberley and gold was found at Witwatersrand. By the turn of the twentieth century, most African tribes had lost their land through 444

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Apartheid of South Africa

Signs like this are an example of the extreme racism that blacks had to endure under apartheid. GE TTY IM AGE S.

conquest or settlement. The white colonizers had reduced the status of native people to that of servants and tenants on land that had once been their own. In 1899, the English sought to establish dominance in the South African region. They went to war against the Boers. The Anglo-Boer War (1899–1902) resulted in an English victory over the Boers. However, the English failed in their attempts to attract large numbers of English immigrants to populate the land. The Boers, determined to preserve their own culture and language, retained a deep hostility toward their English rulers. Less than five years after the war ended, the Boer republics were largely self-governing once again. As a result, England granted the Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

445

Apartheid of South Africa

The Colour Bar A ‘‘colour bar’’ was used in South Africa to determine a person’s rights within the law. Racial prejudice divided people into color groups based on the distinction between whites and nonwhites. Non-whites were further divided into black, Indian, and colored designations. Legally, the color groups were supposed to be categorized into specific groupings. The white population was of European descent. Most came from the Netherlands (Dutch), but large numbers of immigrants also came from France and Germany. They were called Afrikaners and their population was concentrated in the Western and Eastern Cape province and in Natal on the Eastern coast. Native Africans, or blacks (also called Bantu), made up the largest population of people. Blacks were further divided into groups based on language and cultural backgrounds. Examples

included the Swazi, Venda, Tswana, and the Zulu. The Indian designation in the color bar mostly included those of Indian ancestry, but also included all people of Asian descent. Most Indians were originally brought from India to South Africa to work on sugarcane plantations. The largest Indian population lived in the province of Natal. Colored South Africans were people of mixed race. They were descendants of the first Dutch settlers and the native population of South Africa, called the Khoisan. The Khoisan had been militarily defeated and absorbed early in South African history by black migration from the north and white migration from the south. The races further mixed when Malayans and East Indians were brought to South Africa in the eighteenth century. Colored people had their own cultural heritage and generally lived in the Cape region.

colony independence within the British Empire and established the Union of South Africa in 1910. Dutch was recognized along with English as an official language of the Union. Elections placed former Boer generals in high government positions. Two main political parties emerged, and both were opposed to racial equality for native Africans. Most Boers supported the Nationalist (or National) Party. Most Englishspeakers and industrial employers supported the Unionist (or United) Party in the new government. Although the state government was now centralized, the provinces remained deeply segregated because of racial prejudice. People were divided into groups based on the distinction between whites and nonwhites in the so-called ‘‘colour bar’’ (see box). Non-whites were not allowed to vote outside of the Cape Province. Therefore, the rights of the black majority, representing over 70 percent of the population in South Africa, were not considered nationally. The white minority introduced a group of laws in order to enforce the policy of racial separation. 446

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Apartheid of South Africa

The Native Land Act set aside reservations for native Africans. # D AVI D TU RNL EY /C OR BIS .

The Mine and Works Act of 1911 secured the best jobs for white workers by limiting blacks to menial work, such as field laborers. This policy guaranteed a steady supply of cheap labor for mining and the construction of railways and roads used for industrial transportation. An endless need for laborers existed for the construction of buildings, commerce, and in domestic services, such as housemaids, for the rapidly expanding economy. Asian workers provided another source of cheap labor for industry in South Africa. Earlier in 1860, East Indian slaves had been introduced to southern Africa to work on the sugarcane plantations. In much the same way, Chinese laborers had been imported in 1904 to work in the gold mines in South Africa. In 1913, the South African government established the Native Land Act. The act set aside reservations (a tract of public land set aside for a special purpose, such as placement of an undesired social group away from mainstream society) for native Africans. Their land ownership was Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

447

Apartheid of South Africa

restricted to these reserves that covered approximately 13 percent of the country. The government’s land policy forcibly uprooted communities and set in place a migrant (worker who moves from job to job as they become available) labor system. Because the land could not support everyone, some men sought work in the mines located outside their reservations. Wives and children were not allowed to accompany the men. So families would often be separated for most of the year. In 1913, the government also passed the Immigrants Regulation Act, which prohibited Indians from moving out of the province in which they were born. Severely limited social, political, and legal rights finally prompted non-whites to organize and work toward racial equality.

The African National Congress At the turn of the century, several movements formed to promote equal rights for all citizens in South Africa. Most were fairly conservative groups that urged people to work within the political system to effect change. In 1902, the African Political Organization (APO) was founded. Though it was open to all races, it had a predominantly non-white membership that failed to gain wide support because of a general lack of concern for nonwhites among the whites. After years of petitions and protest meetings against segregation, several hundred prominent Africans including John Dube (1871–1946) joined together to form the South African Native National Congress, later renamed the African National Congress (ANC). Dube was the organization’s president for its first years until 1917. The ANC brought together all the native provinces at its inaugural (first) conference in 1912. At first, the ANC was politically conservative and attempted to work within the existing government system. Change seemed hopeful because the policy of segregation was never fully accepted throughout the country. However, progress against segregation at the political level was severely disrupted with the outbreak of World War I (1914–18). South Africa joined the war effort on the side of the British. By the time the war ended, so had the passive acceptance of racism (prejudice against people of a particular physical trait, such as skin color, based on a belief that the physical trait primarily determines human behavior and individual capabilities) by black Africans. Fighting as allies with democracies in the world such as the United States highlighted the inequalities of segregationist policies. They formed associations to promote religious, political, industrial, and social advancement for native Africans. 448

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Apartheid of South Africa

In 1919, Unionist Party leader Jan Smuts (1870–1950) became prime minister (a position similar to that of president) of South Africa. An Afrikaner who was hailed as an international statesman, Smuts represented South Africa at the Paris Peace Conference in 1919. At that time, he also played a leading role in establishing the League of Nations. The League was an international organization whose purpose was to prevent future world wars and improve global welfare. However, the League was given far less power than Smuts had argued for and was largely replaced by the stronger United Nations following World War II (1939–45). After decades of political fighting, Smuts’s goal was to present South Africa as a united nation, ready to take its rightful place as a respectable member of the international community. Smuts’s Unionist Party began to move away from the enforcement of segregationist laws, despite a deep conviction on his part about the virtues of European superiority. Smuts would later write to a friend in a letter that was printed in Martin Meredith’s 1988 book In the Name of Apartheid: South Africa in the Postwar Period, ‘‘I am a South African European proud of our heritage and proud of the clean European society we have built up in South Africa, and which I am determined not to see lost in the black pool of Africa.’’ In 1920 Smuts passed the Native Affairs Act, which focused on the question of separate political representation for blacks and whites in South Africa. The act brought the issue of racism back to the center of attention in the country. It was a controversial act that deeply divided people on both sides of the issue. Those in favor saw it as a great step forward in race relations. Those opposed saw it as a barrier to their goal of apartheid. In order for apartheid to work, political separation of the races, not just physical segregation of people, was necessary. The next decade saw a sharp rise in black political awareness and an increase in the number of protests aimed at political and economic reforms in South Africa. Africans created the South African Council of Non-European Trade Unions. Among other things, they demanded equal pay for equal work. Labor strikes occurred until 1926, when the Masters and Servants Amendment Act removed Africans’ right to strike in most situations. Between 1921 and 1936, thousands of black African men moved from reservations to towns and cities seeking employment. Urban areas were officially reserved for white populations. Native Africans were permitted only as long as they served a specific need, such as work for Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

449

Apartheid of South Africa

white Africans. They were allowed to temporarily live in camps on the outskirts of town, but their real homes were still officially listed on the reservations. Due to the growing number of blacks in the cities as well as the increase in political protests, the white minority sought more stringent controls. Officials set up a legal system that regulated entry into urban areas by requiring all black African men to carry a pass book, or passport, at all times. Police raids were regularly organized to ensure the pass laws were maintained. The raids often turned violent. Those caught without valid passes were arrested and sent to jail. Eventually, they would be sent back into the rural areas away from white-only areas. Not directly represented in government, Africans’ interests were handled by the Native Affairs Department (NAD). The NAD depended entirely on African taxes that paid for the expenses of education, social services, and economic development for native people. In 1936, African voters in the Cape Province lost their right to vote, a right they had held for more than eighty years. The reason given was that their right to vote could eventually lead to demands for the African vote in the northern territories. In exchange for losing their vote in general elections, Cape Province Africans were allowed to vote for selected white delegates who were suppose to represent them before the South African government. Liberty for native Africans was not progressing well and was about to get worse as the world faced another world war.

The world at war The South African population was divided over entering World War II in late 1939 when war first broke out. Racial and political issues brewing at home caused many to favor neutrality (not choosing a side). Afrikaners in the Nationalist Party considered it another of England’s wars that did not concern them. They also questioned opposing Germany, which seemed sympathetic to Afrikaner nationalism. On the other hand, Smuts’s allegiance to England, along with his international leadership ambitions, supported South African participation in the war. The country had the most advanced economy in Africa with its vast mineral wealth. In addition, its control of the Cape shipping routes made it strategically important in the war effort. Smuts and his Unionist Party won out and South Africa went to war. Native Africans’ efforts for greater participation in political life were somewhat interrupted by the war. Thousands who were hoping to escape the poverty of the reserves flooded into urban areas. They were drawn to 450

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Apartheid of South Africa

South African president and activist Nelson Mandela’s words and actions helped put a face on apartheid. # RE UTE RS /C ORB IS .

the cities by the booming wartime industries, but their presence only increased the existing tensions. Authorities extended pass laws controlling African movement in an attempt to gain control of Africans entering into urban areas. Despite their efforts, large camps grew outside such cities as Johannesburg and Durban. Activist movements grew inside these settlements. The movements’ members became increasingly critical of the government because of their poor living conditions. By the mid-1940s, nearly half of all Africans employed in commerce and private industry had joined labor trade unions. In 1943, the ANC drew up a Charter of Rights to increase political pressure on the government. They proposed a fair distribution of land, voting rights for non-whites, and full political participation. Young members of the ANC, including future South African president Nelson Mandela (1918—), formed an African Youth League. They advocated non-cooperation with the war effort in order to bring about social change in South Africa. At the same time, the South African Indians (SAI) Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

451

Apartheid of South Africa

elected a new group of leaders who promised to organize the Indian community to resist the government’s policy of segregation.

Postwar labor unrest African trade unions became more aggressive as a series of strikes broke out. Emergency war regulations passed in 1943 had ended the legal right of Africans to strike in any and all circumstances. Despite the law, tens of thousands of mineworkers went on strike over wages and poor working conditions on April 12, 1946. It was the largest labor protest in South Africa’s history to date. The government’s response to the strike was severe. Armed police were called in to break down the miners’ resistance. Black and Indian tobacco workers marched in support of the striking miners. White citizens were alarmed as the media dwelt on the dangers of allowing such demonstrations. The leaders of the mineworkers’ strike were arrested and five days after it had all begun, the strike was over. The strike had failed in its goals but the very attempt showed to whites and non-whites alike how non-white workers were improving their ability to organize and act collectively. In 1947, the ANC and the SAI made a joint declaration of unity in demanding political and social rights.

Debates over race relations Prime Minister Smuts was facing extreme pressure within South Africa from white citizens who were protesting against the rights of the Indian population to buy land. Indians, on the other hand, were demanding more political and social rights. Smuts’s solution was to offer Indians limited representation in government while restricting their rights on how much and where they could purchase land. This solution did not satisfy either side and the conflict soon became an international issue when it was placed on the agenda of the United Nations (UN) General Assembly in October 1946. Smuts argued that it was an internal matter to be dealt with by South Africa alone, but the Assembly passed a resolution condemning South Africa’s Indian policy. Europe’s colonial powers were leaning toward the idea of racial equality. The UN resolution served to focus the world’s attention on South Africa’s racial practices. Smuts returned home politically weakened. The Unionist Party government took steps to move away from strictly enforcing segregationist laws. They set up the Fagan Commission in 1948, which recommended segregation in the cities be gradually ended. The commission proposed a system that moved toward the races being equal, but still 452

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Apartheid of South Africa

separate (see Jim Crow chapter 17) under South African government rule. In response, Unionists argued that territorial separation of the races was impractical in the mid-twentieth century and Africans should be accepted as a permanent part of the urban population. The Nationalist Party responded with a commission of its own. The resulting Sauer Commission created in 1948 proposed a system of separate development between the races. It gave the name apartheid to the system. The Nationalist Party solution called for total racial segregation, giving native Africans their own separate states with political independence from white South Africa. The Nationalists argued that the reservations already in place were the proper homelands of native Africans and that social and cultural differences should keep the races separate whenever possible.

Divide and rule The general election of 1948 was set for May. It was to determine the direction South Africa would take as a nation following World War II. Europe’s colonial powers had begun to dismantle discriminatory laws. But the war had only increased the existing tensions between the white minority and the black majority in South Africa. The Nationalist Party, campaigning on its policy of apartheid, won an election victory over Smuts’s Unionist Party. They set about to establish their own version of racial discrimination, which would maintain its hold on the country for decades to come. The Nationalists quickly put laws in place to impose apartheid. The Population Registration Act of 1950 required all citizens to register with the government as white, Indian, Colored, or Bantu (the government term for Africans). The Bantu group was further broken down into groups based on language. Each was assigned a homeland, or bantustan. For example, those who spoke Zulu would be assigned a different homeland than those who spoke Sotho, creating two smaller divisions. The fact that whites often spoke different languages was not considered and assured them majority status. The government established complex criteria to determine racial groupings and created a board to rule in questionable cases. This separation by race sometimes resulted in members of the same family being classified in different racial groups and assigned different homelands. The Nationalist Party quickly passed legislation in 1948 enforcing racial purity by outlawing interracial marriages. Apartheid’s purpose was to guarantee political and economic privilege for the English-speaking minority. Not everyone in politics agreed with the policies of the new government, but resistance was quickly Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

453

Apartheid of South Africa

The Reservation of Separate Amenities Act of 1953 created separate beaches, buses, hospitals, schools, and libraries for the races. GE TTY I MA GE S.

crushed. For example, the Communist Party in South Africa attempted political resistance to apartheid and was banned in 1950. The Group Areas Act was passed on April 27, 1950, and became the backbone of apartheid. The act formally separated racial groups into separate states throughout South Africa. Around 87 percent of the country was reserved for whites, Indians, and Coloureds. The remaining land was assigned to the Bantu, who comprised 60 percent of the population. Scattered acres of land, mostly in the north and east, made up the ten designated Bantu homelands. Most of these homelands contained barren land that did not hold any of the wealth or key resources of the country, such as the gold and diamond mines. In 1951, the Bantu Authorities Act created separate government structures for native Africans in each of the homelands. The act laid the foundation for Africans to be declared citizens of Bantustans, not of South Africa, even if they physically lived in other parts of South Africa. The Reservation of Separate Amenities Act of 1953 created separate beaches, buses, hospitals, schools, and libraries for the races. It prohibited people of different races from using the same public amenities, such as restrooms and drinking fountains. Non-whites were prohibited from entering white areas without specific permission and a pass. A pass was only issued 454

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Apartheid of South Africa

to a person with approved work. Spouses and children were not included in the passes, which meant families remained separated if living outside the homeland. Those without a pass were arrested, tried, and deported to their homeland, where poverty was widespread. Over the decades, millions of Bantus were arrested under laws controlling their movement.

Resistance builds Non-whites tried unsuccessfully for decades to end segregationist policies in South Africa. When the Nationalist Party implemented its policy of apartheid through government laws, it became apparent to non-whites that increased resistance was necessary. In the 1950s, several opposition groups, including the Coloured People’s Congress, the SAI, and the white Congress of Democrats came together under the leadership of the ANC. They joined in a campaign of defiance over unjust laws. For the first time they advocated open resistance to unfair practices in the form of strikes, work stoppages, and protest marches. When the government passed the Bantu Education Act (see box) in 1953, a boycott (an organized effort to not buy certain products or use certain services in order to express disapproval with an organization) of schools resulted. Not all whites were in favor of the apartheid system. In 1955, the Black Sash, an organization of white women wearing black sashes in protest of social injustice against black Africans, formed a movement to promote nonviolent resistance to apartheid. In the mid1950s, the government extended the pass laws. Now every Bantu over sixteen years of age was required to carry a passport in order to visit, live, or work in a white area. On August 9, 1956, over twenty thousand women marched on government offices and demanded to see the prime minister. He refused to meet with them and, despite nationwide protests, the pass laws were extended. The protest sparked an annual event known as South Africa Women’s Day. Referred to a National Women’s Day, in 1994 the date of August 9 was proclaimed one of seven South African holidays that is celebrated every year.

The Congress of the People Those opposed to the policies and practices of apartheid gathered outside Johannesburg on June 25, 1955, for a Congress of the People. Over three thousand delegates assembled from various parties and organizations. Their purpose was to create an alliance and draft a freedom charter for the Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

455

Apartheid of South Africa

Bantu Education Act Until apartheid, African schools were divided into four categories. These included private schools run independently by religious communities, mission schools founded by church organizations but funded and controlled by the state, tribal schools operated by African communities, and government schools. The Bantu Education Act of 1953 brought all native African schooling under the administrative control of the government. It effectively ended all other types. This allowed the Education Ministry to determine budgets, examination requirements, and curriculum, or the course of study for Bantu children. The ministry also controlled building location and maintenance, fees, teacher assignments, and pupil-teacher ratios. The apartheid government’s educational policy was a key example of racial discrimination. The potential of a student was not based on individual merits, but rather on membership in a racial group which had been assigned certain characteristics. The Bantu Education Act was designed to insure African children received the type of

education that the ministry had decided was best suited for unskilled labor. Bantu education therefore kept black children at a very low standard. Students were assigned a curriculum that included such subjects as dish washing and the weeding of flower beds. By the 1970s, the pupil-teacher ratio for Bantu education was around sixty to one. In schools for whites it was around twenty to one. School attendance for whites was mandatory but it was optional for Africans at the primary level. African students who went on to secondary school were required to pay for their own education, textbooks, and supplies. Salaries for teachers in Bantu education were about half that of white teachers with the same qualifications. Many Bantu teachers were forced to work a double shift because of the lack of faculty and facilities. Because of the general poverty of native African homes and their distance from schools, the student dropout rate in Bantu education was very high. After 1959, higher education for Bantu was available only in separate colleges and universities.

democratic South Africa of the future. The following day, the Congress of the People met and adopted The Freedom Charter (see box). The Nationalist Party reacted to The Freedom Charter by arresting 156 individuals and charging them with treason (attempting to overthrow the government). Ninety-one blacks were actually taken to court in 1958 in what became known as the Treason Trials. The ANC responded with boycotts and strikes. By the time the trial ended in 1961, international attention was once again centered on the racial situation in South Africa. All of the defendants were found not guilty. In 1962, the UN established the Special Committee against Apartheid to monitor racial policies in the country and to promote an international campaign to support the end of apartheid. 456

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Apartheid of South Africa

The Freedom Charter of 1955 In June 1955, the Congress of the People, consisting of over three thousand delegates opposed to apartheid, assembled to draft a freedom charter for a future democratic South Africa. They created The Freedom Charter. The preamble to The Freedom Charter states, ‘‘We, the people of South Africa, declare for all our country and the world to know: That South Africa belongs to all who live in it, black and white, and that no government can justly claim authority unless it is based on the will of the people . . . And we pledge ourselves to strive together, sparing nothing of our strength and courage, until the democratic changes here set out have been won.’’

The Charter demanded: The People shall govern. All national groups shall have equal rights. The People shall share in the country’s wealth. The land shall be shared among those who work it. All shall be equal before the law. All shall enjoy equal human rights. There shall be work and security. The doors of learning and culture shall be opened. There shall be houses, security and comfort. There shall be peace and friendship.

A new nation struggles South Africa maintained ties with the British monarchy (the king or queen who holds supreme governmental power) until it acquired independence as the Republic of South Africa on May 31, 1961. The continuing turmoil within the country alarmed foreign economic investors, who were concerned that the new government was about to fall. If black resistance continued unrestricted, the Nationalist Party leaders feared these investors would take their money out of South Africa. Demonstrations against the hated pass laws grew violent on March 21, 1960. A large group of blacks congregated outside a police station in Sharpeville. The protesters were not carrying their pass books. They intended to make a statement by offering themselves up for arrest. Police grew intimidated by the crowd and opened fire, killing 69 and injuring 186. The event became known as the Sharpeville Massacre and led to the banning of the ANC and other black organizations by the government. In response, the ANC switched its tactics from nonviolent to violent resistance, which would prove much more effective against apartheid policies through the next thirty years. Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

457

Apartheid of South Africa

Dead bodies scattered on the ground in the aftermath of the Sharpeville Massacre in 1960. # HUL TO N-D EUT SC H CO LLE CT ION / CO RB IS .

In 1961, Nelson Mandela and others from the ANC formed Umkhonto we Sizwe, which is translated as The Spear of the Nation. The underground movement began a campaign of sabotage (to secretly disrupt activities) against the government. In 1963, Mandela and seven other leaders of the underground resistance were arrested and sentenced to life in prison.

An isolated nation During the 1970s, public opposition increased as new trade unions, women’s groups, and youth and student organizations united in their efforts against apartheid. In 1976, students in Soweto went on strike when the government ruled Afrikaans would be the new official language in African schools. Police responded with gunfire to rock-throwing students who gathered in protest. Before the violence ended, twentythree students were officially listed as dead, but accounts of witnesses say hundreds more were killed in what became known as the Soweto Riots. It was a defining moment in the future of apartheid by increasing world attention on South Africa’s racial policies. 458

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Apartheid of South Africa

Police dragging a protestor away at an anti-apartheid demonstration. # WI LL IAM CA MPB EL L/S YG MA /CO RB IS .

The UN had been monitoring the situation in South Africa since 1946, but not until the 1976 Soweto Riots did it have enough international support to establish apartheid as a crime. The International Criminal Court was formed to prohibit any other state from adopting the practices of racial domination and oppression practiced in South Africa. International action against South Africa included oil and arms embargos (stoppages), sports and cultural boycotts, and a campaign to release political prisoners opposed to the system. South Africa was culturally and economically isolated from the rest of the world.

Violence prevails In order to enforce apartheid, the South African government had dramatically increased its military spending. Authorities were allowed to detain opponents of apartheid indefinitely. Many died in custody or were Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

459

Apartheid of South Africa

deported. Agents of the government assassinated leaders of the liberation movement in a further effort to end the opposition. Armed resistance by The Spear of the Nation increased in response. It directed attacks on police stations, military bases, power stations, and government offices used to administer apartheid. The government responded by declaring a state of emergency in 1985, effectively turning South Africa into a police state (police are given greater powers to suppress activities that conflict with governmental policy). Between 1985 and 1988, the country endured its most violent times. Many white South Africans fled the country for fear of being attacked on the streets or in their homes. The need for change was now evident to everyone. Archbishop Desmond Tutu (1932–), an Anglican cleric (a priest of the Church of England) from Cape Town, led the newly formed United Democratic Front (UDF), which called for the elimination of apartheid.

Apartheid ends In 1989, F. W. de Klerk (1936–; served 1989–94) was elected president of South Africa. In his opening address to parliament, de Klerk announced he would overturn discriminatory laws and lift the ban on the ANC and others. After forty-two years, apartheid was officially ended. De Klerk released political prisoners of apartheid, including Nelson Mandela, who had served twenty-eight years of his life sentence. Over the next few years, the laws of apartheid were repealed, one at a time. The last whites-only vote was held in 1992. The vote gave the government the authority to negotiate a multi-racial government transition and a new constitution. Elections were called and took place peacefully in 1994 with the ANC winning all but two provinces. Nelson Mandela became the new president of South Africa. Those who still sympathized with apartheid policies were largely resigned by now to the changes in South African society. Mandela and de Klerk were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1993 for their peaceful termination of the apartheid regime and their work to promote a new democratic (a political system built on social equality in which citizens hold the nation’s supreme power) South Africa. In addition to its issues of racial equality, the apartheid years left the country with serious economic problems and a high crime rate; the new government had serious work to do. The Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act of 1995 set up the Truth and Reconciliation Commission to help South Africa transition to a full and free democracy by exposing all the 460

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Apartheid of South Africa

Nelson Mandela, left, and F. W. de Klerk were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1993 for their peaceful termination of the apartheid regime and their work to promote a new democratic South Africa. # RE UT ERS /C OR BIS .

atrocities that occurred during the apartheid era. Chaired by Archbishop Tutu, the commission began hearings to hear about particular injustices in April 1996. The committees of Human Rights Violations, Reparations (compensation), and Amnesty (pardon) heard thousands testify on life under apartheid. With the power to grant amnesty (official forgiveness), it was hoped this path would heal wounds more quickly, but its effectiveness in actually bringing about reconciliation between blacks and whites proved limited. South Africa entered the twenty-first century as an ethnically

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

461

Apartheid of South Africa

diverse nation steadily progressing toward democratization after years of discrimination.

For More Information BOOKS

Anti-Apartheid Movement. Racism and Apartheid in Southern Africa: South Africa and Namibia. Paris: UNESCO Press, 1974. Desai, Ashwin. We Are the Poors: Community Struggles in Post-Apartheid South Africa. New York: Monthly Review Press, 2002. Dubow, Saul. Racial Segregation and the Origins of Apartheid in South Africa, 1919–36. London: Macmillan Press Ltd., 1989. Finnegan, William. Crossing the Line: A Year in the Land of Apartheid. New York: Persea Books, 2006. Louw, P. Eric. The Rise, Fall, and Legacy of Apartheid. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers, 2004. Meredith, Martin. In the Name of Apartheid: South Africa in the Postwar Period. London: Hamish Hamilton Ltd., 1988. Suttner, Raymond, and Jeremy Cronin. 30 Years of the Freedom Charter. Johannesburg: Ravan Press, 1986. WEB SIT ES

African National Congress: South Africa’s National Liberation Movement. http:// www.anc.org.za/ (accessed on November 29, 2006). Apartheid Museum. http://www.apartheidmuseum.org (accessed on November 29, 2006). Black Sash: Making Human Rights Real. http://www.blacksash.org.za/ (accessed on November 29, 2006).

462

Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac

Prejudice in the Modern World Biographies

Prejudice in the Modern World Biographies

Richard C. Hanes and Kelly Rudd Sarah Hermsen, Project Editor

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies Richard C. Hanes and Kelly Rudd Imaging and Multimedia Dean Dauphinais, Lezlie Light, Mike Logusz

Project Editor Sarah Hermsen Rights and Acquisitions Margaret Abendroth, Tim Sisler

Product Design Jennifer Wahi

ª 2007 Thomson Gale, a part of The Thomson Corporation. Thomson and Star Logo are trademarks and Gale is a registered trademark used herein under license. For more information, contact: Thomson Gale 27500 Drake Rd. Farmington Hills, MI 48331-3535 Or you can visit our Internet site at http://www.gale.com ALL RIGHTS RESERVED No part of this work covered by the copyright hereon may be reproduced or used in any form or by any means— graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, taping, Web distribution, or information storage retrieval systems—without the written permission of the publisher.

For permission to use material from this product, submit your request via Web at http://www.gale-edit.com/ permissions, or you may download our Permissions Request form and submit your request by fax or mail to: Permissions Department Thomson Gale 27500 Drake Rd. Farmington Hills, MI 48331-3535 Permissions Hotline: 248-699-8006 or 800-877-4253, ext. 8006 Fax: 248-699-8074 or 800-762-4058 Cover photographs reproduced by permission of ª Bettmann/Corbis (Cesar Chavez), ª Jayanta Shaw/ Reuters Corbis (Dalai Lama), and AP Images (Rosa Parks).

Composition Evi Seoud Manufacturing Rita Wimberley

Since this page cannot legibly accommodate all copyright notices, the acknowledgements constitute an extension of the copyright notice. While every effort has been made to ensure the reliability of the information presented in this publication, Thomson Gale does not guarantee the accuracy of the data contained herein. Thomson Gale accepts no payment for listing; and inclusion in the publication of any organization, agency, institution, publication, service, or individual does not imply endorsement by the editors or publisher. Errors brought to the attention of the publisher and verified to the satisfaction of the publisher will be corrected in future editions.

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS CATALOGING-IN-PUBLICATION DATA Hanes, Richard Clay, 1946– Prejudice in the modern world. Biographies / Richard C. Hanes and Kelly Rudd ; Sarah Hermsen, project editor. p. cm. — (Prejudice in the modern world reference library) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN-13: 978-1-4144-0207-9 (hardcover: alk. paper)— ISBN-10: 1-4144-0207-4 (hardcover: alk. paper)— 1. Toleration—Juvenile literature. 2. Prejudices—Juvenile literature. 3. Intergroup relations— Juvenile literature. 4. Ethnic relations—Juvenile literature. 5. Race relations—Juvenile literature. 6. Social reformers—Biography—Juvenile literature. 7. Dictators—Biography—Juvenile literature. I. Rudd, Kelly, 1954– II. Hermsen, Sarah. III. Title. HM1271.H36 2007b 303.3’850922—dc22 [B] 2006036956

ISBN-13:

978-1-4144-0203-1 978-1-4144-0204-8 978-1-4144-0205-5 978-1-4144-0206-2 978-1-4144-0207-9

ISBN-10:

978-1-4144-0208-6 (set) (Primary Sources) (Almanac set) (Almanac vol.1) 978-1-4144-0209-3 (Cumulative Index) (Almanac vol.2) (Biographies)

1-4144-0203-1 (set) 1-4144-0204-X (Almanac set) 1-4144-0205-8 (Almanac vol.1) 1-4144-0206-6 (Almanac vol.2) 1-4144-0207-4 (Biographies)

1-4144-0208-2 (Primary Sources) 1-4144-0209-0 (Cumulative Index)

This title is also available as an e-book. ISBN-13: 978-1-4144-1057-9, ISBN-10: 1-4144-1057-3 Contact your Thomson Gale sales representative for ordering information. Printed in the United States of America 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

T a b l e o f Co n t e n t s

Reader’s Guide vii Timeline of Events xi Words to Know xxvii Bella Abzug 1 Yasser Arafat 11 Cesar Chavez 19 Dalai Lama 29 Mahatma Gandhi 37 Heinrich Himmler 47 John Hume 57 Saddam Hussein 65 Alija Izetbegovic 75 Paul Kagame 85 Helen Keller 97 Leontine Kelly 107 Ruhollah Khomeini 115 Nelson Mandela 123 Wilma Mankiller 131 Golda Meir 139 Slobodan Milosevic 147 v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Mine Okubo 157 Rosa Parks 167 Soraya Parlika 175 Alice Paul 185 Jan Smuts 195 Gloria Steinem 205 Mother Teresa 213 Leyla Zana 221

Where to Learn More xxxvii Index xliii

vi

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Reader’s Guide

Of the many kinds of emotions and feelings a person may hold, prejudice is perhaps one of the most common yet complex. Prejudice is a negative attitude, emotion, or behavior towards others based on a prejudgment about those individuals with no prior knowledge or experience. Prejudice can be extremely harmful, oversimplifying diverse aspects of human nature and making broad generalizations about entire races and cultures. These generalizations are frequently based on stereotypes. The use of stereotypes employs negative images of others. Such negative stereotypes may lead to certain forms of behavior including discrimination or even hostile violent acts. This kind of use of generalizations and stereotypes becomes especially critical when people in power, or seeking political power, manipulate through the media the stereotypes of social groups they wish to dominate, or perhaps eliminate. People in these stereotyped groups often become less valued socially. They are frequently made scapegoats, blamed for the problems affecting society in general, even if they have nothing to do with it. Prejudices usually form very early in life; they are shaped by family, schools, and society in general. Prejudice can assume many forms based on the kinds of traits that others are being prejudged by. Racial prejudice focuses on physical biological traits, such as skin color. Religious prejudice considers the beliefs held by others or what religious denomination they are associated with. Ethnic prejudice identifies people who share common backgrounds or social customs. Nationalism is a form of prejudice that focuses on the political systems others live under. Sexism is a gender prejudice against men or women. Sexual orientation prejudices are usually against people who are homosexuals or transgendered. vii

READER’S GUIDE

Some prejudices focus on disabilities of others, ranging from physical handicaps to mental disabilities to mental illnesses. Normally, people—both as a group and individually—are acting out multiple forms of prejudice at any one time. One group of people may hold prejudices and discriminate against another group because of combined religious and ethnic prejudices, racial and social class prejudices, or gender and disability prejudices. Similarly, any multiple combinations of prejudices are possible and may even occur in different combinations in the same individual over time. No matter the complexity of prejudice, one simple fact exists—prejudice has long been one of the greatest barriers and most destructive forces in human history. Prejudice has been a major influence on human relationships throughout the history of humankind. Not only has prejudice existed throughout the history of civilization, it has dominated certain historic periods and historical events, such as the invasion of Christian armies into the Muslim-held Holy Lands beginning at the end of the eleventh century, the sixteenth century religious upheaval of the Reformation in Europe, and the Holocaust in World War II (1939–45) in the mid-twentieth century. Despite this influence of prejudice throughout history, the actual concept of what prejudice is did not develop until the twentieth century, when the study of prejudices gained recognition. Slavery, colonialism, and world empires had largely ended by the early twentieth century. However, racial discrimination, particularly against those groups previously enslaved, ethnic conflicts, and international conflict driven by nationalism remained major influences on the course of modern history. Instances where the consequences of prejudice were most apparent included the racially discriminatory Jim Crow laws of the American South, the extermination of European Jews by Nazi Germany in the Holocaust, ethnic conflicts in former Yugoslavia in Eastern Europe, genocides in the African states of Rwanda and Somalia, and religious conflicts in Northern Ireland and the Middle East. The nature of prejudice-driven discrimination and violence has changed over time. Efforts by national governments, human rights watch groups, and international organizations, such as the United Nations, have made strides in combating prejudice through various educational and humanitarian programs. However, it appeared that prejudice would continue as a major influence and source of conflict in the world into the twenty-first century. viii

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

READER’S GUIDE

Features Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies presents profiles of twentyfive diverse and unique men and women who played key roles in the history of prejudice. Some were prominent national leaders in fighting well-established prejudices while some promoted prejudices in order to pursue their own political and economic gain. Other figures were activists combating the various types of prejudice. Profiles include Paul Kagame, president of Rwanda; Saddam Hussein, president of Iraq; Golda Meir, prime minister of Israel; Wilma Mankiller, chairperson of the Cherokee Nation; social activists Gloria Steinem, Cesar Chavez, Mine Obuko, and Mahatma Gandhi. Other biography subjects range from Nazi German military leader Heinrich Himmler, the primary instigator of the Holocaust, to the Dalai Lama, the Tibetan spiritual leader who promoted religious tolerance. Each biography contains a list of additional sources students can go to for more information; sidebar boxes highlighting people and events of special interest; and boldfaced cross-references to direct readers to other related biography chapters. Nearly 50 black-and-white photographs help illustrate the material. The volume begins with a timeline of important events in the history of prejudice and a Words to Know section that introduces students to difficult or unfamiliar terms (terms are also defined within the text). The volume concludes with a general bibliography and a subject index so students can easily find the people, places, and events discussed throughout Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies.

Prejudice in the Modern World Reference Library Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies is only one component of the three-part Prejudice in the Modern World Reference Library. The other two titles in this set are: Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac offers twenty-two chapters in two volumes. The first eleven chapters explore the many different types of prejudice, their history, what causes these prejudices in people and societies, and their consequences. The types of prejudice described in detail include ethnic, racial, religious, class, gender, sexual orientation, nationalism, and disabilities. Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources tells various stories in the words of the people who fought prejudice, acted out prejudices, and those who were the victims of prejudice. Sixteen excerpted documents touch on a wide range of topics on prejudice. Included are Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

ix

READER’S GUIDE

excerpts from published diaries, national magazine and news articles, reports produced by the United Nations and human rights watch groups, published interviews, and Web sites dedicated to the elimination of prejudice in everyday life. A cumulative index of all three titles in the Prejudice in the Modern World Reference Library is also available.

Acknowledgements These volumes are dedicated to our new granddaughter Jenna Grace Hanes. May she grow up to enjoy a world far less shaped by the destructive consequences of prejudice.

Comments and Suggestions We welcome your comments on Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies and suggestions for other topics to consider. Please write: Editors, Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies, U
X
L, 27500 Drake Rd. Farmington Hills, Michigan 48331-3535; call toll free: 1-800-877-4253; fax to (248) 699-8097; or send e-mail via http:// www.gale.com.

x

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Timeline of Events

February 1882 At the age of nineteen months Helen Keller suddenly

comes down with a severe fever that leaves her unconscious with little hope of survival; after her illness suddenly disappears it is discovered that Keller is left deaf, blind, and mute. 1890s Jim Crow laws are introduced in the United States to legally

enforce public racial segregation for the next half century. 1890 Helen Keller becomes a celebrity after spending two winters in

Boston at the Perkins Institution learning to read Braille and writing letters, diary entries, and short stories that are published and receive wide circulation. 1902 The First International Convention for Women meets in

Washington, D.C., with representatives arriving from ten nations to plot an international strategy for gaining suffrage. 1904 Helen Keller becomes the first deaf and blind person to earn a

college degree when she graduates from Radcliff College with honors. 1905 Black American leaders meet in Niagara Falls, Canada, to develop a

strategy to fight racial prejudice in America; it becomes known as the Niagara Movement. 1909 The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People

(NAACP) is established to fight lynching and other racist activities in the United States through legal action, educational programs, and encouraging voter participation. xi

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

1912 Hundreds of prominent Africans form the South African Native

National Congress, later renamed the African National Congress (ANC), to protest racial segregation in South Africa. March 3, 1913 On the day before U.S. president Woodrow Wilson’s

inauguration in Washington, D.C., Alice Paul leads a massive parade of over eight thousand suffragists down Pennsylvania Avenue past the White House; with over a half a million bystanders gathered along the route, the march attracts major media coverage for days. 1914 Alice Paul and Lucy Burns break from NAWSA and form the

Congressional Union for Woman Suffrage that promotes aggressive, but nonviolent tactics to promote a national constitutional amendment for women’s suffrage. 1915 Helen Keller establishes Helen Keller International, a nonprofit

organization dedicated to the prevention of blindness through education and promotion of social reforms that benefit the disabled throughout the world. 1915 Mahatma Gandhi begins a series of nonviolent demonstrations in

order to promote India’s independence from British rule; attracting large crowds at public meetings he earns the title of Mahatma, meaning Great Soul, as he works to ease the burden of poverty and ignorance for the poor focusing on the rural peasant population that forms the vast majority of the population. 1916 The Irish Republican Army (IRA) forms to fight a guerrilla war for

Ireland’s independence from England; the Irish Free State is formed five years later. January 1917 Alice Paul organizes picketing of the White House to

demand the right to vote; it is the first known organized effort to picket the White House. 1918 Since 1889, 2,522 black Americans are lynched—hung, burned

alive, or hacked to death—largely in the American South, as a result of extreme racial prejudice. 1918 Following World War I (1914–18) the Kingdom of the Serbs,

Croats, and Slovenes is formed, later adopting the name Yugoslavia; it soon becomes apparent that the various ethnic groups are unwilling to blend together. xii

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

1918 Defeat of the Ottoman Empire in World War I leads the victors,

Britain and France, to divide up the Middle East under their control with Britain forming a new country called Iraq and establishing rule over Arab Palestinian territory. August 1919 Jan Smuts replaces Louis Botha as South Africa’s prime

minister following Botha’s death. 1920 The All India Home Rule League is formed, with Mahatma

Gandhi as its president, to seek independence from British rule. It adopts anti-British measures, including a boycott of British imported goods, refusing employment by the British, and refusing to pay taxes; these actions lead to the imprisonment of Gandhi. 1923 After successfully passing the women’s suffrage constitutional

amendment in 1920, Alice Paul writes the first draft of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), a proposed constitutional amendment guaranteeing equal rights to men and women; it is introduced into Congress but does not pass until 1972. 1924 Mahatma Gandhi is elected President of the Indian National

Congress. 1928 The Muslim Brotherhood is created in Egypt to resist European

colonial powers controlling much of the Arab world in northern Africa and the Middle East and promote a return to Islamic states of past centuries. 1929 Heinrich Himmler takes command of the Slutzstaffen or Security

Squad (SS), a German military organization initially created as an elite bodyguard unit for the rising German politician Adolf Hitler and other Nazi party leaders; the power of the SS dramatically grew under his leadership, with its size increasing from 280 members to 52,000 soldiers. December 1929 Mahatma Gandhi launches a countrywide civil disobe-

dience movement in India to gain independence from British rule. May 24, 1937 Mother Teresa takes her final vows of poverty, chastity,

and obedience in accordance with the tradition of the Loreto nuns and dedicates her life to tending to the slum children of Calcutta; she becomes the principal of the school at St. Mary’s. Alice Paul establishes the World Party for Equal Rights for Women, otherwise known as World Women’s Party, to promote increased political power of women worldwide.

1938

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

xiii

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

November 9, 1938 Known as the Night of Broken Glass, the German

government carefully orchestrates violence against Jews across Germany and German-controlled Austria for two days as rioters burn or damage over one thousand Jewish synagogues and almost eight thousand Jewish-owned businesses; some thirty thousand Jewish men are arrested and sent to concentration camps, the first mass arrest of Jews by Nazi Germany. 1940 The fourteenth Dalai Lama is installed as the religious leader of

Tibet at the age of seven. 1942 The United States and Mexico establish the Bracero Program that

allows Mexican day laborers to legally enter the United States for seasonal work on farms and other jobs until 1964 when the program officially ends; almost five million workers journeyed from Mexico though working conditions were often harsh. 1942 Iranian religious leader Ruhollah Khomeini publishes the first

version of his booklet Kahf-ol-Asrar (Key to the Secrets) that condemns anyone who criticizes Islam. January 20, 1942 Heinrich Himmler participates in a meeting of Nazi

leadership known as the Wannsee Conference, where it is decided how to carryout the extermination, or genocide, of European Jews using concentration camps specially equipped with gas chambers for killing large numbers of people at a time and crematoriums for burning their bodies. February 19, 1942 U.S. president Roosevelt signs Executive Order 9066

authorizing the removal of Japanese Americans from their homes in the West Coast to detention camps established by the War Relocation Authority (WRA). April 26, 1942 Mine Okubo reports to a central relocation station to

receive instructions on her evacuation to a Japanese American relocation camp. Nelson Mandela and other young members of the African National Congress (ANC) form the African Youth League (AYL) to promote social change in their country through the use of strikes and boycotts.

1943

January 1944 Okubo leaves her relocation camp and moves to New York

City to work for Fortune magazine beginning an illustrious art career. xiv

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

December 1944 With the end of World War II in sight, the remaining

forty-four thousand Japanese Americans being detained since 1942 are freed, although the last camp does not close until March 1946. Following World War II, the Federal Peoples Republic of Yugoslavia is established as a communist country under the control of the USSR including the six states of Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, Serbia, Slovenia, Montenegro, and Macedonia.

1945

1945 The United Nations forms as an international world body to

resolve international disputes; its membership includes fifty-one nations; among its branches is the Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). May 23, 1945 Heinrich Himmler commits suicide by swallowing a

potassium cyanide capsule he had been hiding in his mouth before Allied forces can interrogate him; he is buried in a secret location so that Nazi sympathizers can not use his gravesite as a place of inspiration. 1946 Yasser Arafat joins the Palestinian resistance against British con-

trol over Palestinian territory and helps smuggle weapons into Palestine. 1946 Artist Mine Okubo publishes a book about Japanese American

internment during World War II titled Citizen 13660 providing one of the first inside descriptions of the internment experience. March 1946 Alija Izetbegovic is convicted in Bosnia of hostile activity

and sentenced to three years in prison for his role in publishing a dissident Islamic journal called Soldier of God that makes anti-Soviet statements. 1947 The Indian government stops legally enforcing the traditional caste

system, establishes prohibitions against discrimination against members of former castes, and creates an aggressive affirmative action program to help those lower caste members historically discriminated against. January 30, 1948 A young Hindu assassinates Mahatma Gandhi during

his usual evening prayer meeting in New Delhi, India. December 1948 The United Nations adopts the Convention on the

Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in response to the Holocaust during World War II; the resulting trials continue Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

xv

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

through the remainder of the twentieth century setting precedents for future war crimes trials conducted by international tribunals. 1950s American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) attorney Bella Abzug

gains a reputation for defending the civil rights of citizens by defending artists and writers accused of being communists by the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC). 1950s Yasser Arafat organizes a group of Palestinian exiles in an under-

ground cell that becomes known as al-Fatah, a movement dedicated to establishing an independent Palestinian state. 1950s Ruhollah Khomeini is acclaimed an ayatollah (major religious

leader) and changes his surname to the town of his birth in accordance with clerical tradition, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. 1950 Mother Teresa founds an order of nuns called the Missionaries of

Charity in Calcutta, India, and serves as its director for nearly fifty years. 1953 Cesar Chavez joins the Community Service Organization (CSO)

and becomes a community organizer to help register Mexican Americans to vote and challenge prejudice and injustice in postwar America. 1954 The U.S. Supreme Court rules in Brown v. Board of Education that

racially segregated public schools are illegal marking a major legal victory for black Americans against Jim Crow laws. 1955 Mother Teresa founds her first orphanage for abandoned babies

and children, calling it Shishu Bhavan (Sowing Joy); the home also has a soup kitchen, clinic, and shelter for expectant mothers who have been rejected by family and society. June 1955 The South African Congress of the People, consisting of over

three thousand delegates opposed to apartheid, assemble to draft the Freedom Charter for a future democratic South Africa. December 1, 1955 Rosa Parks, riding a Montgomery, Alabama, city

bus, refuses to give her seat to a white man when requested; police take Parks to the police station where she is charged with disorderly conduct for violating a city bus ordinance. 1956 Golda Meir becomes Israel’s Foreign Minister and chief interna-

tional defender of the new nation. xvi

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

1956 After graduation with honors from Smith College, Gloria Steinem

travels to India to study political science for the next two years where she witnesses severe discrimination in Indian society and joins nonviolent protests against prejudiced governmental policies. October 29, 1956 Through November 6, Egypt nationalizes the Suez

Canal, blocking Israeli commercial ships from passing through the critical waterway and leading to a brief war in which Israel wins. December 20, 1956 A boycott of the Montgomery, Alabama, city buses

comes to an end after 382 days when the city complies with the U.S. Supreme Court ruling that city bus segregation is unconstitutional following the arrest and trial of Rosa Parks. 1957 At the age of twenty, Saddam Hussein joins the Baa´th Party, a

revolutionary Arab political party whose motto is ‘‘One Arab Nation with an Eternal Mission.’’ 1958 Racial violence breaks out in the Notting Hill district of London

leading to calls for increased restrictions on immigration. 1959 Tibetan resistance to Chinese control and discrimination escalates

into violence in Tibet’s capital city of Lhasa, causing the Dalai Lama and tens of thousands of Tibetans to seek exile in India while the Chinese systematically destroy Tibetan monasteries. November 1961 Nelson Mandela joins with other ANC leaders to form

Umkhonto we Sizwe, meaning the Spear of the Nation, that conducts an underground campaign of sabotage targeting government offices used to administer the racial discrimination policies of apartheid. 1962 Cesar Chavez forms the Farm Workers Association (FWA) and

travels to migrant labor camps throughout California and Arizona, convincing workers of the need for unity; FWA is later renamed the National Farm Workers Association (NFWA). July 1, 1962 The African state of Rwanda gains independence from

Belgian rule. 1963 Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini begins using his position as Iran’s

spiritual leader to publicly denounce the government of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi and condemns the United States and Israel as co-conspirators with the Shah in their alleged efforts to erase Islam; the Shah forces Khomeini into exile. Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

xvii

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

August 28, 1963 Black leaders including Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.,

Philip Randolph, Roy Wilkins, James Farmer, and Whitney M. Young, Jr., lead a massive protest march on Washington, D.C., attracting over two hundred thousand people, both blacks and whites. 1964 Nelson Mandela, convicted with other prominent ANC leaders at

the Rivonia Trial on charges of sabotage and crimes of treason, receives a life sentence and is placed at a high-security prison off the coast of Cape Town. From prison Mandela calls for continuing pressure to crush apartheid and create a democratic and free society. 1964 The U.S. Congress passes the landmark Civil Rights Act prohibit-

ing discrimination based on race and gender in public places and calling for equal opportunity in education and employment. 1964 Violence erupts in Northern Ireland as Catholics rebel against

Protestant oppression, leading to a bloody terrorist campaign by the Irish Republican Army (IRA) leaving thousands dead. September 1964 U.S. president Lyndon B. Johnson awards Helen Keller

the prestigious Presidential Freedom Award, one of the two highest awards given to civilians in the United States. 1965 Cesar Chavez and his National Farm Workers Association supports

California grape pickers to promote a public boycott of certain products until increased pay demands are met; Chavez also leads a march of ten thousand people to the California state capital to deliver the workers’ demands for legislation to protect the workers from unfair and unsafe working conditions. 1965 A gay rights march held outside Independence Hall in Philadelphia

marks the beginning of the modern gay rights movement and formation of such groups as the Gay Liberation Front and Gay Activists Alliance. 1965 U.S. president Lyndon Johnson signs a presidential order establish-

ing affirmative action programs to correct for past governmental injustices and end Jim Crow discriminatory social customs. 1967 John Hume becomes a leading figure in the Northern Ireland Civil

Rights Association (NICRA) founded to promote the civil rights of Catholics in Northern Ireland. July 1968 Saddam Hussein, as regional commander of the Baa´th Party,

organizes a successful coup that takes control of the Iraq government; xviii

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

Saddam is named vice-chairman of the Revolutionary Command Council and vice-president of Iraq. 1969 Wilma Mankiller joins a group of American Indians calling

themselves United Indians of All Tribes that seizes control of Alcatraz Island, located in the middle of San Francisco Bay, for eighteen months seeking to reclaim the island as Indian country; the protest inspires a new Indian rights movement. February 1969 Yasser Arafat is elected chairman of the Palestinian

Liberation Organization (PLO) that serves as an umbrella organization to unite the large number of groups working to free Palestine for the Palestinians. March 1969 Golda Meir is chosen to become the fourth Prime Minister

of Israel, continuing her efforts to assert the rights of Jewish people to settle in Israel. 1970 Alija Izetbegovic publishes the book The Islamic Declaration that

calls for the renewal of a strict Islamic way of life and a united Islamic community based on the Qur’an; many view his book as a radical statement for Bosnian Muslims since he condemns non-Islamic beliefs and societies. 1971 Activist Bella Abzug wins a seat in U.S. Congress becoming the first

Jewish Congresswoman, and one of only a dozen women in the U.S. House of Representatives; during her three terms in Congress Abzug earns wide respect in writing three crucial pieces of legislation protecting individual freedoms: the Freedom of Information Act, the Right to Privacy Act, and the Sunshine Law, that required government bodies to meet publicly. 1971 Activist Bella Abzug helps found and becomes chair of the National

Women’s Political Caucus that promotes peace and women’s activism. July 1971 Gloria Steinem and Bella Abzug, along with other feminist

leaders, help found the National Women’s Political Caucus to encourage women’s active participation in the forthcoming 1972 presidential election campaign. Gloria Steinem publishes the first edition of Ms. magazine, the first national women’s magazine run by women; all

December 1971

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

xix

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

three hundred thousand copies are sold in just eight days and in five years the circulation grows to five hundred thousand. 1972 After being repeatedly introduced in Congress every year since

1923, the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) is finally passed by both houses of Congress and sent to the states for ratification. 1972 Ed Roberts, a quadriplegic, forms the Center for Independent

Living (CIL) to advocate for an end to discrimination against persons with disabilities and to instill pride and empowerment within the disabled community; numerous CIL branches open across the nation during the following years. 1973 The U.S. Congress passes the Rehabilitation Act, first of three core

laws created to give persons with disabilities legal access to life activities that are available to nondisabled Americans; the other two later acts are the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1974, that in 1990 is renamed the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990. January 22, 1973 The U.S. Supreme Court issues the landmark decision

on abortion rights in Roe v. Wade ruling that most laws prohibiting abortion, including many existing state laws, violate the constitutional right to privacy of women. October 6, 1973 War again breaks out between Israelis and Arabs

referred to as the Yom Kippur War after a very important Jewish holiday on which the war begins. 1974 Gloria Steinem founds the Coalition of Labor Union Women, the

only national organization for women who are labor union members, to improve the working conditions of women. 1975 In support of tribal sovereignty and economic self-sufficiency, the

U.S. Congress passes the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act giving the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and other federal agencies authority to transfer responsibility for administering certain tribal programs to the tribes. December 9, 1975 The United Nations General Assembly adopts the

Declaration on the Rights of Disabled Persons, declaring that disabled persons are entitled to the same rights as the nondisabled in all areas of life including rights to an education, medical services, xx

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

employment, legal aid, to live with their families, and to be protected against abuse and discrimination. 1976 After monitoring racial discrimination in South Africa since 1946,

the United Nations establishes apartheid as an international crime, imposes an oil and arms embargo against South Africa, and creates the International Criminal Court to discourage any other nation from adopting similar practices of racial domination and oppression as practiced in South Africa. 1979 Soraya Parlika is arrested and sentenced to eighteen months in

prison for organizing a women’s movement that opposes the policies of Afghan President Hafizullah Amin and his communist rule; while in prison she is tortured in an effort to gain the names of other members of her group. 1979 The Rwandese Refugee Welfare Foundation (RRWF) is estab-

lished to aid Rwandan refugees in exile; after several name changes the organization becomes the Rwandese Patriotic Front (RPF) in December 1987. January 1979 Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi is overthrown from his

Iranian leadership role and flees to the West for safety; Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, ordained as the Supreme Leader of the Revolution in the new Islamic Republic of Iran, introduces Sharia (Islamic law) and calls for Islamic revolutionaries across the Muslim world to follow Iran’s example. July 16, 1979 Saddam Hussein becomes president of Iraq, chairman of

the Revolutionary Command Council, and Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces. November 4, 1979 In reaction to the American refusal to return exiled

Iranian leader Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi for trial, Khomeini supporters seize the U.S. embassy in Tehran and hold fifty-two American hostages for 444 days before they are released. 1981 Members of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, a violent wing of the

Muslim Brotherhood, assassinate Egyptian President Mohamed Anwar Sadat for introducing Western ideas into Islamic societies. 1983 Janjaweed militias with support of the Sudanese government begin

systematically killing black Africans in the Darfur region of western Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

xxi

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

Sudan leading to the murder of some two million people and displacement of another four million. April 1983 Alija Izetbegovic, tried in a Bosnian court with twelve other

Muslim activists for their alleged hostile behavior, is convicted and sentenced to fourteen years in prison; human rights organizations including Amnesty International strongly criticize the verdict. 1984 Leyla Zana becomes a political activist, joining the growing

movement for Kurdish civil rights and, more radically, Kurdish separation from Turkey. July 20, 1984 Leontine Kelly is consecrated as bishop in the Western

Jurisdiction of the United Methodist Church becoming the second woman and first black woman to be elected to the top ministerial office of a major religious denomination in the United States; Bishop Kelly serves on the executive committee of the Council of Bishops, serves as president of the six-member Western Jurisdictional College of Bishops, and is also a member of the General Board of Church and Society. December 5, 1985 Wilma Mankiller is sworn in as Principal Chief of the

Cherokee Nation. 1987 Rosa Parks founds the Rosa and Raymond Parks Institute of Self

Development in Detroit, Michigan, to promote education and career training for black youth. 1987 The Dalai Lama addresses the U.S. Congress and proposes a Five

Point Peace Plan for Tibet that calls for fundamental rights and freedoms for the Tibetan people and negotiations between the Tibetan and Chinese people on the future status of Tibet. 1988 Leyla Zana is arrested for inciting a riot and spends fifty-seven days

in prison after she and eighty-two other women who could hear their husbands being beaten inside a Turkish prison attack prison guards outside. 1988 Islamist rebels heavily funded by the United States successfully

drive the armed forces of the Soviet Union out of Afghanistan after eight years of war. March 1988 Under Saddam Hussein’s direction, Iraq warplanes drop

numerous bombs containing various poisonous toxic agents, including mustard gas and cyanide, on the Iraqi Kurdish town of Halabja xxii

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

becoming the largest chemical weapons attack against a civilian population in modern history; estimates of deaths range up to several thousand Kurds. 1989 Slobodan Milosevic becomes president of Serbia after former

colleague Stambolic is ousted. 1989 Newly elected South African president F.W. de Klerk announces

he will seek to overturn all racial discriminatory laws, release political prisoners of apartheid including Nelson Mandela (who is released in February 1990), and lift the ban on anti-Apartheid organizations such as the ANC. 1990s During years of civil war and oppressive Taliban rule Soraya

Parlika becomes leader of a small underground women’s movement that steadily gains membership; she also organizes a network of secret schools for girls. 1990 Bella Abzug cofounds and heads the Women’s Environment and

Development Organization (WEDO) created to improve the environment as well as address social justice and women’s issues worldwide. August 2, 1990 Saddam Hussein’s Iraqi forces invade the neighboring

nation of Kuwait in reaction to disputes over the exact border location and the claim that Kuwait was illegally slant-drilling petroleum under Iraq’s border. December 20, 1990 Alija Izetbegovic is elected as leader of Bosnia. 1991 Following the demise of the communist governments of Eastern

Europe, a wave of nationalistic movements and their related prejudices sweeps the region leading to the formation of the Baltic States of Lithuania, Estonia, and Latvia and the breakup of Yugoslavia; the ethnic struggles among the Serbs, Bosnian Muslims, and Croats of Serbia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, and Croatia leads to two hundred thousand Bosnian Muslims, Croats, and Serbs being killed and over one million being displaced from their homes. October 20, 1991 At thirty years of age Leyla Zana is elected to the

Turkish parliament becoming the first Kurdish woman representative and one of only nine elected women; in parliament Leyla seeks improved Kurdish-Turkish relations and official recognition of Kurdish identity. Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

xxiii

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

March 3, 1992 Bosnian president Alija Izetbegovic formally declares

independence from Yugoslavia, and the European Union and the United States extend official recognition. Following secret negotiations, Yasser Arafat signs an IsraeliPalestinian agreement known as the Oslo Accords that allows for Palestine to gradually gain control of both the West Bank and Gaza.

1993

1994 The UN Security Council establishes the International Criminal

Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) to bring to trial those accused of genocide; by 2005 sixty-three individuals accused of being genocide leaders come under the ICTR process. 1994 During a one-hundred-day period the Hutus of Rwanda kill almost

one million Tutsis and politically moderate Hutus. Through general elections, Nelson Mandela becomes the new president of South Africa and serves as president for the next five years.

1994

July 19, 1994 With forces led by Paul Kagame in complete control of

Kigali, the capital city of Rwanda, officials for a new Tutsi government, called the Government of National Unity, are sworn in; Kagame is named vice president and commander-in-chief of the army and holds the real power of government. December 1994 A Turkish State Security Court convicts Leyla Zana and the

three other Kurdish parliamentarians on charges of advocating Kurdish separatism and other illegal activities; Zana serves ten years in prison. December 1995 After some 5 percent of the Bosnian population has been

killed and half of the population has become refugees since 1991, Alija Izetbegovic, Slobodan Milosevic, and other political and ethnic leaders of Bosnia sign a ceasefire agreement known as the Dayton Accord, keeping Bosnia as a single country but divides it approximately in half into the Serbian Republic and the Croat-Muslim Federation. 1996 Rosa Parks receives the Medal of Freedom award from U.S.

president Bill Clinton; she receives the U.S. Congressional Gold Medal of Honor in July 1999, the highest honor a civilian can receive in the United States. 1996 The U.S. Congress passes the Defense of Marriage Act that denies

same-sex couples federal benefits including Social Security pensions; survivor benefits for federal employees; Medicaid coverage; next-ofkin status for emergency medical situations; domestic violence xxiv

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

protection orders; inheritance of property; and joint adoption and foster care benefits. 1996 Yasser Arafat is elected president of the new Palestinian Authority. 1997 Mother Teresa wins the Nobel Peace Prize accepting it on behalf of

the ‘‘unwanted, unloved, and uncared for.’’ 1998 The FRY begins an ethnic cleansing of Albanians remaining in

Kosovo, causing over 300,000 Albanians to flee Kosovo for Macedonia. April 10, 1998 Violence in Northern Ireland finally ends as voters in

Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland approve the Good Friday Agreement, or Belfast Agreement, by a large margin that provides for power sharing between Northern Ireland’s Catholic and Protestant populations in an elected Northern Ireland Assembly and directs that the political status of Northern Ireland can only change with the approval of a majority of Northern Ireland voters. The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) located in The Hague, Netherlands, indicts former Serbian president Slobodan Milosevic and four other top Serbian officials of war crimes and crimes against humanity for the mass murder of people in Kosovo.

May 1999

March 2000 Following the resignation of Bizimungu as president of

Rwanda, Paul Kagame is elected president of Rwanda and makes progress in reconciliation between Tutsi and Hutu leading to approval of a new constitution on May 26, 2003. September 11, 2001 Attention of the world is dramatically focused on

the Islamic fundamentalist movement when Islamic extremists slam two fully fueled jetliners into the World Trade Center Towers in New York City and the Pentagon in Washington, D.C., killing some three thousand civilians and starting a strong wave of nationalistic fervor in the United States. February 12, 2002 The war crimes trial of former Serbian president

Slobodan Milosevic begins but ends abruptly on March 11, 2006, when Milosevic is found dead in his detention cell of a heart attack. 2003 U.S. forces invade Iraq and drive Saddam Hussein from power;

religious hatred between Shiı´tes and Sunni surfaces after decades of oppression under Hussein causing a deep divide in Iraq society. Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

xxv

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

2004 The Australian government begins providing assistance to Aborigines

directly through the agencies that serve the general population and establishes the Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination within the Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs to coordinate the various programs for indigenous peoples. 2004 The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) reports that over 15

percent of hate crimes committed in the United States are based upon the perceived sexual orientation of the victims. November 2004 The question of gay marriage divides many Americans

and becomes a major factor in the 2004 presidential election as socially conservative groups rally against the prospect of various states legalizing same-sex marriages. 2005 A study by the National Council on Disabilities indicates that while

substantial gains against prejudice of the disabled have been made discrimination in housing is still a major problem. 2005 The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, established

in December 1950, reports the existence of over nine million known refugees in the world, not including four million Palestinian Arabs permanently displaced with creation of the state of Israel in 1948. 2005 In Egyptian parliamentary elections, members of the Muslim

Brotherhood win 20 percent of the parliament seats even though the organization is still officially banned. July 28, 2005 The IRA declares an end to its military campaign for

independence for Northern Ireland and removes its store of weapons from service. November 2005 Race riots across France increase fears of continued high

immigration levels as anti-immigration feelings rise. January 2006 The radical Palestinian group Hamas wins the majority of

seats in Palestine’s parliamentary elections, gaining a political victory over the PLO, the controlling political party in Palestine since 1967. February 2006 The South Dakota legislature passes a bill making the

performance of all abortions a felony crime. Summer 2006 Israel launches a major offensive against Lebanon after

Hezbollah militia kidnaps two Israeli soldiers and kills another.

xxvi

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Prejudice in the Modern World Biographies

Bella Abzug B OR N: July 24, 1920  New York, New York D I E D : March 31, 1998  New York, New York

American lawyer, feminist

‘‘They call me Battling Bella, Mother Courage, and a Jewish mother. . . . But whatever I am—and this ought to be made very clear at the outset—I am a very serious woman.’’

ella Abzug was a well-known civil rights (basic individual rights to legal and social equality) lawyer and founder of Women Strike for Peace before going to Congress in 1971, where she advocated for women’s rights and an end to the Vietnam War (1957–75). She served three terms as the Democratic candidate from the Nineteenth Congressional District in New York City. Abzug was the first Jewish Congresswoman. She also co-founded the National Women’s Political Caucus, which focused on both peace and women’s activism. Abzug coauthored several crucial pieces of legislation, including the landmark Freedom of Information Act. Early in her career, Abzug gained a reputation for legally defending those accused of being Communists by the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC), a congressional committee that probed alleged connections of people to communist activities. Communists are

B

Bella Abzug. AP I MA GE S.

1

Bella Abzug

people who support a political and economic system where a single party controls all aspects of citizens’ lives and private ownership of property is banned. Her aggressive manner earned her a number of nicknames, including ‘‘Battling Bella.’’ While she was a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, she was among the first to call for the impeachment, or removal from office, of U.S. president Richard M. Nixon (1913–1994; served 1969–74) for his efforts at trying to conceal criminal activity by people associated with his presidential reelection campaign. It became known as the Watergate Scandal. Abzug was known both for her outspoken views and her oversized hats. She was an unsuccessful senatorial and mayoral candidate, but her political successes earned her a place in the National Women’s Hall of Fame in the United States. Abzug championed a global sisterhood to address social justice and women’s issues worldwide. She maintained a high political profile to promote her favorite causes until her death in 1998.

Born yelling Bella Savitzky was born in New York City on July 24, 1920, to Jewish immigrant (a person who leaves his country of origin to reside permanently in another) parents from Russia. Her father, Emanuel Savitzky, moved to the United States in 1905, when Russia went to war with Japan. Not long after Emanuel arrived, Abzug’s mother, Esther Tanklefsky, came to America from Russia with her family to escape religious persecution, or maltreatment. Emanuel and Esther were married in New York City and started a butcher shop on Ninth Avenue in Manhattan. World War I (1914–18) broke out in 1914, and by the time the fighting was over in 1918, there was great political debate about a peace program. Everyone had ideas on how to prevent another world war from ever happening again. Emanuel made his own political statement by renaming his shop The Live and Let Live Meat Market. Abzug grew up in the East Bronx with her sister Helene, her parents, her Grandpa and Grandma Tanklefsky, and her mother’s young brother. Abzug’s grandfather babysat the girls while their parents worked. A religious man, Wolf Tanklefsky went to the Jewish synagogue (place of worship) twice a day and would take the girls with him when they were not in school. By the time she was eight years, old Abzug excelled in her ability to read Hebrew. Every week after the traditional Sabbath meal on Friday evening, Abzug’s family would gather together and sing Yiddish (a Jewish-German language of Eastern Europe) and Russian folk songs. 2

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Bella Abzug

Helene played the piano and Abzug played her favorite instrument, the violin. Abzug loved her family and her religion, but her first feminist (a woman who opposes gender prejudice) thoughts of rebellion began growing while she was still young. Abzug reacted negatively to the idea that as she grew older she must go upstairs to the synagogue balcony because men and women are not permitted to sit together during religious services in Orthodox Judaism (a branch of Judaism which observes all of the ancient laws). When Abzug voiced her concerns to her grandfather, he explained that it was just the way things were. Abzug would not accept that answer and argued that she was being treated unfairly. As described in Doris Faber’s 1976 book Bella Abzug, Abzug’s mother was proud of her outspoken daughter and would explain to those on the receiving end of her forceful arguments that her daughter ‘‘came out yelling,’’ in reference to her birth.

Strong supporter of Jewish traditions Abzug was educated at public schools in the Bronx and also attended Hebrew school several times a week at the Jewish Center connected with their synagogue. A bulletin board at the Center supported efforts to establish a Jewish homeland in Palestine (now Israel). Followers of the Jewish faith, who had suffered from prejudice and persecution for centuries in Europe, had no nation of their own to offer refuge during times of need. They looked to their biblical homeland of Palestine as the preferred place for a nation. It caught Abzug’s attention. She joined a pioneer Zionist (supporters of a Jewish homeland) youth group known as Hashomir Hatzair and spent hours with the group collecting money for the Jewish National Fund. She and her friends would board a subway (underground) train, and between stops, Abzug would shout out a little speech while others went up to passengers collecting coins to help Jewish settlers in Palestine. Abzug also hoped to settle on a kibbutz (Jewish agricultural settlement) in Israel and create green farms in the deserts of Palestine. In 1932, when Abzug was twelve years of age, her Grandpa Tanklefsky died just before his eightieth birthday. Within the year, her father also died and Abzug was left with a crucial decision. Religious tradition forbade women from saying Kaddish (the prayer for the dead), but her father did not have a son to say the memorial prayer for him. So Abzug did it herself. Every morning before school for a year, Abzug stood Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

3

Bella Abzug

in the synagogue to repeat the words of the Kaddish for her father. Not everyone in her family or the synagogue liked it. However, no one ever tried to stop her from entering the chamber that was normally forbidden to females and she persisted. Needing to help support the family after her father’s death, she was able to find work even though millions of people were without work due to the Great Depression. The Great Depression was a major economic crisis in much of the world during the 1930s that led to extensive unemployment and widespread hunger. Abzug first found a job as a camp counselor in the summer and later taught Hebrew language, history, and customs in order.

The gender gap By the time Abzug graduated from Walton High School in 1938, she knew she wanted to be a lawyer. She moved to Hunter College in New York City, where she received a bachelor of arts degree in 1942. Her first choice for law school was Harvard, but female students were not accepted there. Abzug accepted a scholarship to Columbia University Law School, which paid her tuition expenses. This choice allowed her to remain in New York City. Before attending Columbia, Abzug boarded a train to Florida to visit relatives. It was there that she met Maurice M. (Martin) Abzug. The two were married on June 4, 1944, after Martin completed his military service in World War II (1939–45). Because of the wartime shortages of apartments, the couple settled in a small hotel suite near Columbia. At the end of her first year, Abzug was honored by being chosen as an editor of the Columbia Law Review, a extremely prestigious journal examining articles on law. Following graduation, Abzug passed the New York state bar (professional statewide lawyer association) exams in 1947 and joined a law firm that specialized in labor law. She and Martin eventually moved to the New York suburb of Mount Vernon, where they raised their two daughters who were born in 1949 and 1952. As a young lawyer in the 1950s, Abzug found she was not initially taken seriously when she represented a law firm. Since only around 2 percent of the bar was female at the time, she was often mistaken as a secretary. Because professional women usually wore hats and gloves at that time, Abzug adopted the practice and found that it helped in her career as well by combating gender prejudice against nonprofessional women. She soon opened her own law office. When she was not defending clients in the courtroom, she spent her time as a social activist. For the next twenty-five years, Abzug specialized in civil rights cases. 4

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Bella Abzug

Abzug gained a reputation for defending those accused of being Communists by the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC). HUAC was created in 1938 to investigate alleged disloyalty and subversive activities on the part of private citizens, public employees, and those organizations suspected of having Communist ties. She represented a large number of artists and writers charged with un-American activities because of their political associations. Abzug was one of only a few attorneys willing to fight against the powerful government committee because of her belief in civil rights. People targeted by HUAC became blacklisted. This meant the people accused and investigated were unable to find work anywhere even if they were innocent of any charges made against them, as many were.

A Mississippi legal case As a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Abzug was chosen as chief counsel of appeals (legal requests for a new hearing) in a well-known Mississippi civil rights case in 1950. Willie McGee was a thirty-two-year-old black truck driver who had been convicted and sentenced to death for raping a white woman. At that time, it was illegal in many southern states for whites and blacks to even date each other. It turned out McGee and his accuser had a long-standing sexual relationship. When the affair was discovered by another person, the woman brought the charges against him in an effort to clear herself of any wrongdoing. In her appeal, Abzug argued that McGee’s sentence was racially motivated because Southern judges and juries reserved the death penalty for rape by blacks only. She pointed out that a white man had never been condemned to death for the same offense. She also challenged the traditional practice of excluding blacks from the jury. Abzug appealed the case all the way to the Supreme Court and managed to get a stay, or postponement, of execution twice. The case had received national and international attention since a campaign demanding fair treatment for McGee had been launched against the state governor’s office. As the final execution date approached, Abzug traveled to Jackson, Mississippi, for a last-minute hearing. Alone and in the early stages of pregnancy, Abzug arrived in town to find a hostile reception from local whites who resented outside interference. Unable to find a hotel that would take her, Abzug sat up all night in the bus station before pleading the case for clemency (an official declaration of mercy) the following day. Her final appeal failed and McGee was executed in 1951. Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

5

Bella Abzug

Bella Abzug (center, wearing hat) participated in many public demonstrations, such as this 1980 march celebrating the 60th anniversary of the passage of the Nineteenth Amendment, advocating for women’s rights. # BET TM ANN /C ORB IS .

Women Strike for Peace Throughout the 1950s, Abzug was a prominent campaigner for peace and for women’s rights. In 1961, she helped found the national organization called Women Strike for Peace (WSP) that was part of the peace movement opposing testing of nuclear weapons. She was the national legislative director of WSP from 1961 to 1970. In 1961, thousands of WSP members staged peaceful protests in response to the threat of a nuclear war between the United States and the Soviet Union. Both nations were threatening to resume atmospheric (above ground) nuclear tests in a competition for world dominance, and the WSP supported the banning of all nuclear testing. The WSP also opposed the Vietnam War and supported those resisting the military draft (required military duty), known as conscientious objectors. The HUAC considered WSP’s political objectives un-American and served subpoenas (formal court order to appear) on fourteen members in 6

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Bella Abzug

the New York metropolitan area in 1962. Abzug prepared a description of the constitutional rights of witnesses for WSP defendants at the HUAC hearings. She also encouraged them to claim that this was a challenge to their First Amendment rights of free speech rather than using the defense of the Fifth Amendment, which protects an individual from providing testimony incriminating themselves in a crime. WSP members emerged victorious and found the experience brought them additional benefits. The HUAC investigation provided them ample opportunities to hold press conferences in order to express WSP’s political views, gain support, and raise funds. By 1963, world leaders took an important first step in limiting nuclear testing by signing an agreement to stop testing nuclear weapons in the air, on the ground, and in the sea.

Ms. Abzug goes to Washington In opposing the Vietnam War, Abzug soon became an important voice in calling for an end to the conflict. In 1969, Abzug decided to run for Congress in the Democratic primary from the Nineteenth Congressional District in New York City. She won and in 1971, took her seat in the U.S. House of Representatives with the added distinction of being the first Jewish Congresswoman, and one of only a dozen women in the House. On her first day in Congress, she fulfilled her campaign promise to be a voice of change by introducing a resolution calling for the withdrawal of American troops from Vietnam by July 4. That same year, Abzug helped found and was chair of the National Women’s Political Caucus (see box) that both was a proponent for peace and women’s activism. Abzug’s trademark wide-brimmed hats brought her a great deal of publicity and made her one of the most recognizable women in American politics at the time. Her forceful personality and direct manner brought Abzug even greater attention and made her an influential leader. Not all attention was positive; Abzug was a focus for criticism. Adopting feminist trends of the day, she insisted on being called Ms. rather than Mrs. and drew as many defenders as she did detractors on any given issue. Abzug’s dynamic approach was often disruptive and earned her a variety of nicknames, including Battling Bella, Bellicose (belligerent) Bella, and Mother Courage. A 1977 hurricane was named for her. During her three terms in Congress, Abzug earned wide respect and was involved in writing several crucial pieces of legislation. As two examples, she co-authored the Freedom of Information Act (1966) which requires the federal Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

7

Bella Abzug

National Women’s Political Caucus In 1971, four feminist leaders announced the formation of the National Women’s Political Caucus (NWPC). The original leaders included Betty Friedan (1921–2006), Shirley Chisholm (1924–2005), Gloria Steinem (1934–; see entry), and Congresswoman Bella Abzug. As a lawyer and politician, Abzug was one of the key figures of the modern feminist movement. The stated purpose of the NWPC was to create a political power base that included women, the poor, the working class, racial minorities, and other groups previously excluded from the political process.

In the early twenty-first century, the NWPC billed itself as a multi-cultural, intergenerational, and multi-issue organization that was dedicated to placing women who were pro-choice candidates (favoring the right of women to have abortions) into positions of power at all levels of government. The caucus offered financial assistance as well as training and technical assistance to women of all political party affiliations, although the vast majority were Democratic candidates. State and local chapters provided volunteer assistance and helped raise money to increase women’s participation in government.

government to provide many types of information when requested by the public and the Right to Privacy Act (1974) to protect the personal records of citizens held by the government. Abzug was among the first on the House Floor to call for the impeachment of President Richard M. Nixon (1913–1994; served 1969–74) for his role in the Watergate Scandal.

Battling Bella Abzug left Congress in 1976 to make an unsuccessful run for the U.S. Senate. After losing the Senate race by a narrow margin, she campaigned for mayor of New York City in 1977 and lost again. U.S. president Jimmy Carter (1924–; served 1977–81) appointed Abzug as chair of the National Advisory Commission on Women in 1978. The Commission is to advise the president and national leaders on issues important to women. However, she was dismissed in 1979 for openly criticizing the administration’s economic policies. In response, Abzug set up a grassroots, or working class, political action organization called Women USA, and resumed her law practice in New York City’s Greenwich Village. In addition to working on her various causes, Abzug served as a television news commentator and magazine columnist for a time and co-authored with Mim Kelber a book titled Gender Gap in 1984. With a lawyer’s enthusiasm for her topic, she explained in the book how women could achieve political 8

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Bella Abzug

power in America by networking in organizations ranging everywhere from the Parent Teacher Associations (PTA) to the United Nations (UN), an international organization created to resolve conflicts in the world. She believed the law was an instrument of change. However, the law did not always work in favor of women, minorities, and the poor, making it necessary to organize coalitions (a temporary combination of organizations formed for a common cause) to make change. Abzug’s vision was to mobilize women all over the world in what she called a global sisterhood.

Active throughout life After forty-two years of marriage, Abzug’s husband, Martin, died in 1986. She lost her greatest supporter and friend. Despite failing health, Abzug continued her involvement in political issues, especially women’s rights. She was a member of a variety of pressure groups including the National Organization of Women (NOW), the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), and Americans for Democratic Action (ADA). In 1990 she co-founded and headed the Women’s Environment and Development Organization (WEDO) to improve the environment as well as address social justice and women’s issues worldwide. Abzug was inducted into the National Women’s Hall of Fame in 1994. Her work as president of WEDO made her an international influence at the UN and various world conferences with her efforts to empower women around the globe. Early in March 1998, she made her final public speech before the UN at the age of seventy-seven. Abzug was admitted to Columbia-Presbyterian Medical Center in Manhattan and died of complications from heart surgery on March 31.

For More Information B O O KS

Abzug, Bella. Bella!: Ms. Abzug Goes to Washington. New York: Saturday Review Press, 1972. Abzug, Bella, and Mim Kelber. Gender Gap: Bella Abzug’s Guide to Political Power for American Women. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1984. Avlon, John P. Independent Nation: How the Vital Center is Changing American Politics. New York: Harmony Books, 2004. Faber, Doris. Bella Abzug. New York: Lothrop, Lee and Shepard Company, 1976. Swerdlow, Amy. Women Strike for Peace: Traditional Motherhood and Radical Politics in the 1960’s. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1993. Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

9

Bella Abzug WEB SIT ES

‘‘About the Caucus.’’ National Women’s Political Caucus. http://www.nwpc.org/ ht/d/CaucusDetails/i/178/aboutus/Y/pid/954 (accessed on December 11, 2006). ‘‘Bella Abzug.’’ Jewish Women’s Archive: Women of Valor. http://www.jwa.org/ exhibits/wov/abzug/ (accessed on December 11, 2006). ‘‘Bella Abzug.’’ National Women’s Hall of Fame. http://www.greatwomen.org/ women.php?action=viewone&id=4 (accessed on December 11, 2006).

10

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Yasser Arafat B OR N: August 24, 1929  Cairo, Egypt D I E D : November 11, 2004  Paris, France

Palestinian president

‘‘The uprising will stop only when practical and tangible steps are taken toward the attainment of its national goals and establishment of its Palestinian state.’’

asser Arafat first gained international attention as founder and leader of the militant Palestinian group called al-Fatah. Most Palestinian Arabs worship the religious faith of Islam. Such people are called Muslims. In 1969, he was elected chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), a political organization promoting the creation of an independent Palestinian state. Arafat waged a guerrilla war (military forces that operate in small bands and harass the enemy, usually by surprise attacks) against Israel until 1988. Arafat took the role of diplomat at the end of the twentieth century and represented the Palestinian people in peace talks to try and resolve the long-standing Arab-Israeli conflict in the Middle East. He was instrumental in bringing about the Oslo Accords of 1993 that established the Palestinian Authority. For his efforts, Arafat was co-recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, along with Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Rabin (1922–1995) and

Y

Yasser Arafat. # P ET ER TU RN LEY /C OR BI S.

11

Yasser Arafat

Foreign Minister Shimon Peres (1923–) in 1994. Arafat was elected president of the Palestinian Authority in 1996 and remained a symbol of the Palestinian national movement until his death in 2004.

The student leader Born in 1929, Mohammed Abder Rauf Arafat al-Kudwa al-Husseini became known as Yasser Arafat. Yasir (meaning ‘‘easygoing’’) was Arafat’s nickname as a youth. An Egyptian birth certificate records Arafat’s date of birth as August 24 in Cairo, Egypt. However, other sources list the date as August 4 and cite Jerusalem, or sometimes Gaza, as his place of birth. Arafat’s father, Abder Rauf Arafat, was a religious man who was active with the Islamic Council in Cairo. He was a Palestinian textile merchant was trading in Gaza and Egypt when Yasir was born. His mother, Zahwa Abu Saud, was the daughter of a prominent Palestinian family from Jerusalem. She died when Arafat was four, leaving Yasir and his six siblings in the care of their father. Abder sent Yasir and his younger brother to Jerusalem to live with their maternal family until he remarried four years later. The boys then returned to Cairo, where Yasir spent most of his childhood and teenage years. By 1946, Arafat had joined the Palestinian resistance against the British, who held a mandate (official instruction or command) to govern Palestinian territory since the end of World War I (1914–18). He helped gather weapons that were smuggled into Palestine to fight against the British. Arab nations were angered because the British were negotiating with the leaders of Zionism after World War II (1939–45). Zionism was a movement that lobbied for, or promoted, the creation of a Jewish homeland in Palestine. Early in the twentieth century, the British had also promised Palestine land to the Arabs as well for their support during World War I. However, growing Arab opposition to the movement of Jews into the region in the 1920s later led to increasing conflict and little political resolution of the homelands of both groups. Arafat graduated from high school in 1947. In that year, the General Assembly of the United Nations (UN) passed a resolution to partition (divide and separate) Palestine into two states, one Jewish and one Arab. The UN is an international organization created in 1946 to help resolve disputes and maintain peace between nations. On May 15, 1948, the state of Israel was established. War immediately broke out between the Jews and neighboring Arab states. The Arabs hoped to drive out the Jews before the land could be partitioned in the newly established country. 12

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Yasser Arafat

The Arab-Israeli War of 1948 ended with the defeat of the Arab forces. By the time the armistice (peace agreement) was signed, Israel had gained additional territory. Both sides experienced a significant refugee (person who flees in search of protection or shelter) problem because of the number of people who were displaced during the hostilities. Some fled to refugee camps while others scattered throughout the Arab world, Europe, Israel, and North America. The armistice ended open warfare between the nations. However, the conflict reemerged as a guerilla war that sustained the cycle of violence between Israelis and Palestinians into the twenty-first century. Arafat attended Cairo University, where he majored in civil engineering. While in school, he sought ways to contribute to the Palestinian cause. He became involved in political student activities and joined the Egyptian-based Muslim Brotherhood that opposed Western influences in Arab societies. Arafat served as chairman of the university’s Union of Palestinian Students from 1952 until 1956. Graduating in 1956 with a bachelor’s degree, Arafat served briefly in the Egyptian Army during the Suez Crisis. The crisis began when the Egyptian government took control of the Suez Canal, a valuable shipping waterway that connects the Mediterranean Sea and the Red Sea. This action blocked Israeli and European shipping routes. In response, Israel took control of Egypt’s Sinai Desert and the Gulf of Aqaba, while Britain and France regained control of the Suez Canal. Israel suffered 177 deaths while Egypt suffered 1,650 killed and 4,900 wounded. The conflict ended with an agreement brokered by the United Nations under pressure from the United States and the Soviet Union. Under the agreement, Israel was able to maintain control of some captured territories such as the Sinai Desert, but agreed to give up control of the Suez Canal after the United Nations guaranteed Israel’s continued access to the vital waterway.

Birth of al-Fatah Arafat left Egypt in 1956 to take a job with the department of public works in Kuwait, a small country bordering southern Iraq. He soon started his own successful contracting firm and used the proceeds to support the Palestinian cause. In the late 1950s, Arafat organized a group of Palestinian exiles in an underground cell (small, secret group of activists) that became known as al-Fatah. Fatah means ‘‘conquest’’ or ‘‘victory.’’ The movement was dedicated to establishing an independent Palestinian state. Arafat published a magazine called Filastin-na (Our Palestine), which supported an armed struggle against Israel. About this Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

13

Yasser Arafat

Intifadah Intifadah is an Arabic word meaning uprising. In December 1987, an intifadah broke out in Palestine over Israel’s occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. The former Palestinian territory had been captured by Israel twenty years earlier during the Six-Day War of 1967. Arab workers living in the occupied territory protested the long lines and special permits required to travel to their places of employment in Israel. Palestinian citizens staged labor strikes and boycotts. These resulted in violent confrontations with Israeli forces. The fighting continued on a daily basis and seriously disrupted the economic stability in the area. Israel imposed curfews (restricting movement of people after a particular hour) in the territories and imprisoned thousands of Palestinians before the intifadah ended. In 1988, the two sides agreed to negotiations which resulted in the Oslo Accords.

The peace talks between the Palestinians and the Israelis broke down in September 2000, and a second intifadah erupted. Negotiations were complicated by disagreements over how property was to be compensated (paid for the loss) for and control over water resources. Control over Jerusalem, a city of historic and religious importance to both Muslims and Jews, also remained a major point of disagreement. Militant Palestinian groups who reject the legitimacy of the state of Israel encouraged the intifadah and increased the violence against Israelis. Israel responded by blocking Palestinians from working in Israel in order to secure its borders against terrorist attacks. The second intifadah ended in 2005. However, deeply held prejudices on both sides make coexistence unlikely and the conflict remained unresolved.

time, Arafat donned the kufiyah (checkered scarf) headdress which became his symbol. He also adopted the fighting name Abu Amar. By 1964, Arafat left Kuwait to become a full-time revolutionary (one who is in favor of overthrowing a government). He launched armed raids into Israel from Jordan. Arafat became a national hero in Palestine because he dared to confront Israel. However, Arab governments feared he might bring them into a war with Israel before they were prepared. As a result, he was imprisoned twice in Syria in 1966. Once released, Arafat continued to form a network of cells to attack Israeli targets. His actions eventually helped provoke the Six-Day War of 1967. The war was between Israel and the armies of Egypt, Jordan, and Syria. The Israelis quickly defeated the Arab forces and gained control of new Palestinian territories, including the West Bank, Gaza, Golan Heights, and Sinai Peninsula. The Arab forces suffered 21,000 killed and 45,000 wounded while Israel suffered 779 killed and fewer than 2,600 wounded. Media coverage of the war brought Arafat and Fatah to the attention of the international community. Young Palestinians joined his movement and Fatah escalated their attacks against Israel. At the end of the 1960s, 14

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Yasser Arafat

Arafat emerged from the underground movement as the acknowledged leader of the largest faction of Palestinian guerrillas working with the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO).

The Palestine Liberation Organization In February 1969, Arafat was elected chairman of the PLO, which was based in Jordan. The PLO had been established by the Arab League in 1964 to be an umbrella organization (one that coordinates activities of a number of other organizations that share a common cause or interest). He was to bring together the large number of groups working to free Palestine for the Palestinians. Arafat’s leadership and organizational skills allowed the widely differing political views of the fedayeen (literally translated as ‘‘those who sacrifice themselves’’) to work together. This permitted the PLO to unite many Arabs in their cause. However, it also made it impossible for Arafat to impose discipline or to come up with any consistent policy in negotiations with other nations. The PLO became an independent military organization within the nation of Jordan. Tensions erupted into open fighting in June 1970. A PLO group had hijacked several aircraft and the Jordanian government took action to regain control over its territory. Conflict opened up between Palestinian guerillas and the army of Jordan in September 1970 and lasted until July 1971. The conflict ended when the PLO relocated its operations to southern Lebanon. The Arab-Israel War of 1973 began with a surprise invasion of the Golan Heights and Sinai region by a coalition of Arab forces led by Egypt and Syria. The war is also referred to as the Yom Kippur War because the invasion occurred on the date of a very important Jewish religious holiday called Yom Kippur. The Arabs hoped to regain lands lost in the Six-Day War of 1967. Israel won again, suffering 2,656 killed and 7,250 wounded while the Arab forces suffered over 8,500 deaths and almost 20,000 wounded. Israel’s resulting victory led to discussions of the possibility of peace with Israel among some members of the PLO. Arafat himself addressed the UN General Assembly in New York on November 14, 1974, claiming he was open to the possibility of peace. The following year, the UN General Assembly passed a resolution (written agreement approved by a majority vote) accusing the Israeli government of abusing the non-Jews in their midst. Citing laws which grant Jews rights over non-Jews, the resolution equated Zionism with racism. For example, Jews were favored over others in Israel’s emigration Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

15

Yasser Arafat

U.S. president Bill Clinton brings Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Rabin (left) and PLO chaiman Yasser Arafat (right) together for a historic handshake after the signing of the Israeli–PLO peace accord in September 1993. # RE UTE RS /C OR BIS .

laws because Jews are given immediate citizenship while others were not and perhaps denied citizenship altogether. Other regulations prohibited non-Jews from purchasing or renting a house, apartment, or business in territories regulated by the Jewish National Fund. This restriction included 90 percent of Israel’s habitable (suitable for life) land. The UN resolution condemned the Israeli state on the grounds that it showed prejudice against non-Jews. The resolution was repealed in December 1991 at the request of the United States.

Compromise for peace Arafat still had only limited control over the multiple factions within the PLO. Despite talk about peace, groups such as Hamas (see box) were increasing their terrorist activities. The PLO continued attacks on Israel from its base in Lebanon until Israel invaded the country in 1982 and 16

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Yasser Arafat

Hamas Hamas became the ruling political party of the Palestinian Authority in early 2006 elections. Hamas is short for Harakat al-Muqawamah alIslamiyah, which means the Movement of Islamic Resistance. The Arabic word adopted by the party literally means ‘‘zeal.’’ Hamas began as an extension of the Egyptian-based Muslim Brotherhood in the late 1970s. By the 1980s, followers of the movement called for jihad (holy war) against Israel. They wanted to reclaim land in the West Bank and Gaza that had been lost during the 1967 Arab-Israeli War. Hamas intensified its attacks against Israel when the Oslo Accords of 1993 established a peace agreement between Palestine and Israel because its charter, or agreement, calls for the complete liberation of Palestine. Hamas leaders were given a political voice in the newly formed Palestinian Authority when Yasser Arafat appointed several of its members to leadership positions in the government. Hamas is one of the major political parties that are part of the Palestine Liberation Organization, the official representative of the Palestinian people.

The other major parties are Fatah and the Islamic Jihad. Fatah differs from the more radical parties in Palestine because it is the only one that recognizes Israel’s right to exist in the Middle East. Fatah was the dominant party in the Palestinian parliament until January 2006 when Hamas won the legislative elections. Israel and the United States reacted to the Hamas victory by cutting off tax receipts and funds to the Palestinian Authority. This action paralyzed the state’s economy by the spring of 2006. Before Hamas came to power, the two states had made moves toward coexistence, even with the removal of some Jewish settlements from the West Bank. The possibility of peace between Israel and Palestine was undermined in June 2006, when militants linked to the Hamas party kidnapped an Israeli soldier. They demanded the release of 1,500 Palestinian prisoners for his return. The Israeli government responded in July with a wide-scale military offensive in the Gaza Strip and announced that it was prepared for an extended war with the Palestinians.

forced the PLO into exile in Tunisia. In 1987, Palestinians launched an intifadah (see box) to protest the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza areas. World attention now focused on the plight of the Palestinians. Arafat used the political momentum to move his followers toward the prospects of a peace agreement with Israel. Secret negotiations began in 1992 and led to an Israeli-Palestinian agreement known as the Oslo Accords in 1993. Officially called the Declaration of Principles (DOP), the agreement allowed for Palestine to gradually gain control of both the West Bank and Gaza. Palestinian elections took place in 1996. Arafat was elected president of the new Palestinian Authority. Further peace talks between the Palestinians and Israelis soon broke down and a second intifadah erupted in September 2000. Israel announced its intentions to remove Arafat from the IsraeliPrejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

17

Yasser Arafat

controlled West Bank because of his inability to control the Palestinian militant organizations. Arafat fell ill in October 2004 and was taken to Paris for treatment. He died on November 11 and, after a state funeral in Cairo, was laid to rest within his former headquarters in Ramallah in the West Bank.

For More Information BOOKS

Aburish, Said K. Arafat: From Defender to Dictator. New York: Bloomsbury Publishing, 1998. Esposito, John L., ed. The Islamic World: Past and Present. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc., 2004. Gowers, Andrew, and Tony Walker. Behind the Myth: Yasser Arafat and the Palestinian Revolution. New York: Olive Branch Press, 1992. Hart, Alan. Arafat: A Political Biography. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1989. Wallach, Janet, and John Wallach. Arafat: In the Eyes of the Beholder. Secaucus, NJ: Carol Publishing Group, 1997. WEB SIT ES

‘‘Yasser Arafat.’’ cbcnews. http://www.cbc.ca/news/obit/arafat/ (accessed on December 11, 2006). ‘‘Yasser Arafat: The Nobel Peace Prize 1994.’’ The Nobel Foundation. http:// nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1994/arafat-bio.html (accessed on December 11, 2006).

18

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Cesar Chavez B OR N: March 31, 1927  Yuma, Arizona D I E D : April 23, 1993  San Luis, Arizona

Mexican American labor leader, social activist

‘‘I am convinced that the truest act of courage, the strongest act of manliness, is to sacrifice ourselves for others in a totally nonviolent struggle for justice. To be a man is to suffer for others. God help us to be men!’’

esar Chavez was a Mexican American labor leader and social activist who fought against racial prejudice. He founded and led the first successful farmworkers’ union (organized groups of workers joined together for a common purpose, such as better working conditions) in the United States. Chavez captured the nation’s attention in 1965 when he organized the largest agricultural strike (refusal to work until demands for fair treatment are met) on record. As a civil rights leader, Chavez spoke out for economic and social justice during the turbulent years following World War II (1939–45). His message of nonviolence, fairness, and respect brought about peaceful change and instilled a sense of cultural pride in Mexican Americans who were struggling for equality. In 1994, Chavez was posthumously (post-death) awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the United States’ highest civilian honor.

C

Cesar Chavez. # NA JL AH FEA NNY /C OR BI S.

19

Cesar Chavez

The Great Depression When Cesar Estrada Chavez was born in the spring of 1927, his family owned and operated a small business near Yuma, Arizona. His parents, Librado and Juana Estrada Chavez, lost their business as well as the family farm during the Great Depression (1929–41), a prolonged and severe worldwide economic slump that led to high unemployment rates and much hunger and homelessness. When Chavez was ten years old, the family joined thousands of other migrant farmworkers who followed the harvest circuit throughout the American Southwest. The annual routine began in early winter in the Imperial Valley just across the CaliforniaArizona border and ended in the San Joaquin Valley in northern California after Christmas. Family farms lost through foreclosure (failure to make mortgage payments) were incorporated into large land holdings as the Depression progressed. The spirit of cooperation that often existed between laborers and small farm owners did not exist with the large company farms. They were operated by absentee owners who could easily distance themselves from the suffering of fieldworkers. In the 1930s, author John Steinbeck (1902–1968) wrote his most famous novel titled The Grapes of Wrath and based on a fictional migrant camp located in the San Joaquin Valley. The book chronicled the lives of the dispossessed, or cast out, population of migrant workers who roamed California’s rich agricultural valleys during the Depression. The Farm Security Administration (FSA) was established in 1935 as a branch of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Its task was to document and report on the lives of impoverished farmers and laborers who were suffering the effects of poor land conditions in addition to the deepening economic crisis. FSA director Roy Stryker (1893–1975) hired an impressive group of photographers, including Esther Bubley (1921–1998) and Dorothea Lange (1895–1965), to make a photographic record of the workers’ conditions. Lange’s photograph titled ‘‘Migrant Mother’’ became one of the best-known images to come out of the department’s extensive photograph collection. Chavez’s father imparted the knowledge of farming and the value of honest labor to his six children. He refused to tolerate prejudice (a negative attitude, emotion, or behavior towards individuals based on a prejudgment about those individuals with no prior knowledge or experience) and discrimination (treating some differently than others or favoring one social group over another based on prejudices). He would lead his family out of 20

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Cesar Chavez

the fields whenever they were faced with such abuses as unsanitary conditions and lack of clean water. Over the years, Librado Chavez joined several labor unions that attempted to organize. He was the first to stop working if leaders called for a Huelga (Spanish for strike). Efforts to unionize were often met by intimidation, reduced wages, and even violence by the state’s big growers. Juana Chavez was a deeply religious woman whose Catholicism sustained the family during difficult times. She taught her children the importance of caring for the less fortunate, despite their own family’s hardships. Juana, who was illiterate (could not read), was determined that her children receive an education. It was Chavez’s parents’ influence that molded his enduring commitment to religion, labor activism, and social justice.

A trail of crops Life for migrant workers was very difficult throughout the 1930s and 1940s. Poor whites from Oklahoma and Arkansas were uprooted from their homes along with poor blacks from the South and Hispanics from the Southwest. They all headed for the California fields in search of for work. However, the African American and Mexican American workers faced the additional burden of racial and ethnic prejudices and discrimination when they arrived. Many migrants who were of Hispanic descent could speak little English. Dishonest farm owners easily took advantage of them by paying less money than what the workers expected or requiring the workers to work longer hours than originally understood. In the Depression-era fields, job competition created fierce rivalries among migrants because there were so many unemployed workers. The exhausting field work was made more difficult because a worker’s earnings depended on speed. Paid by the basketful, workers rushed to pick and deliver the produce. The increased production not only earned more money, but also set a laborer apart from others seeking jobs. Children joined adults in the field to put food on the table. However, families still could not earn enough for rent. Many slept in cars or erected crude shacks on the edge of a town. Social class prejudice (groups of people sharing similar wealth and social standing) and racial prejudices existed in the schools and towns where workers settled in addition to the fields they worked. Tradition in California had long separated residents based on their skin color and individual wealth. Segregation (keeping races apart in public places) of Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

21

Cesar Chavez

Zoot Suits Zoot suits were a popular style of dress for young Hispanic males in the early 1940s. The outfit was distinguished by its high-waist pants that ended in a tight cuff around the ankles. A long coat was worn over the pants with a hanging watch chain as an accessory. Broad-brimmed hats covered a long, ducktail haircut at a time when military buzz-cuts were mainstream style. White Americans associated the zoot suit with criminal activity because the outfit was worn by pachuco gangs in southern California. Pachuco is a slang word that came to mean ‘‘tough guy.’’ In the summer of 1942, the Los Angeles media gave extensive coverage to the high-profile trial of twenty-two pachucos accused of murder of a young man born in Mexico but raised in the United States. Twelve of the men were initially found guilty but an appeals court reversed the convictions, dismissing all charges. Anti-Mexican sentiment continued nonetheless.

The following summer in 1943, a minor clash between Mexican and white youths resulted in a police raid on Mexican neighborhoods. The media frenzy that followed increased anger among the general public. Race riots aimed at Mexican Americans erupted across the city on June 7, 1943. Mobs of soldiers and sailors stationed in Los Angeles during World War II joined civilians carrying sticks, clubs, and chains as they searched for zoot-suiters in the downtown area. Pulled from public facilities, the youth were stripped of their clothing, beaten, and left bleeding on the streets. The rioting spread to the suburbs and expanded to include anyone of Mexican descent. After two days, the rioting was finally stopped by police and military authorities, but not before it had spread to other Southern California communities including Long Beach, Pasadena, and San Diego. No deaths resulted but hard feelings remained.

Mexican Americans and whites was the accepted practice in restaurants, stores, theaters, and even schools during the Depression. Children were punished for speaking Spanish in class and often humiliated for making mistakes in English. Racist (prejudice against people of a particular physical trait, such as skin color) remarks against the Hispanic students were commonplace. Prejudice and a heavy workload disrupted any formal education the Chavez children received. Chavez left school after completing the eighth grade at the age of fifteen. As a teenager, Chavez favored the baggy zoot suits (see box) that were popular among Hispanic pachucos (tough guys). The outfits carried a negative image among white Americans and further fueled existing prejudices. Two years after leaving school, Chavez joined the U.S. Navy and served in the western Pacific near the end of World War II. The war had left Southern California with a severe field labor shortage. The American government worked with the Mexican government to set up the Bracero Program (see box). The program brought hundreds of thousands of guest workers into the United States to fill wartime demands for agricultural 22

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Cesar Chavez

The Bracero Program With much of America’s working population serving in the military overseas during World War II, temporary laborers were needed to fill their places at home. Women of all races joined the work force in nontraditional jobs, such as assembly line workers in aircraft manufacturing, to meet the needs of factories in the war effort. A severe shortage of agricultural workers also occurred, leaving the nation unable to fill wartime demands for food. The United States turned to nearby Mexico to meet its agricultural needs. The two governments formed the Bracero Program with the expectation it would be mutually beneficial to both countries because Mexico was experiencing high unemployment rates at the time. Bracero originates in the Spanish word brazo (meaning arm) and is a Mexican term that translates into English as hired hand. By the time the war ended, more

than two hundred thousand braceros had participated in the international program. Like the Mexican American laborers they were replacing, the Mexican workers were welcomed into the fields, but not into American society. Braceros were subjected to exploitation despite government agreements designed to protect them. The U.S. and Mexican governments worked together to set up the Bracero Program, which attracted more than two hundred thousand braceros by the time the war ended. The Mexican term bracero comes from the Spanish word brazo or ‘‘arm.’’ Roughly translated into English, bracero means ‘‘hired hand.’’ Although the governments’ signed contracts to avoid exploitation of the braceros, in practice they were routinely violated and the workers were subjected to a variety of abuses.

laborers. With the end of war the soldiers returned to the United States and the braceros returned to Mexico. The sacrifices that Mexican Americans made in the defense of their country in wartime left many determined to demand the protection of constitutional rights due to them as Americans in peacetime. When Chavez returned from active military duty, he married Helen Fabela, whose farm worker family had settled in Delano, California. Chavez returned to life as a farmworker. The couple eventually settled in the East San Jose area called Sal Si Puedes (literally ‘‘get out if you can’’). He found work at a lumberyard and began to look for ways to improve working conditions for the thousands who labored on farms for low wages and under severe conditions. Between 1949 and 1959, Cesar and Helen had eight children.

The Delano grape boycott In 1953, Chavez joined the Community Service Organization (CSO) to help register Mexican Americans to vote. The CSO was one of a growing number of civil rights groups that formed in the 1950s to challenge Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

23

Cesar Chavez

prejudice and injustice in postwar America. The association helped to improve educational opportunities for minorities and also addressed such critical problems as police brutality. Chavez began as a local volunteer and soon became a paid organizer. By 1958, he was director of the CSO. He gained the skills and acquired the contacts he needed to work with other Mexican American community activists on a larger scale. Chavez left the CSO in 1962 when its policy board rejected his proposal to form a union of agricultural workers. That year, he joined others in forming the Farm Workers Association (FWA). Chavez, still living in Delano, traveled to migrant labor camps throughout California and Arizona, convincing workers of the need for unity. Minimal monthly dues provided workers with group health insurance, a credit union (an association that makes small loans to its members), and an advocate, or supporter, in the fields or in the courts. The FWA was renamed the National Farm Workers Association (NFWA) and chose Viva La Causa (‘‘long live the cause’’) as its motto. Its purpose was to rally young Hispanics to the fight for equality in American society. The union’s flag was a black eagle in a white circle against a field of red. The black in the logo symbolized the workers’ dark position, the red illustrated the work and suffering yet to be endured, and the white represented the light of hope. In 1965, a union of Filipino grape pickers approached Chavez and the NFWA for help. They wanted to organize a boycott (to stop buying a certain product until demands are met) against Delano grape growers because of unfair wages. The NFWA agreed. Chavez led a group of strikers who walked from Delano to the state capitol in Sacramento to deliver the union’s demands for the government to take action to protect the workers. Ten thousand marchers arrived at the state capitol on Easter morning after walking for three weeks and over 200 miles. The marchers received national media coverage. The Delano Grape Strike ended successfully for workers in 1966. The NFWA voted to merge with other farm unions to become the United Farm Workers (UFW) union, which was recognized by the national AFL-CIO (American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations). The Delano strike brought Chavez national recognition as a leader of a large, broad-based civil rights movement. He spoke out not only for economic and social justice, but also against the unpopular Vietnam War (1957–75). Chavez received public support from Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. (1929–1968). La Causa gained momentum in the country. 24

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Cesar Chavez

La Causa Strikes, boycotts, pickets, marches, and sit-ins (to sit down and quietly refuse to leave when asked) were all political weapons Chavez employed in his nonviolent battle against racial discrimination. Inspired by Indian leader Mahatma Gandhi (1869–1948; see entry), who fought racial discrimination in India using nonviolent methods including fasting (to not eat or only eat very little of certain things), Chavez used fasting to call attention to his message against prejudice and encouraged followers to remember his example of nonviolence. When UFW members began talking about adopting more violent tactics during a 1968 strike in California, Chavez began a fast that lasted twenty-five days in protest. Union members agreed to renounce violence. U.S. senator Robert Kennedy (1925–1968) joined Chavez at a press conference in Delano where Chavez ended his highly publicized fast. Kennedy also lent his prestige to the La Causa movement when he went on the campaign trail for president that year. The assassinations of both King and Kennedy in 1968 divided union leadership on the issue of nonviolence. Chavez resisted pressure to embrace a militant Hispanic movement just as King had resisted the Black Power movement a decade earlier. The political battle for the rights of workers continued. In 1970, Chavez helped negotiate an historic contract with a majority of grape producers in Delano. In 1974, Martin Luther King’s widow, Coretta Scott King (1927–2006), presented Chavez with the Martin Luther King Nonviolent Peace Award in Atlanta, Georgia. That same year, Chavez and Helen, who was a big supporter of Cesar’s activism, traveled to Europe in an effort to increase support among international leaders. Religion and spirituality were central to his life and his cause. Therefore, a highlight of the trip for Chavez came when he was granted a private audience with the Roman Catholic pope Paul VI (1897–1978). Finally in 1975, California passed the Agricultural Labor Relations Act. It was the first bill to protect the right of farmworkers in the United States to act together to help themselves. It provided for government-supervised collective bargaining (negotiations between representatives of employers and workers to reach agreement on working conditions) under the Agricultural Labor Relations Board. Criticism of Chavez’s authoritarian (power is centered in a single person who demands complete obedience of others) style of leadership caused internal opposition for the UFW during the 1980s. However, he continued to recruit migrant workers to the union and raise funds to Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

25

Cesar Chavez

Cesar Chavez walks a picket line boycotting Chiquita bananas, 1979. A P IM AG ES.

ensure the union’s future. During the early 1980s the state of California became less committed to enforcing the Agricultural Labor Relations Act. In response, Chavez promoted another grape boycott to protest the use of toxic pesticides in grapes. In 1988, Chavez began a fast to draw attention to the dangers of pesticides to workers in the fields and vineyards as well as to the consumers who ate them. The fast lasted for thirty-six days and left the sixty-one-year-old Chavez severely weakened. 26

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Cesar Chavez

In 1991, Chavez received Mexico’s highest award, the Aguila Azteca (The Aztec Eagle). The award is presented to people of Mexican heritage who have made major contributions to society throughout the world. As head of the UFW, he continued to work for the rights of farmworkers until his death in 1993. While on union business, Chavez died in his sleep at the age of sixty-six of unidentified natural causes, not far from his birthplace in Arizona. Over fifty thousand mourners paid their last respects at a funeral mass for Chavez. Millions more witnessed it on international broadcasting networks. In death and in life, Chavez brought attention to La Causa and the need for peaceful social change.

For More Information B O O KS

Bruns, Roger. Cesar Chavez: A Biography. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2005. Ferriss, Susan, and Ricardo Sandoval. The Fight in the Fields: Cesar Chavez and the Farmworkers Movement. New York: Harcourt Brace & Company, 1997. La Botz, Dan. Ce´sar Cha´vez and La Causa. New York: Pearson Longman, 2006. Levy, Jacques E. Cesar Chavez: Autobiography of La Causa. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1975. WEB SIT ES

Library of Congress. ‘‘Cesar Chavez.’’ America’s Story. http://www. americaslibrary. gov/cgi-bin/page.cgi/aa/chavez (accessed on December 11, 2006). Tajeda-Flores, Rick. ‘‘Cesar Chavez.’’ The Fight in the Fields: Cesar Chavez and the Farmworkers’ Struggle. PBS: F. http://www.pbs.org/itvs/fightfields/ cesarchavez.html (accessed on December 11, 2006).

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

27

Dalai Lama B OR N: July 6, 1935  Chinghai Province, China

Tibetan spiritual leader

‘‘The suppression of the rights and freedoms of any people by . . . governments is against human nature, and the recent movements for democracy in various parts of the world are a clear indication of this.’’

enzin Gyatso was the fourteenth Dalai Lama, the spiritual and former political leader of Tibetan people. The Dalai Lama lived in exile (banished from one’s own country) in India in the early twenty-first century following the invasion of Tibet by the People’s Republic of China in 1959. For over four decades he set up educational, cultural, and religious institutions to promote peace and preserve the Tibetan identity. His Holiness the Dalai Lama held the Geshe Lharampa Degree (Doctorate of Buddhist Philosophy). He lectured around the world and authored more than fifty books. The Dalai Lama traveled internationally and met with all the religious and political leaders of the major nations to promote negotiations between the Tibetan and Chinese people. In 1973, the Dalai Lama and Pope Paul VI (1897–1978) held an historic press conference when the leaders of two faith traditions met at the Vatican in Rome. In 1981, the

T

Dalai Lama. # J AY ANT A SH AW/ RE UTE RS /C OR BIS .

29

Dalai Lama

Dalai Lama spoke at an interfaith service organized by the World Congress of Faiths and called for inter-religious understanding and universal responsibility. His message of freedom and peace was recognized by numerous awards, including the prestigious Nobel Peace Prize in 1989.

The boy from Taktster Lhamo Thondup, later renamed Tenzin Gyatso, was born in 1935 to a farming family in northeastern Tibet, which later became the Chinghai province of China. Like most Tibetans his parents, Choekyong and Dekyi Tsering, were faithful Buddhists (see box). His mother gave birth to sixteen children, but only seven survived through infancy in the isolated and harsh climate of Tibet. Lhamo had two sisters and four brothers. When he was a baby his mother carried him on her back when she went out to work in the fields. She often placed him in a corner of the field under an umbrella that was staked to the ground while she took care of the crops. The family’s main livelihood was agriculture, but they also kept cattle and chickens, and his father had a special fondness for horses. They lived a simple life in the tiny, solitary hamlet of Taktser among about twenty other families, unaware of much that happened in the world beyond their own horizon. The eastern district of Tibet was under the secular (nonreligious leaders) rule of China at the time Lhamo was born, but the Thirteenth Dalai Lama, Thupten Gyatso (1876–1933), was the spiritual leader of the people. He lived in exile in British India from 1913 until his death in 1933. With the passing of the Dalai Lama, an immediate search began in order to choose his successor. Choosing the Dalai Lama (see box) is done in accordance with time-honored customs and traditions. Initially a Regent, or trustee, is appointed by the Tibetan National Assembly to govern the country until the reincarnation (rebirth in a new body or other form of life) of the Dalai Lama can be found and grow to maturity.

The fourteenth Dalai Lama State oracles (sources of wise or god-like counsel) and learned lamas were consulted in order to find out where the reincarnation would appear. Searchers recalled that the Dalai Lama’s body had been placed facing south, but after a few days the face had turned towards the northeast. Combined with other evidence, it indicated the direction where the new Dalai Lama should be sought. Senior lamas (priests) and high dignitaries were sent out to all parts of Tibet. They arrived in Taktser when Lhamo 30

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Dalai Lama

Buddhism Buddhism is an East Indian religious tradition that began around the sixth century BCE by Siddhartha Gautama, or Buddha (the Enlightened One). Buddha was regarded by his followers as a great man and a master teacher. He saw himself as one who had ‘‘arrived,’’ or transcended the imperfections of life. Buddha taught many followers and was revered as the Exalted One. He lived a long, full life and died at the age of eighty. Buddhism grew out of a reform movement in reaction to the Hindu religion. It advocated tolerance for everyone and offered direction toward the realization of freedom in perfect existence for individuals or societies.

The Three Valued Components of Buddhism (also called the Three Jewels) are the Buddha (Teacher and Ideal), the Dhamma/Dharma (Buddhist Principles), and the Sangha (Buddhist Community). Buddhism teaches that three kinds of individuals exist. The lowest being cares solely for worldly matters and at best can only pursue a blissful existence in a future life. Buddhist doctrine teaches that the human soul is reincarnated, or reborn in a new body or form of life. A person’s actions in each life generate karma, a force which brings ethical consequences to determine one’s destiny in the next existence (what a person puts out into the world will return to him.)

Although begun in Asia, Buddhism spread throughout the world by the twentieth century. European colonialism (extending a nation’s control beyond its existing borders) introduced westernized values and technology during Buddhism’s historical development. A variety of cultural and educational influences brought significant changes in traditional Buddhist beliefs and institutions by the beginning of the twentyfirst century. While there was still considerable unity among practitioners, there were different approaches by which one could realize the Buddhist way of life and attain Enlightenment (a final blessed state marked by the absence of desire or suffering), Nirvana (a state of oblivion to external reality), and liberation from the bonds of Phenomenal Existence (existence in the moment).

For individuals of the intermediate and highest kinds, the Phenomenal World represents sorrow. They strive to attain a position where they are no longer disturbed by worldly turmoil. The highest aim of any individual is to leave the ego behind and attain Buddhahood in order to bring deliverance to other living beings. One’s deliverance from Phenomenal Existence is secured through constant meditation on the true aspect of existence or being. For those with the highest aims, there are five pathways, or degrees, in the pursuit of ‘‘the way to Final Deliverance.’’ The first is the Path of Accumulating Merit. The second is the Path of Training. The first two are considered lower paths. The last three represent ‘‘the Path of the Saint.’’ They are the Path of Illumination, the Path of Concentrated Contemplation, and the ‘‘Final Path,’’ where one is no longer subjected to training.

was about two years old. He passed the required tests for a Dalai Lama. The search party was fully convinced they had discovered the reincarnation. They needed to take him to the great monastery in Lhasa, the ‘‘home of the divine’’ in Tibet. Lhasa was known to the rest of the world as The Forbidden City because of its mystery and isolation. Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

31

Dalai Lama

Choosing the Dalai Lama Dalai Lama is a Mongolian title meaning Ocean of Wisdom. It is a combination of the Mongolian word dalai (ocean), which signifies profound knowledge, and the Tibetan word blama (religious teacher). The title dates from 1578 and has been given to each reincarnation in the lineage up to the fourteenth Dalai Lama. The men who have held the title are manifestations of the previous Dalai Lama as well as the Bodhisattva of Compassion, the traditional patron of Tibet.

special lamas are also interpreted as guides to finding his rebirth.

Within a year of the death of the reigning Dalai Lama, people begin to expect reports of an exceptional male child to replace him. Those assigned the task of choosing the reincarnation follow traditional procedures to discover the rebirth of the Dalai Lama. These procedures include studying statements made by the previous Dalai Lama during his lifetime as well as studying significant omens surrounding his death. Meditative visions by

Once the true reincarnation of the Dalai Lama is determined, he is enthroned in the Potala palace in the mountains near Lhasa in Dbus province, Tibet. Here he receives a monastic education until he reaches the age of maturity, about eighteen years old, and assumes the religious and political power of the office of Dalai Lama. In the West he is called His Holiness the Dalai Lama. Tibetans refer to His Holiness as Yeshin Norbu, the Wish-fulfilling Gem, or Kundun, which simply means The Presence.

When possible male candidates are discovered, they are subjected to tests to determine physical fitness, intelligence, and memory of events and objects from their previous existence. The boys are usually between two and three years old when chosen. If several children are likely candidates, the final selection is made by drawing a name from a golden urn.

The Tibetan government in Lhasa was advised of the discovery, and in mid-summer of 1938, the search party was told to bring the boy to Lhasa for further testing. Although they were sure he was the Dalai Lama, they did not declare him found because they feared what the Chinese governor might do. At first, the governor would not give permission for the boy to leave unless he was declared the Dalai Lama and provided a large escort of Chinese soldiers to Lhasa. The Tibetan government feared once the soldiers arrived at Lhasa, there was a danger the Chinese government would demand authority in Tibet. However, the Chinese government withdrew its demand for control of Tibet in exchange for a payment of one hundred thousand Chinese dollars. When the money was paid, the governor demanded an additional three hundred thousand dollars, Negotiations began between the two governments for the release of Lhamo Thondup. 32

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Dalai Lama

When the final payments were finally arranged the party left the Chinghai province, and Lhamo Thondup was ordained a monk. He was renamed Jamphel Ngawang Lobsang Yeshe Tenzin Gyatso. The name means The Holy One, The Gentle Glory, Powerful in Speech, Pure in Mind, of Divine Wisdom, Holding the Faith, Ocean-Wide. Recognized as the genuine Reincarnation, Tenzin Gyatso was duly enthroned as the fourteenth Dalai Lama in the Potala (palace) at Lhasa in 1940, at the age of four and a half.

A forced exile When the young Dalai Lama began his education at the age of six the world was at war. His education at a religious monastery was interrupted late in 1950, when forces of the People’s Republic of China invaded Tibet. At the age of fifteen, the Dalai Lama received early empowerment for his office in order to assume his religious and political duties because of the invasion. To avoid capture by the Chinese, he was escorted by horse caravan to a village near the Indian border. Negotiations between India and China allowed the Dalai Lama to return to Lhasa the following year. He made an effort to rule over his people under the agreement worked out with China. Tibet is called the Roof of the World because of its vast mountain system, which contains the world’s highest ranges. Its rugged geography kept the nation isolated for centuries, and Tibet’s social structure operated as a feudal system (an ancient economic system in which landowning lords provide land to peasants to farm in return for their faithfulness and payments). This meant there was little chance of moving upward from the poor peasant class to the wealth of the landowning aristocracy outside of the monasteries in Tibet. Promotion within the monasteries was democratic (voted by majority of members) for male citizens, however, and they received the finest education. Many lamas had chosen to be reborn in humble families, much like that of the Dalai Lama. Most Tibetan citizens accepted the Dalai Lama system without question because they regarded spiritual matters of equal importance with material (worldly) matters. There was no doubt that their position in life had been determined by karma (a person’s conduct determines his destiny in this life or when reincarnated in the future). The Dalai Lama believed the current distribution of wealth in Tibet was not in accordance with Buddhist teaching. He set out to change the conditions of ordinary people by proposing fundamental reforms in land Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

33

Dalai Lama

laws. It was necessary for the Chinese government to approve all such changes, and they had arrived in Tibet with their own ideas of land reform based on the Communist model. Communism is a political and economic system where a single political party controls all aspects of citizens’ lives and private ownership of property is banned. The two sides could not reach agreement, so the Dalai Lama traveled to Peking, China, in 1954 to talk with Chinese leader Mao Zedong (1893–1976) and other Chinese leaders about the reforms and Tibet’s future. Tibet existed historically as an independent, sovereign (free from the rule of other nations) nation prior to the Chinese occupation. However, the Chinese viewed Tibetans as backward, ignorant, and barbaric, because their beliefs and lifestyles were different from the Chinese. To educate the people in Communist ideology required changes in religious, cultural, and political viewpoints. Tibetans were resistant to these changes and used nonviolent means to demonstrate against China. The situation in Tibet continued to deteriorate until March 1959, when a national uprising against the Chinese regime in Lhasa was suppressed by Chinese troops. The Dalai Lama fled to India and established the Tibetan government-in-exile in Dharamsala, north India. The Chinese government abolished the Tibetan government and the ruling authority of the Dalai Lama. It set about establishing a socialist (government or whole community controls industry and distribution of goods) society in Tibet.

Peace of mind The Dalai Lama’s appeal to the United Nations (UN; an international organization founded in 1945 composed of most of the countries in the world) on the question of Tibet’s status as a nation had little effect. The General Assembly of the UN passed three resolutions on Tibet in 1959, 1961, and 1965, calling for China to respect the human rights of Tibetans and their desire for self-determination. In 1963, the Dalai Lama presented a draft of a democratic constitution for Tibet. It was later published as ‘‘The Charter of Tibetans in Exile.’’ In 1966, Mao mobilized Chinese youth into battalions of Red Guards in order to speed up the spread of Communism. The resulting Cultural Revolution (1966–76) soon spread to Lhasa with a campaign to eliminate the ‘‘four olds’’ and replace them with the ‘‘four news’’ (ideology, customs, culture, and habits). Street names were changed to reflect revolutionary themes. Portraits of Mao began to appear all across Lhasa. Mandatory study groups were organized to read Mao’s writings. People were detained if they did not 34

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Dalai Lama

In the early twenty-first century, the Dalai Lama was still held in high regard by Tibetan Buddhists and many people around the world, as shown by this protester outside the Chinese Consulate in Houston, Texas. A P IM AG ES.

carry Mao’s Red Book at all times. Tibetan songs and dances were banned, and people wearing Tibetan dress were physically attacked. Before the situation calmed down in 1969, the Red Guard had torn down Buddhist prayer flags and burned ancient scriptures and paintings. China’s desire to destroy religion in Tibet resulted in the loss of over six thousand monasteries and countless religious artifacts during the Cultural Revolution. The People’s Republic of China (PRC)’s admission to membership in the UN in the early 1970s brought a more moderate policy in China. It also ended any further UN resolutions concerning Tibet, but it brought about some dramatic changes within all of China’s minority areas. Attacks on religion suddenly ended, and the media in Tibet experienced greater Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

35

Dalai Lama

freedom. Tibetans were permitted again to wear their traditional clothing, travel within the country, and celebrate the birthdays of the Dalai Lama and Siddhartha Gautama (563 BCE –483 BCE ), the founder of Buddhism. Secret negotiations were opened between the Chinese government and the Dalai Lama. However, efforts for a compromise ended without resolution, and the Chinese media renewed its attacks on him. It remained illegal to possess an image of the Dalai Lama in Tibet into the twenty-first century. In 1987, the Dalai Lama addressed the U.S. Congress and proposed a Five Point Peace Plan for Tibet. Among other things, the plan called for fundamental rights and freedoms for the Tibetan people and their land, an end to China’s population relocation to Tibet, and negotiations between the Tibetan and Chinese people on the future status of Tibet. The Dalai Lama expanded his Five Point Plan in a presentation at Strasbourg, France, in June 1988. His plan included a self-governing, democratic Tibet in association with the PRC, but his proposal was rejected by the Tibetan government-in-exile in 1991. In the early twenty-first century, the Dalai Lama was still held in high regard by Tibetan Buddhists and many people around the world, but he was seen as a threat by the PRC. China refused his request to return to Tibet on his eightieth birthday on July 6, 2005.

For More Information BOOKS

` Bstan-dzin-rgya-mtsho, Dalai Lama XIV. Freedom in Exile: The Autobiography of the Dalai Lama. New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 1990. ` Bstan-dzin-rgya-mtsho, Dalai Lama XIV. My Land and My People: The Original Autobiography of His Holiness the Dalai Lama of Tibet. New York: Warner Books, 1997. Gard, Richard A., ed. Buddhism. New York: George Braziller, Inc., 1961. Goldstein, Melvyn C. The Snow Lion and the Dragon: China, Tibet, and the Dalai Lama. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997. Grunfeld, A. Tom. The Making of Modern Tibet. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe Inc., 1987. Hicks, Roger, and Ngakpa Chogyam. Great Ocean: An Authorized Biography of the Buddhist Monk Tenzin Gyatso, His Holiness the Fourteenth Dalai Lama. New York: Penguin Books, 1990. WEB SIT ES

‘‘The 14th Dalai Lama-Biography.’’ NobelPrize.org. http://nobelprize.org/peace/ laureates/1989/lama-bio.html (accessed on December 11, 2006). ‘‘His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama of Tibet.’’ Central Tibetan Administration. http://www.tibet.net/hhdl/eng/ (accessed on December 11, 2006). 36

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Mahatma Gandhi B OR N: October 2, 1869  Porbandar, India D I E D : January 30, 1948  New Delhi, India

Indian political leader, spiritual leader

‘‘My mission is not simply the brotherhood of Indian humanity. My mission is not merely freedom for India. But through the freedom of India I hope to realize and carry on the mission of the Brotherhood of Man.’’

ahatma Gandhi was a major political and spiritual leader of India. In an age of empires and military dominance, Gandhi used nonviolent activism to free his people from colonial rule (one nation gaining political and economic control of another, usually lesser developed, country and its resources) in India and racial oppression in South Africa. His use of civil disobedience (to peacefully disobey laws in protest of government policy) to achieve change inspired similar movements for freedom and human rights around the world. Gandhi earned the title of Mahatma (Great Soul) for his efforts to ease the burden of poverty and ignorance for the poor. A student of Hindu philosophy, Gandhi lived simply and was recognized in India as the Father of the Nation.

M

Mahatma Gandhi. # HU LT ON- DEU TS CH/ CO RBI S.

Gandhi named his autobiography The Story of My Experiments with Truth because he had dedicated his life to the wider purpose of 37

Mahatma Gandhi

Hinduism Hinduism is a very complex and diverse religion. The historical roots of Hinduism are found between the sixth and fourth centuries BCE . Hinduism is sometimes referred to as the Vedic religion because it is based on oral and written traditions known as the Vedas, the ancient Hindu scriptures. Other important Hindu scriptures include the Bhagavad Gita and the Upanishads. Hindus believe in a variety of deities (gods). Each deity is an expression of the one true reality (or god), named Brahman. One of the most basic truths in Hinduism is that atman (the soul) is equivalent to Brahman. This truth can only be realized through proper spiritual enlightenment. Hinduism considers human desires as the source of all spiritual problems. If desires can be eliminated by pursuing dharma (the right path or religious duty) followers can ultimately escape the wheel of rebirth (reincarnation).

discovering truth, or Satya. Gandhi was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize five times between 1937 and 1948, although he never received the award because of the deep divisions within India over independence from British rule and beginning of war between India and Pakistan in 1948. The government of India introduced a series of Mahatma Gandhi currency notes (paper money) in 1996 and annually awards the Mahatma Gandhi Peace Prize to distinguished social workers internationally. Statues dedicated in honor of Gandhi exist in many prominent cities throughout the world, and his life is memorialized in books and on film.

Mohandas from Porbandar

Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi was born in the little town of Porbandar in Gujarat, Western India, on the edge of the Arabian Sea. His family practiced Hinduism (see box) and were of the sect of the god Vishnu, called Vaishnava. Gandhi’s mother, Putlibai, was a deeply religious woman who raised her five children as orthodox (strict interpretation of traditional religious guidance directing behavior and beliefs) Hindus. Mohandas means Slave of Mohan, the Hindu god (also called Krishna) who teaches nonviolence and sympathy for all beings in the holy Hindu book. His father, Karamchand Uttamchand, was Dewan—or prime minister—of the small state where Gandhi was born. Karamchand enjoyed religious discussions outside his own faith and frequently entertained guests and holy men such as Muslims and Jains. The Jain religion is a small sect with similarities to Buddhism which teaches that everything is constantly subject to change and suffering. The only way to escape suffering is to stop desiring material things of the world and live a virtuous life that includes doing no harm to living things, never stealing, lying, bragging, using drugs or alcohol, and remaining faithful in marriage. The Jains’ chief doctrine of nonviolence to any living creature influenced the character of Hinduism, and of Mohandas in particular, in the state of Gujarat.

38

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Mahatma Gandhi

The Hindu Caste System The Hindu caste system includes four principal social class distinctions. The Brahmins, the most senior caste, are religious teachers and scholars. Next in rank are the Kshatriyas. They are traditionally warriors who are eligible to become kings and princes. The third in rank are Vaisyas who are merchants, small landholders, and clerks. They do not have a distinguished ranking in the caste system even though they may own lands and property and be relatively wealthy. The lowest rank in the caste system is the Sudras. They are craftsmen and peasants who are assigned to provide services to others as laborers, such as in construction. Completely outside the caste system are people designated as Untouchable. The

Untouchables are outcasts who live in slums and are confined to the most demeaning work in Indian society. They are assigned such tasks as sweeping floors and streets, or removing human excrement, dead animals, and human corpses. Untouchables may not enter temples or use the same wells as other people. In the caste system, Hindus consider themselves polluted if even the shadow of an Untouchable falls across them. A person’s position in life is determined at birth with prospects of improvement very limited due to the prejudice between groups. In modern India, the caste system and discrimination against Untouchables is considered illegal, although it persists in practice, particularly in some rural areas.

The name Gandhi means ‘‘grocer,’’ and it indicated that the family ranking was Vaisyas in the Hindu caste system (a rigid series of social classes allowing little opportunity for people to improve their individual standing in society) (see box). Gandhi’s father and grandfather had risen above their caste status as traders to become civil servants in British-ruled India, a rare accomplishment in Indian society. This meant that the family enjoyed relatively affluent circumstances in their home country. When Gandhi was seven, his father moved the family to Rajkot, a city in far western India, where he became a high-ranking official. Gandhi was a shy and sensitive boy who did not excel at school. He preferred long, solitary walks in the countryside to participating in games or sports. According to the custom of the day, Gandhi married Kasturbai, a Porbandar merchant’s daughter, when she was twelve and he was thirteen years of age. They had four sons and their marriage lasted sixty-two years. However, as an adult Gandhi condemned childhood marriage as a part of Hindu society since it denied the freedom of people to select whom they wish to marry. Gandhi graduated from Rajkot High School in 1887. He next spent nine months at the Samal Das College in nearby Bhavnagar. His father Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

39

Mahatma Gandhi

had died when Gandhi was just seventeen. After his death, a family friend and mentor to Gandhi suggested he study law in England. With Kasturbai expecting their first child, Gandhi took his friend’s advice and journeyed to London in 1888. While there, Gandhi made a conscious effort to adopt the dress and manners of the English in order to fit into their society. He became a lawyer in 1891 and immediately made plans to return home. Upon arrival in Bombay, India, his elder brother met him to break the news that their beloved mother had died just weeks before. Gandhi was greatly saddened to not have had the opportunity to see her before her death.

Trouble in South Africa Gandhi experienced little success as a trial lawyer in India but made a modest living writing petitions (formal written requests to government authorities) in Rajkot. In 1893, a Muslim (worshipper of the Islam religion) merchant from Porbandar offered him a one-year contract to represent his firm in Natal, South Africa. Like India, South Africa was also under British rule. Gandhi set sail for Africa. There he experienced firsthand the prejudice of whites against people of color. On a train ride to a court date, Gandhi was confronted by a European man who was offended that an Indian was sitting in the first-class carriage. Despite his possession of a valid ticket, an official was called and Gandhi was put off the train at the next station. Angered at the ill treatment he received, Gandhi determined at that moment to fight the intense racial prejudice (a prejudgment against people of a particular physical trait, such as skin color) that stripped humans of their dignity. On a later trip from Natal Province to Johannesburg, South Africa, Gandhi booked a coach seat, but the coachman refused him a seat and tried to make him sit on the floor. When he refused, he was beaten by the coachman. He was denied a room at a Johannesburg hotel because of his skin color. The following day, he continued his journey to Pretoria and was ushered to a third-class carriage despite his first-class ticket. Only the intervention of a white passenger allowed Gandhi to take his place in first class. Indian workers had come to South Africa as traders, professionals, and indentured servants (people who work for others to pay off debts) to build the economy when the country was developing. As Indian communities grew in size and commercial importance, they came to be seen as a threat by white South Africans. As a result, laws were passed to restrict the rights of Indians. Proposed legislation in 1894 called for new laws 40

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Mahatma Gandhi

aimed at Chinese immigrants that included physical segregation (to separate certain social groups, such as whites and people of color) and barred from voting. As Gandhi became increasingly aware of the institutionalized (formally built into society) racial discrimination (treating differently or favoring one social group over another based on arbitrary standards or criteria) against Indians, he decided on a plan to combat it. He created a method of resistance he named Satyagraha, or Truth Weapon. Satya is a Sanskrit word meaning truth and agraha means force. His plan was based on passages he had studied in the Hindu Bhagavad Gita (holy book) and the Christian Bible. They called on the faithful to love their enemies and reject violence as a response to racial oppression. Nonviolent strikes (refusing to work until a demand is met), including hunger strikes, were among the major strategies of the satyagraha.

Civil disobedience At the age of twenty-four, Gandhi promoted his plan for peaceful resistance to unjust laws. He called for Indians to unite. He urged them to forget personal and religious divisions among themselves in order to reach their common objectives. Gandhi helped establish the Natal Indian Congress to address the social and political concerns of the local Indians. In August 1894, he became its secretary. Early in 1896, Gandhi returned to India to see his family as well as to enlist support for his campaign for Truth in South Africa. In November Gandhi, Kasturbai, and their two young sons set sail for South Africa. This time they, and other Indian passengers, received a hostile reception from those opposed to Indian immigrants (a person who leaves his country of origin to reside permanently in another). Upon his return in January 1897, Gandhi found his position had changed. He was now viewed as the chief political representative of Indians in South Africa. He gave up his law practice and his Western way of living in order to devote himself full time to improving the conditions of Indians living in the country. Civil resisters were subject to severe punishments such as whippings or being shot and Gandhi himself was briefly jailed on a number of occasions for not obeying certain laws discriminating against minorities, such as requirements to register with the government as a minority person. In 1910, Gandhi set up a satyagraha camp known as the Tolstoy Farm located near Johannesburg. The camp was to shelter those in the Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

41

Mahatma Gandhi

Indian community affected by the protests and to teach the method of satyagraha. The struggle for civil rights that had begun in 1894 continued on until 1914, with a brief suspension during the Boer War (1899– 1902). The Boer War was a conflict between British and Dutch colonists in parts of South Africa. During this time, the Indians supported the British government as a sign of loyalty. On June 30, 1914, the South African government gave in and moved to stop the oppression as public opinion grew in support of the peaceful protesters. The Indian Relief Bill was passed to stop anti-Indian discrimination in the country.

The Mahatma Gandhi returned to India a nationally recognized celebrity in 1915. He began a series of satyagraha agitations in order to promote independence in his home country. He attracted large crowds at public meetings to promote Indian self-government (political independence from Britain) and explain his vision of the kind of programs that would best meet the nation’s needs. He soon earned the title of Mahatma as he worked to advance the cause of India and ease the burden of poverty and ignorance for the poor. People living simply was Gandhi’s vision for India. He was most concerned with the rural peasants who formed the vast majority of the population in India yet whose issues were not represented in government. He opened schools in villages and promoted programs for the advancement of women and the Untouchables, India’s lowest-ranking social group in its rigid caste system. Gandhi resisted the influences of Western industrialization and encouraged community farms and village industries. Industrialization is an economic change from an agricultural focus to one of producing large quantities of goods in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries by wage-earning workers operating machines located in factories. As a role model, he established the Satyagraha Ashram (spiritual community or village) in Ahmedabad in 1915. Dedicated followers went out from there to teach others how to set up similar communities for shared communal living. With the outbreak of World War I (1914–18), Gandhi once again supported the British war efforts. He hoped the show of loyalty toward the government would win him and his followers the favor of the British and hasten India’s freedom. Changing his strategy for reform, Gandhi led a series of local agitations starting in 1917 that involved acts of civil disobedience in India. In 1919, he led the first nationwide agitation that united Indians against 42

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Mahatma Gandhi

government proposals restricting their civil liberties (freedoms from government restrictions, such freedom of speech or right to a fair trial) and legal protections. The following year, Gandhi began a two-year NonCooperation Movement that demanded, among other things, Indian independence from Britain. Gandhi’s technique involved arousing and uniting Indians to action using legitimate and peaceful means while preventing the heightened emotions from running over into violence. When confrontations resulted in violence, Gandhi would call off the activity until order was restored. Gandhi’s political activism in the independence movement resulted in his arrest on March 10, 1922. Charged with sedition (encouraging others to disobey the law) he was sentenced to six years in prison. Early in 1924, emergency surgery for appendicitis left him weakened and he was released from prison to recuperate at his ashram. Gandhi was elected president of the Indian National Congress that year. However, he mainly spent the remaining years of the 1920s writing from his ashram. Fondly referred to as Bapu (father), Gandhi was recognized as the Father of the Nation in India.

The Quit India movement In December 1928, the English government in India received an ultimatum from the Indian National Congress. The demand was for dominion status (a self-governing nation that still acknowledges the British king or queen as chief of state) by December 1929, or a countrywide civil disobedience movement would be launched. Time passed without a favorable response from the British rulers. Gandhi came out of seclusion to lead the movement. He organized a series of individual and group satyagraha that soon grew into a mass movement of open defiance against the government in India. He was arrested in May 1930, but public protest only increased due to his arrest. Gandhi was set free the following January. He traveled to England in March 1931 to represent the Indian National Congress before the British government in London at a conference. Gandhi was unable to advance his political mission while in Britain. However, he did attract large crowds of curious and friendly citizens who listened to him speak of an independent India. When political progress failed to materialize from his trip to Britain, the civil disobedience movement resumed in India in January 1932. Gandhi and other Congress leaders were arrested and jailed by the new British colonial governor, Lord Willingdon (1866–1941), who adopted a new get-tough policy against the Indian nationalists. He also declared the Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

43

Mahatma Gandhi

In 1930 Mahatma Gandhi organized a series of individual and group satyagraha that soon grew into a mass movement of open defiance against the government in India. Pictured here is his famous March to the Sea to make salt, in defiance of the British salt monopoly, April 5, 1930. # B ET TMA NN/ CO RB IS.

Congress as unlawful. Gandhi began a series of fasts (to not eat or only eat very little of certain things) to protest various causes while in prison. He was released again by the government in May 1933. Upon his release, Gandhi devoted himself to promoting the cause of the Untouchables, whom he renamed the Harijans (People of God). His efforts landed him back in prison by August, with a one year sentence. After a four-day fast, Gandhi was again removed to a hospital and quickly released. The government officials feared a national riot if he should die in prison. 44

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Mahatma Gandhi

Tension within India increased as World War II (1939–45) approached. Parties eager for Indian independence urged the Congress to take advantage of Britain’s distraction with the international situation. Gandhi led a nationwide satyagraha campaign under the slogan ‘‘Do or Die.’’ In addition, Congress passed the Quit India resolution on August 8, 1942. The resolution demanded immediate independence and the complete withdrawal of the British from India. Congress leaders, including Gandhi and his wife, Kasturbai, were imprisoned at once. Kasturbai died in prison on February 22, 1944. Gandhi was released on May 6 of that year after contracting malaria. At the end of the war, negotiations for the future of India resumed. In August 1947, the British divided India into two self-governing dominions: India and Pakistan. Pakistan was created as a Muslim state within the subcontinent in order to accommodate the millions of followers of Islam in India. Gandhi wanted a unified India and did not agree to the division. He called for peace and brotherhood during the riots that accompanied the much-disputed partition of the country. On January 30, 1948, a young Hindu assassinated Gandhi during his usual evening prayer meeting in New Delhi.

For More Information B O O KS

Moon, Penderel. Gandhi and Modern India. New York: W. W. Norton and Company, 1969. Owen, Hugh. Gandhi. Queensland, Australia: University of Queensland Press, 1984. Payne, Robert. The Life and Death of Mahatma Gandhi. New York: E. P. Dutton and Co., 1969. Rawding, F.W. Gandhi and the Struggle for India’s Independence. Minneapolis, MN: Lerner Publications Company, 1982. Renou, Louis, ed. Hinduism. New York: George Braziller, Inc., 1961. WEB SIT ES

‘‘Indian National Congress.’’ http://www.aicc.org.in/ (accessed on December 11, 2006). ‘‘Time 100: Person of the Century Runner Up: Mohandas Gandhi.’’ Time Inc. http://www.time.com/time/time100 (accessed on December 11, 2006).

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

45

Heinrich Himmler B OR N: October 7, 1900  Munich, Germany D I E D : May 23, 1945  Luneberg, Germany

German administrator, military commander

‘‘The best political weapon is the weapon of terror. Cruelty commands respect. Men may hate us. But, we don’t ask for their love; only for their fear.’’

erman military commander Heinrich Himmler became a key organizer and officer-in-charge of Nazi Germany’s infamous concentration camps during World War II (1939–45). The camps included the death, also known as extermination, camps, where millions of people were murdered in a very businesslike manner. The camps were the centerpiece of the German effort to exterminate all Jews living in Europe. Considered the second most powerful man in Nazi Germany behind dictator Adolf Hitler (1889–1945), Himmler oversaw the murder of possibly as many as eleven or twelve million people including six million Jews, an event later referred to as the Holocaust. Other categories of victims besides Jews included Russian war prisoners, Slavic populations of Eastern Europe and Russia, homosexuals, Catholics, and Roma peoples known as Gypsies.

G

Heinrich Himmler. # B ETT MA NN/ CO RBI S.

47

Heinrich Himmler

Himmler is one of the most notorious mass murderers in world history. He was driven by extreme loyalty to Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party and intense racial prejudice. Himmler was the mastermind behind the mass murders, which were motivated solely by prejudice and referred to as ethnic cleansing later in the twentieth century. He was able to convince thousands of people to carry out mass murders on an almost daily basis with few apparent feelings of guilt. He even authorized gruesome medical experiments on living inmates in concentration camps.

A comfortable upbringing Himmler was born in October 1900 in Munich, Germany, into a middleclass family. He was the second of three sons. His father, Gebhardt Himmler, was a schoolteacher. His mother, Anna Maria Heyder Himmler, was a homemaker. Gebhardt ruled over the family members with a stern hand, expecting excellence from each of the children in their schooling and other endeavors. When Himmler was thirteen years old, the family moved fifty miles away from Munich to Landshut, where Gebhardt became headmaster (principal) of a school. While Himmler was in high school, World War I (1912–18) raged across parts of Europe. The war raised Himmler’s interest in military matters. When he graduated from high school, Himmler joined the Germany army and attended officer training school. However, just before he was to be commissioned an officer, Germany conceded defeat and the war ended. Himmler was discharged from his military responsibilities. After the war, Himmler went to work on a farm to learn about agriculture. However, his chronic poor health forced him to quit the heavy labor of a farm job. He moved back into Munich and began studying agriculture at the university. While in school, Himmler became interested in the right-wing paramilitary organizations that were formed after the war by former German soldiers who remained upset about their defeat. Himmler joined one of the groups. It was named the Imperial War Flag. Anti-Semitism (prejudice against Jews) was very strong in Germany at this time. The Jews were blamed, or used as scapegoats (people blamed for something over which they have no control), for Germany’s loss in the war. Himmler shared these sentiments with his fellow soldiers.

Joins the Nazi movement In 1922, Himmler graduated from college and went to work for a fertilizer company. The following year, he began taking part in the 48

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Heinrich Himmler

Nazi Extermination Camps The following concentration camps were constructed during World War II with special facilities to carry out mass murders against Jews and others considered undesirable by the Nazis. The estimated number of people killed at each camp is also given. Approximately 80 percent of those killed at these camps were Jews. All of these camps except Jasemovac and Maly Trostenets were located in Poland. They all were operated by German commander Heinrich Himmler’s SS troops.



Chelmno—152,000 (first death camp in operation on December 8, 1941, and continued until April 1943)



Majdanek—200,000 (operated from April 1942 to July 1944)



Sobibor—250,000 (operated from May 1942 to October 1943)



Treblinka—800,000 (operated from July 1942 to October 1943)

Auschwitz—1.1 million (the largest camp, first established in April 1940 as a concentration camp, with construction of extermination facilities begun in October 1941)



Jasenovac—600,000 (located in Croatia, most victims were ethnic Serbs)



Maly Trostenets—60,000 (located in Belarus, it is the camp least known about because it was under Soviet Union rule following World War II until 1990s)





Belzec—500,000 (began operation on March 17, 1942)

activities of the newly established organization called the National Socialist German Workers’ Party, or Nazis for short. He participated in Hitler’s unsuccessful military revolt to gain power in Munich, Germany, in early November 1923, an event known as the Beer Hall Putsch. The Nazis were considered a politically radical group by the general public at the time, and Himmler lost his job due to his association with them. During the 1920s, the Nazis were recruiting soldiers from the paramilitary groups to form its own military organization known as the Slutzstaffen or Security Squad (SS). The primary purpose of the SS at first was to provide an elite bodyguard unit for Hitler and other party leaders. By 1925, Himmler was accepted as a member of the SS and began quickly rising through its ranks. In 1928, Himmler married a Polish nurse, Margarete Concerzowo, who operated a Berlin nursing home. They sold the nursing home and bought a small farm outside Munich from which they sold produce and raised hens. They had one daughter. As Himmler’s Nazi responsibilities steadily grew, he would spend less and less time at the farm with the family. By January 1929, Himmler became the head commander of the SS. Himmler was elected as a deputy to the German parliament known as Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

49

Heinrich Himmler

the Reichstag in 1930. Himmler would also have two other children with his personal secretary after separating from his wife in 1940.

Growth of the SS When Himmler took command of the SS in 1929, it numbered only 280 members. It was a very small part of the regular German army, known as the SA (Sturmabteilung, or Stormtrooper in English). Through aggressively promoting his troops with Nazi leaders, Himmler was successful in building the SS and expanding its responsibilities. When the Nazi Party rose to power in Germany in 1933, the SS ranks had dramatically increased to 52,000 soldiers. The SS also reflected the strong racism of the Nazis. All SS troops had to project a certain physical appearance. They had to represent the ideal German as viewed by the Nazis: blond, blue-eyed, and physically strong. Nazis and other Germans referred to this model as the Aryan race. Not only did Himmler make sure the soldiers had the proper physical and racial characteristics, he also laid down the rules about whom the SS troops could marry. Himmler wanted to ensure the purity of the race by not allowing any contamination of undesired biological traits deriving from Slav, Jewish, or Roma ancestry. He even established a mandatory SS bride school to shape the future wives on the proper behavior of an SS wife. In contrast, Himmler was short, slight in stature, and not very athletic. He was severely nearsighted. Having little personality, Himmler was never very comfortable socializing. He was often sickly and had a persistently weak stomach. Nonetheless, his zealous attitude and steadfast allegiance to Nazi leaders allowed him to gain a prominent position of power. There was nothing he would not do, no matter how ruthless, if commanded.

Nazis expand power Prior to 1933, the SS were considered a small supplementary force to the regular army. However, with the Nazis now in power, Himmler wanted to make the SS special. In late 1933, he introduced a major new uniform change for the SS. Instead of the SA brown shirts, the SS adopted fearsome-looking black uniforms. Himmler also rose in rank equal to regular SA commanders, a promotion resented by the other commanders. That same year, Himmler established Germany’s first concentration camp at Dachau, where political prisoners—people considered as 50

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Heinrich Himmler

opponents or threats to the Nazis—could be held. It would be the forerunner of what was to appear later across Europe. In early 1934, Hitler and the other Nazi leaders increasingly considered the traditional leadership of the regular German army, the SA, as a threat to Nazi rule. Hitler assigned Himmler and several other highranking party members to kill the commander of the SA, Ernst Rohm, and other senior SA officials. On June 30, 1934, Himmler and the others carried out the order, executing Rohm and others. The following day, the SS became a military organization fully independent from the SA; Himmler was its leader. No one dared to question Himmler for his actions. Himmler’s span of influence continued to grow throughout the 1930s. In 1936, Hitler gave Himmler and the SS control over all German local law enforcement organizations. The German secret police unit also came under Himmler’s leadership. Himmler now enjoyed vast police powers in Germany and additional territories as Germany gained control of neighboring countries without open conflict. Himmler focused on security and espionage (secretly gathering and analyzing of information about potential enemies) throughout the region.

World War II World War II broke out in September 1939 when Hitler unleashed Germany’s massive war machine consisting of the latest in armored vehicles, tanks, and combat aircraft together with very large, wellequipped ground forces, which quickly overran Poland. Hitler wanted more than a military occupation of Poland, he wanted to destroy Polish society and replace it with German society. Himmler and the SS were charged with the task of eliminating Polish society. Himmler oversaw the construction of more concentration camps, where those people considered by the Nazis to be undesirable could be rounded up and imprisoned. The targeted people included Jews, Roma, priests, homosexual males, political leaders, Communist party members, and any others the Nazis held a racial or religious prejudice against. Not only were these peoples considered political opponents, but also threats to the purity of the German race. Jews comprised such a large part of Polish society that the Germans needed to round them up and isolate them in crowded neighborhoods called ghettos before shipping them to camps. As Himmler remained in the background, his SS troops—dressed in their pressed black uniforms, Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

51

Heinrich Himmler

Heinrich Himmler (left) inspects Russian prisoners of war at a Nazi concentration camp. # COR BI S.

black caps, shiny black boots, and wearing swastika (a key Nazi symbol believed associated with the mythical ancient Aryan race) armbands— terrorized these crowded ghettos. As a show of extreme prejudicial cruelty, they murdered, raped, and robbed the Jews trapped in the ghettos as they rampaged through the ghettos’ streets. Himmler’s responsibilities greatly expanded again in June 1941, when Germany launched a massive surprise assault against its ally, the Soviet Union. As the German army swept across previously Soviet-controlled territories, Himmler was charged with administering those newly gained lands and their peoples. As in Poland, the goal of the Nazis was to destroy the Soviet communist system and its society. In doing this, they wished to rid the population of the undesirables as in Poland, including Jews, Slavs, and Roma. Himmler chose a particularly bloody approach. 52

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Heinrich Himmler

He sent out mobile volunteer death squads. These units searched out the targeted people and then gathered them on the outskirts of towns, where they would shoot them all as a group, execution style. The bodies were then buried in mass graves or burned in piles.

The Final Solution During the 1930s the Germans under Hitler made life as unbearable as possible for German Jews to try to force them to leave the country of their own accord. Between 1933 and 1941, the number of Jews in Germany declined from 500,000 to 164,000. However, fewer countries were willing to accept more Jews in large numbers as time passed due to antiSemitism in their societies. By late 1941, it was no longer effective to force Jews to leave. Millions of Jews were detained by the Germans, the highest concentration being in Poland. The Nazi leadership, including Himmler, decided the only option of eliminating the Jews was by mass extermination. They referred to this option as the Final Solution to the Jewish Problem. On January 20, 1942, Himmler’s assistant, Reinhard Heydrich (1904–1942), led a meeting of Nazi leadership known as the Wannsee Conference. They were to decide how to carry out the extermination, or genocide (killing of an entire race or particular population of people). The resulting plan was to transport the Jews from the ghettos by train to concentration camps specially equipped with gas chambers for killing large numbers of people at a time and crematoriums for burning their bodies. Many of the captives would be used as slave laborers for industries located at the camps until they died from exhaustion, malnourishment, or exposure to the harsh Polish winter conditions. The young, elderly, and infirm (sick) were to be killed as soon as they arrived in camp. Himmler ordered all gold teeth to be removed from the bodies to help pay for the camp expenses. The entire extermination process would operate with the cold efficiency of an industry and in complete secrecy. Gas chambers were even disguised as large shower rooms. Though naturally a timid person, Himmler became the most feared man in Germany. He made sure the SS carried out anything Hitler ordered, no matter how evil the task. One example of his ruthlessness occurred in 1942, when Heydrich was killed by Czech resistance fighters in Prague. In reprisal, Himmler had every male in the region killed. By 1943, the SS, which included thirty-five divisions or eight hundred thousand armed troops, had grown in size to rival the regular Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

53

Heinrich Himmler

German army. Himmler even began plans for SS industries, such as tank production. However, the existing German war production minister blocked those plans not wanting to see the SS expand any further. In response, Himmler ordered what resulted in an unsuccessful attempt to have the minister killed in February 1944. Himmler also made plans for a guerilla (an irregular combat unit) force in the event that Germany should lose the war. The guerillas would continue fighting for the German Nazi cause after the war officially ended. With expanded SS capabilities, Himmler assumed field command of combat units for a while in late 1944. First he commanded troops in the Alsace region of France against U.S. and French troops. He then moved to the eastern front against Soviet troops. Given his lack of previous battlefield experience, he was ineffective in leading on the field of combat. Hitler soon brought him back to the home front to command troops stationed there. Hitler expanded Himmler’s powers in other ways each year up to and through 1944 appointing him as Germany’s interior minister in charge of overseeing activities within Germany. To many, Himmler clearly seemed to be the mostly likely successor to Hitler if anything should happen to the German dictator. By the spring of 1945, it was becoming clear to Himmler and others that defeat in the war was unavoidable. On his own and behind Hitler’s back, Himmler decided to seek negotiations for peace with the Allies. Using a Swedish contact, Himmler transmitted an offer for surrender to the Allied commander, U.S. general Dwight Eisenhower (1890–1969). In return, Himmler requested a promise of freedom from prosecution. Himmler even gave some Jews a last-minute reprieve (pardon) from death in hopes that would win him favor with the Allied leadership. However, Eisenhower ignored the offer and declared Himmler a war criminal. Himmler’s attempt to surrender soon came to Hitler’s attention. Accusing Himmler of being a traitor to the Nazi cause, Hitler stripped Himmler of all commands and rank. Hitler committed suicide the following day as Allied troops were closing in. Himmler was now a wanted man by the Allies and banished by the Nazis. Hoping to secretly escape from Germany, Himmler wandered for several days near the Danish border, posing as a member of a local police force. However, his forged identification papers aroused suspicion of a British patrol unit. They took him into custody on May 21, 1945. His true identity quickly became known. He was shocked that once they knew his identity he was still treated as a common prisoner rather than with the respect due an elite officer. 54

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Heinrich Himmler

The Allies joined Himmler with other German leaders destined to stand trial at Nuremburg, Germany, on war crimes (violating international laws of war) charges. However, on May 23, before he could be interrogated, Himmler committed suicide by swallowing a potassium cyanide capsule he had been hiding in his mouth. The Allies buried him in a secret location so that Nazi sympathizers could not use his burial location as a gathering spot and place of inspiration. In an ironic twist, a great-niece of Himmler’s later married the son of a Holocaust survivor who lived in Israel. The numbers of people killed at Himmler’s death camps in Poland were staggering. At Auschwitz alone, between 1.1 and 1.6 million people were killed. Some eight thousand people were killed at Auschwitz each day during its operation. Over 200,000 Gypsies were also killed at Auschwitz. At the Treblinka camp which was operated for seventeen months a staff of 120 Germans killed between 750,000 and 900,000. Belzec operated for ten months and claimed the lives of nearly 500,000 Jews. About 250,000 were killed at Sobibor. At some camps, gruesome medical experiments were performed on live victims, such as seeing the effects of freezing to death, testing various drugs, and performing amputations without medication. Some prisoners threw themselves into the electrified fences to give themselves a mercifully quick death. As Soviet troops were approaching Auschwitz in January 1945, the Germans marched 60,000 remaining prisoners 35 miles before boarding them on trains to other concentration camps. Approximately 15,000 died on the way. When the killings ended at some camps, all traces of the camps were removed and farms were built on the sites.

For More Information B O O KS

Altman, Linda J. Hitler’s Rise to Power and the Holocaust. Berkeley Heights, NJ: Enslow, 2003. Breitman, Richard. The Architect of Genocide: Himmler and the Final Solution. New York: Knopf, 1991. Gilbert, Martin. The Holocaust: A History of the Jews of Europe during the Second World War. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1986. Hale, Christopher. Himmler’s Crusade: The Nazi Expedition to Find the Origins of the Aryan Race. Hoboken, NJ: J. Wiley, 2003. Padfield, Peter. Himmler. New York: MJF Books, 1996. W E B SI T E

United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. http://www.ushmm.org (accessed on December 11, 2006). Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

55

John Hume B OR N: January 18, 1937  Derry, Northern Ireland

Northern Irish statesman

‘‘All conflict is about difference, whether the difference is race, religion, or nationality . . . . Difference is an accident of birth and it should therefore never be the source of hatred or conflict. The answer to difference is to respect it.’’

ohn Hume became a social activist and political leader in his native Northern Ireland to resolve the religious prejudice that initially drove the conflict between Britain and the Republic of Ireland over the control of Northern Ireland. He served in the European Parliament (government) and was a strong advocate of the European Union. The European Union is an organization of European nations formed in 1992 to promote political and economic partnerships. Hume was a cofounder of the Social Democratic and Labor Party (SDLP), a nationalist party seeking civil rights for Catholics in Northern Ireland, and was instrumental in shaping the Anglo-Irish Agreement of 1985, the first attempt to bring an end to Northern Ireland strife by giving the Republic of Ireland some influence in Northern Ireland affairs.

J

John Hume. AP I MA GES .

57

John Hume

One of the most effective leaders of the twentieth century, Hume gained respect on both sides of the peace process in Ireland and was one of the main authors of the Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement of 1998 that eventually brought peace to the region. That year, Hume was jointly awarded the Nobel Peace Prize along with Ulster Unionist leader David Trimble (1944–). Hume was also awarded the International Gandhi Peace Prize in 2001 for his efforts to find a peaceful solution to the conflict in Northern Ireland.

The boy from Derry John Hume was born on January 18, 1937, to Sam and Annie Doherty Hume in the predominantly (mostly) Catholic city of Derry, on the island of Ireland. It was the same year that most of the island known as the Irish Free State declared independence from Britain and became known as Eire, which is Irish for ‘‘Ireland.’’ It would later become known as the Republic of Ireland. Derry, however, was in the part of the island that remained under British rule. For this reason, Derry is also known as Londonderry because it is in the British-ruled northern counties of the divided island. Hume’s Scottish ancestors were Protestants who moved to Ireland in the mid-nineteenth century and, through marriage, joined the Roman Catholic faith. John was the eldest of seven children. Sam Hume worked as a civil servant before World War II (1939–45). However, high wartime wages in industry drew him to work at the local shipyards as a riveter. When the war ended, so did his employment. The family then existed on Sam’s unemployment checks and Annie’s earnings in the local shirt-making industry. Although the Humes lived in poverty, the children were raised with a sense of community and encouraged to help others in need. As the eldest son, John was responsible for adding to the household income. He had an evening newspaper route by the time he was eight years old. At the same age, he was chosen as an altar boy (attendant to the altar during worship service) at St. Eugene’s Catholic cathedral in Derry. It was an honor that young Hume proudly earned. Hume was among the first generation in Northern Ireland to enjoy free public education. He was a good student and went on to study at St. Columb’s College in Derry and at St. Patrick’s College in Maynooth. Hume originally intended to study for the priesthood. But his interests changed, and he graduated in 1958 from the National University of Ireland with a double major in French and history. He also spent several summers studying in France at St. Malo, Brittany, and the Institut 58

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

John Hume

Catholique in Paris. On December 10, 1960, John married Pat Hone. The couple had five children. They were active in promoting their shared public causes over the decades. In 1964, Hume received a master’s degree in history from St. Patrick’s College in Maynooth before returning to Derry to teach school.

A divided population Derry is located in Northern Ireland, where deep political divisions existed between the Unionists and the Nationalists throughout most of the twentieth century. Unionists, mostly Protestant citizens, wanted Northern Ireland to remain part of Great Britain, with London as its political base. Nationalists, who were mostly Catholic, favored Irish independence. They wanted to reunite the provinces of Ireland that had been divided since the Anglo-Irish Treaty of 1921. Protestants held the majority of power in Northern Ireland’s parliament located at Stormont, near Belfast. Therefore, Stormont was seen as a symbol of oppression by the Catholic community. With these deep political divisions along religious lines, religious segregation existed in Derry. This meant that Catholics and Protestants were kept separate in public places. This separation resulted in varying economic and social conditions between Catholics and Protestants, conditions which left Catholic residents feeling like second-class citizens with restricted job and educational opportunities and living in impoverished neighborhoods. The Protestant majority lived on the east bank of the fast-flowing Foyle River that divided Derry. The city also had placed most public buildings and services, including both hospitals, on the east side. This left the unemployment office, police station, and courthouse on the west bank, where the Catholic minority lived. This discrimination led to a sense of hopelessness for Catholic young people, whose lives were blighted by poverty. Many families and youth left Derry in search of a better life.

A bid for unification When Hume returned to Derry, he began searching for solutions to the divisions between the Catholics and Protestants. He wanted to unite the divided city and offer Catholics the means to improve their future. At this time, credit unions were an emerging community banking system that not only encouraged savings and investments, but also provided lowinterest loans to members. The concept appealed to Catholics. Regular Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

59

John Hume

banks, largely managed by Protestants, gladly accepted their savings but did not always want their business when they needed a loan. Catholics were more likely to be unemployed and were more likely to receive lower wages if they did find work. Bankers stereotyped (forming an opinion of each member of a group based on their common traits) them as probable risks if money was loaned out. Demonstrating an understanding of their clients, credit unions provided an additional form of insurance. If a member were to die with debts, those debts would be cleared. If, on the other hand, a member had savings in the credit union when they died, that amount was doubled and the money was distributed to the family. Hume saw the credit union movement both as a unifying force for Catholics and Protestants as well as a way to help the Catholics cope with money issues. In 1960, Hume and four cofounders in Derry joined together and organized the first credit union branch in Northern Ireland. Because of his commitment to the ideas of the movement, Hume was selected as its first treasurer. He traveled throughout Northern Ireland to promote the community aspect of the credit union. He argued that if they would help each other in financial affairs, they could tackle other problems together as well. Hume successfully convinced the Catholic community but failed to win over many Protestants despite his policy of cooperation and inclusion that was meant to unite the two traditions in a common cause. The gulf between the two religious communities widened in 1965, when Derry lost its bid to have Northern Ireland’s second university established there. As chairman of the University for Derry Campaign, Hume came face to face with the political reality in Northern Ireland. It was revealed that some Protestant political leaders had secretly advised the government against choosing Derry. They feared losing their majority status and control if the university came to town and the town grew in numbers. They preferred that the Catholic population remain a minority in Derry, even if that meant losing the university bid. Hume decided he needed to personally run for public office in order to change the face of discrimination and promote unity in his hometown.

The Troubles Hume became a leading figure in the Northern Ireland Civil Rights Association (NICRA), founded in 1967 to promote civil rights (legal protections and privileges given to all citizens in a country) for Catholics in Northern Ireland. NICRA joined with the student-led People’s 60

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

John Hume

Democracy (PD) to press for reform in the country’s political system. Among the reforms they proposed were changes in the discriminatory manner in which public housing was assigned and change in unfair voting laws. Public demonstrations against the existing policies started out peaceful. However, rioting and violence soon followed on the part of both groups. The long-standing division between the Nationalists and the Unionists deepened, driven by activities of militant groups from the Republic of Ireland to the south. Most notable was the political party Sinn Fein and its armed branch, the Irish Republican Army (IRA). The oldest political organization in Ireland, Sinn Fein was organized as a political party in 1905 to secure Irish unity and independence. It reorganized in the 1960s and launched a political campaign to gain support on issues other than separation. The following period in Irish history, known as The Troubles, soon become very deadly as violence continued sporadically for thirty years. Throughout this period, the British Army suffered almost 500 casualties, more than in any other conflict since World War II. More than 3,500 people, both civilian and military, were killed on both sides. In 1968, the government introduced a reform program in response to the NICRA protests. The proposed program split the Unionist community. This division allowed several civil rights activists in the Nationalist party, including Hume, to gain office in the parliamentary elections of February 1969. Hume took his place at Stormont as a Member of Parliament (MP). With his own political standing increased, the following year he helped found the Social Democratic and Labor Party (SDLP). During this period, Britain retained ultimate control of security in Northern Ireland and steadily expanded its power in the region. For example, in 1971 the British government introduced a measure that allowed imprisonment without trial of any suspected terrorists from the Republic. The IRA escalated the violence in response to increased British control. They waged their campaign to drive the British out of Northern Ireland and unite the thirty-two counties on the island into a single independent nation. In March 1972, Britain suspended the Northern Ireland parliament at Stormont and took complete control of the country. A power-sharing leadership position was established through the Sunningdale Agreement between the Unionists and Nationalists. Hume was selected the Minister of Commerce. However, the power-sharing government fell apart in 1974 because of the lack of cooperation between the two groups. Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

61

John Hume

The Belfast Agreement of 1998 The Belfast Agreement is also known as the Good Friday (the Friday before Easter that commemorates the Crucifixion of Jesus) Agreement because the plan for the peaceful future of Northern Ireland was reached on Good Friday, April 10, 1998. Negotiators included representatives of the governments of Britain, Northern Ireland, and the Republic of Ireland. The negotiations were conducted with the help of other international diplomats. In order to include everyone and ensure a stable peace, the talks included Sinn Fein as well as political representatives of Protestant paramilitary organizations. The Belfast Agreement reaffirmed the Anglo-Irish Agreement of 1985 that guaranteed that the political status of Northern Ireland could only be changed by a majority vote in Northern Ireland. The plan established an Equality Commission and a Human Rights Commission. They addressed the issues of reform in the criminal justice system and policing and help for victims of violence. The Agreement proposed three levels or strands of interconnected institutions to govern Northern

Ireland and ensure peace for its people. Strand One of the agreement arranged for the creation of the Northern Ireland Assembly and its elected executive position. Strand One was to deal with the citizens of Northern Ireland itself. Strand Two was to maintain productive relationships between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. The two governments would work together within the North-South Ministerial Conference (NSMC) on all cross-border issues. Strand Three established a British-Irish InterGovernmental Conference to promote cooperation between all members of the British Isles. A large margin of voters in both Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland approved the Belfast Agreement. However, the IRA and other opponents of the Agreement continued their terrorist activities for several more years. However, in 2005 the IRA declared an end to their campaign and acceptance of the political arrangements created by the Belfast Agreement. They disarmed their members and destroyed their store of weapons.

In 1979, Hume was chosen as leader of the SDLP and elected to the European Parliament. Hume was elected in 1983 to the British Parliament as a Member of Parliament for the Foyle region that largely consists of the city of Derry. He used his parliamentary position to bring international attention to the call for peace and reconciliation in Northern Ireland. Hume’s diplomatic efforts to help end the violence were instrumental in shaping the Anglo-Irish Agreement of 1985. The agreement allowed the Republic of Ireland a limited say in Northern Ireland’s political matters. However, many Unionists, Nationalists, and Irish Republicans rejected the agreement and The Troubles continued. Hume reopened negotiations with Sinn Fein and the government in 1988. The talks resulted in a temporary ceasefire that lasted from 1994 to 1996. Renewed peace talks began in 1997 and resulted in the Belfast 62

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

John Hume

John Hume (left) shared the Novel Peace Prize of 1998 with UUP leader David Trimble (right). At center is Irish activist and U2 lead singer Bono. # LE WI S AL AN/ CO RB IS S YG MA.

(Good Friday) Agreement of 1998 (see box). Hume had long been criticized for negotiating with terrorist groups. However, it was his contacts and political lobbying that proved critical toward pushing the peace talks along in the 1990s in Northern Ireland. As a result of his long and finally successful efforts, Hume shared the Nobel Peace Prize of 1998 with Ulster Unionist Party (UUP) leader David Trimble, who was leader of the UUP from 1995 to 2005. They were recognized for their leadership in promoting peace in Northern Ireland. Hume resigned from the leadership of the SDLP in 2001, the same year he was awarded the International Gandhi Peace Prize.

For More Information B O O KS

Arthur, Paul, and Jeffery, Keith. Northern Ireland Since 1968. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers Inc., 1996. Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

63

John Hume

O’Malley, Padraig. Biting at the Grave: The Irish Hunger Strikes and the Politics of Despair. Boston, MA: Beacon Press, 1990. Routledge, Paul. John Hume: A Biography. London: HarperCollins Publishers, 1997. Townshend, Charles. Ireland in the Twentieth Century. New York: Oxford University Press Inc., 1998. White, Barry. John Hume: Statesman of The Troubles. Belfast: The Blackstaff Press Limited, 1984. WEB SIT ES

‘‘John Hume, The Nobel Peace Prize 1998: Nobel Lecture.’’ The Nobel Foundation. http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1998 (accessed on December 11, 2006).

64

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Saddam Hussein B OR N: April 28, 1937  Al-Awja, Iraq D I E D : December 30, 2006  Baghdad, Iraq

Iraqi president

‘‘Just as your beautiful skyscrapers were destroyed and caused your grief, beautiful buildings and precious homes crumbled over their owners in Lebanon, Palestine and Iraq because of American weapons . . . ’’

addam Hussein was a leading member of the Iraqi Baath Party and played a key role in the 1968 coup (military takeover) that brought the party to power. Saddam served as vice president in the Iraqi government for eleven years before becoming president of Iraq in 1979. In this position, Saddam was also chairman of the Revolutionary Command Council and commander-in-chief of the armed forces. His reign spanned the Iran-Iraq War (1980–88) and the Gulf War (1991) before he was deposed (forced to leave his position) by the United States and its allies during the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Saddam faced a war crimes tribunal (a special court established to try those accused of violating international laws of war) after his capture by U.S. troops. He was charged with numerous crimes, including genocide (the deliberate destruction of a

S

Saddam Hussein. A P IM AGE S.

65

Saddam Hussein

racial, religious, or cultural group), for the death of potentially thousands of ethnic Kurds in the 1980s.

Baathist beginnings Saddam Hussein Abd al-Majid al-Tikriti was born into a Sunni Arab family in Al-Awja, near the town of Tikrit in northern Iraq. Almost all Muslims (those who follow Islam religion) belong to the two major sects or branches of Islam, Sunni and Shiı´tes. The Sunnis and Shiı´tes originally split over a dispute about which person should rightfully succeed the prophet Muhammad at his death in 632 CE . Hussein’s father, Hussein al-Majid, was a poor and landless peasant who disappeared. He was presumed dead six months before Saddam was born. His mother was Subha Tulfah al-Mussallat. She named her son Saddam, meaning ‘‘one who confronts’’ or, ‘‘the stubborn one.’’ He was given his father’s personal name of Hussein, also spelled Husayn, or Hussain. Abd al-Majid was his grandfather’s personal name and alTikrit refers to one who was born and raised in or near Tikrit. Tikrit is located on the northern bank of the Tigris River. It had once been the location of a fortress that was a center of defense against foreign invaders. By the twentieth century, Tikrit had fallen into decay and was notable only for the castle ruins overlooking the town. Saddam’s official birth date is listed as April 28, 1937. Because precise records were not kept in the region where he was born, particularly in peasant families, it is possible the date is inaccurate by several years either way. When Saddam was born Iraq was politically unstable. A constitutional monarchy (rule by a single person) had been established in 1932 when Iraq became an independent state. Britain administered the country until that time and had two military bases in Iraq. It upheld a variety of treaties that allowed the British special political status. To achieve true independence, Iraq nationalists (those seeking independence from foreign influence) wanted to eliminate the British presence and influence in Iraq and other Arab lands of the Middle East. World War II (1939–45) brought the two sides into armed conflict in 1941 in what was known as the Rashid Ali Coup. The failed coup resulted in the defeat of the nationalists. The authority of the British-supported monarchy in Iraq was strengthened by their victory. Many nationalists who participated in the uprising were either jailed or executed. Saddam’s maternal uncle, Khairallah Talfah, was an army officer and an avid supporter of Arab nationalism. He participated in the ill-fated 66

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Saddam Hussein

uprising and was jailed for five years after being discharged from the army. Saddam had been living with his uncle, who was his foster father in his earliest years. When Khairallah was imprisoned, three-year-old Saddam was sent back to a small village near Tikrit to live with his mother. She had remarried in the meantime and Saddam had three half-brothers through their union. His stepfather was a brother of Saddam’s late father. He treated the young boy harshly on his return. His stepfather took great pleasure in humiliating Saddam and would send the boy out to steal for him. He beat Saddam for any failure. Saddam was also bullied by the local village boys and often mocked for being fatherless. His only true pleasure was in the company of a horse that he truly loved. Saddam’s own circumstances and the jailing of his uncle left him with deep resentments against the monarchy and its foreign influences.

The revolution Saddam ran away from home at the age of ten and returned to live with his uncle after his release from prison in 1947. Khairallah would have a lifelong influence on Saddam both personally and politically. Khairallah’s own son Adnan was three years younger than Saddam and soon became his best friend. Saddam began attending school for the first time, but he was not an able student. He graduated from primary school in 1955 and moved with his uncle to Baghdad at the age of eighteen. Saddam was enrolled at Karkh high school, a secondary school in the city. When Saddam arrived in Baghdad in the mid-1950s, national fervor (intense feeling) and conspiracies, or plots, against the established government were still very much alive in the streets. Revolutionary sentiment (belief in the righteousness of rebellion) was further heightened throughout the Middle East with the Suez Crisis in 1955. Egypt seized complete control of the Suez Canal, a vital waterway for world trade connecting the Indian Ocean with the Mediterranean Sea, from Britain. Now Egypt blocked all Israeli shipping from reaching its destination. Israel and its allies immediately launched an attack defeating Egyptian forces. Despite Egypt’s quick defeat at the hands of British, French, and Israeli forces, Egypt’s actions were seen as a heroic act against the West. A wave of revolutions followed in the coming decades as the Arab world moved to unite politically. The Suez Crisis brought a passionate response in Baghdad that resulted in anti-West and Israeli riots in the fall of 1956. Wide public dissatisfaction with the Iraqi government grew since it did not join other Arab countries. Critics assumed that it was merely a puppet Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

67

Saddam Hussein

The Baath Party The Baath Party was established in Damascus, Syria, in the early 1940s but remained a minor political influence until the late 1950s. Also ` or Baath, ` spelled Bath the word can be translated as meaning revival, resurgence, or renewal. The party’s pan-Arab motto is ‘‘One Arab Nation with an Eternal Mission.’’ Seeking Arab unity in a single nation, the party’s ultimate goal was to promote the spiritual rebirth of Arabs. However, divisions arose over ideology (guiding principles) and personal rivalries. Ultimately, the party accepted unity of purpose among Arab leaders rather than the actual unification of all Arab countries into a single country. The birth of the Baath Party can be traced to the early twentieth century when Middle East boundaries were established by the world’s great powers. These boundaries served the particular

interests of each power at the time and kept the Arab world divided. In the mid-twentieth century, Arab nations decided to eliminate all traces of colonialism (control by foreign nations) and restore Arab pride. In particular, Baathists believed the creation of Israel in 1948 was specifically designed to keep the Arab world fragmented. They vowed that Israel must not be allowed to exist. All party branches are combined to form the party’s Congress. It elects the regional representatives from branches in the various Arab countries and they comprise the international council known as the National Command. It is the supreme decision-making body in the Baath Party. It was the dominant party in Iraq for several decades from 1963 until 2003 when it was outlawed by the occupying Western forces.

government (one controlled by a foreign country) of the West. The capital city, which Saddam now called home, plunged into turbulent competition over control of Iraq. Saddam applied to the prestigious Baghdad Military Academy where his uncle had graduated. However, he failed the entrance examinations. In 1957, at the age of twenty, he joined the Baath Party (see box). The Baath Party was a revolutionary, pan-Arab (represents all Arabs) political party which Khairallah supported. Its motto was ‘‘One Arab Nation with an Eternal Mission.’’ Finally, in 1958, army officers in Iraq overthrew the monarchist government and established the Republic of Iraq. Baathists opposed the new government and planned to assassinate the new prime minister. However, the plot failed and the conspirators, including Saddam, fled the country into exile. Saddam escaped to Syria and from there to Egypt. In Egypt, he studied law at Cairo University but left before earning a degree. While in Egypt, Saddam married his maternal (on his mother’s side) first cousin, Sajida Khairallah Tulfah. They had five children. 68

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Saddam Hussein

Rise to power In 1963, another regime change resulted and Iraq was now placed into the hands of army officers who had ties to the Baath Party. The new government, however, was deeply divided politically and lasted just nine months before being overthrown. During this time when the Baath Party was in power, Saddam returned to Iraq with other exiled Iraqis. Before long, they were forced underground (into secret operations) because of the political tensions. He became a member of the regional command of the Baath Party. In this capacity, Saddam played a major role in organizing the party to stage a second coup. This coup took place in July of 1968 and successfully brought the Baathists back to power. In payment for his contributions, Saddam was named vice-chairman of the Revolutionary Command Council and vice president of Iraq. Saddam served as vice president from 1969 until 1979, when the aging ruling president Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr (1914–1982) resigned due to failing health and being pressured by Hussein. On July 16, 1979, Saddam became the president of Iraq, chairman of the Revolutionary Command Council, and commander-in-chief of the armed forces. He quickly moved to eliminate any challengers to his authority and implemented policies that brought social and economic sectors under government control. Saddam’s government programs included compulsory (required) primary education, the founding of new universities, and a socialized (government controlled and operated) medical program. Among Middle Eastern countries, Iraq became a leader in providing social services, such as healthcare, to its people. Saddam sought to combine pan-Arabism with Iraqi nationalism. He saw himself in the role of leader in the united Arab world. During the 1970s, Iraq invested much of its oil profits into industrial expansion in order to help expand the economy. At the same time, Iraq built strong ties with the Soviet Union and the Eastern bloc of European nations. It distanced itself from Western governments, such as Western Europe and the United States. Despite his pan-Arab policies, Saddam created a Western-style legal system which gave women freedoms and rights to high-level jobs in government and industry. This made Iraq the only country in the Persian Gulf region whose legal system was not ruled according to traditional Sharia (Islamic) law. Unlike women in Western-style society, under Sharia law women may not be allowed to vote or participate in politics, to freely mix socially with others, or to wear what clothes they choose. Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

69

Saddam Hussein

Claiming Kuwait Iraqi society has long been divided along lines of ethnicity, language, and religion. Saddam’s political efforts of modernization under the Baath Party leadership depended on the support of Sunni Muslims. Sunnis comprised roughly 20 percent of the population of Iraq. Shiı´te Muslims were the majority religion and regarded Sunnis as enemies of the faith. As a result, Saddam’s government was met with resistance due to its secular (not related to religion) policies. Iraqi Kurds in northern Iraq brought a special challenge to Hussein. They are Sunni Muslims but not Arabs. They wanted self-determination, which meant having their own country. The Kurds had seen some success in gaining independence from the Iraqi government, in large part due to help from neighboring Iran in their separatist struggle. In 1975, Saddam negotiated the Algiers Agreement with the shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi Shah (1919–1980). This agreement resulted in Iran’s withdrawal of support for the Kurds. Tensions between Iraq and Iran increased greatly following the Iranian Revolution of 1979. The Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini (1902–1989; see entry) helped depose the shah of Iran and established the Islamic Republic of Iran. He called for Islamic revolutionaries across the Muslim world to follow Iran’s example. Tensions across the Middle East escalated. Border clashes between Iran and Iraqi forces were followed by assassination attempts on top Iraqi officials. Saddam responded by attacking the oil-rich, Iranian-held land of Khuzestan in southwest Iraq, along the Persian Gulf, in September 1980. The area had a sizable Arab minority and Saddam declared it a new province of Iraq. The invasion marked the beginning of the Iran-Iraq War which lasted eight years. The Islamic, Arab, and international communities were divided over their response to the war. However, sentiment shifted toward Iran when it was learned that Iraq had used chemical weapons against Iranian forces and Kurdish separatists (people seeking to form a new nation from a part of one currently existing). The Iran-Iraq War became one of the longest and most brutal and destructive wars of the twentieth century. One of the greatest atrocities of the war was an Iraqi army attack on the Iraqi Kurdish town of Halabja in March 1988. Halabja is located 150 miles northeast of Baghdad and less than 10 miles from the Iranian border. Iran had been supplying Kurdish rebels with arms to fight for independence from Iraq. Hussein and Ali Hassan al-Majid (1941–), who commanded Iraq forces in northern Iraq, were regularly directing attacks 70

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Saddam Hussein

on the Kurdish populations in the region from 1986 to 1989 in a strategy known as the Al-Anfal Campaign. On March 16 and 17, Iraq war planes continuously dropped bombs containing various poisonous toxic agents including mustard gas and cyanide. The devastation was so complete that information on the attack did not reach the outside world for several days. Journalists visiting the area soon afterwards reported that life ended suddenly in the town with many people dying almost instantly, left in the positions they were when the poisonous gas engulfed them. Many others died a slow agonizing death as the poison deteriorated their lungs. It was the largest-scale chemical weapons attack against a civilian population in modern history. Estimates of deaths ranged up to five thousand Kurds as reported by the U.S. State Department. Another ten thousand people were blinded or severely injured by the gases. Investigations over the next few years by various organizations including Human Rights Watch indicated the Iraqi army was to blame for the mass killing of civilians at Halabja. They also estimated that approximately 180,000 Kurds died during the Al-Anfal Campaign overall. However, Western powers, including the United States, which backed Hussein in the war against Iran, tried to shift the blame on Halabja to Iran at the time.

Gulf War Only two years after battling Iran, Hussein initiated another conflict. This time, his actions attracted the attention of the international community. On August 2, 1990, Hussein’s Iraqi forces invaded the neighboring nation of Kuwait. Kuwait is a small Arab monarchy located on the coast of the Persian Gulf. Saudi Arabia lies to the south and Iraq to the north. Iraq had long-standing claims to the oil-rich country of Kuwait but the Iraqi Baathist regime had recognized its independence since 1963. Tensions over the exact border location, oil pricing, and the claim that Kuwait was illegally slant-drilling petroleum under Iraq’s border prompted the invasion. Slant drilling refers to drilling at an angle from the surface wells to reach pockets of oil below the earth’s surface. With the invasion, Iraq doubled its control of the world’s crude oil reserves to 20 percent. The United Nations (UN) Security Council, the part of the international organization that makes decisions aimed at maintaining peace between nations, gave Hussein a deadline to withdraw from Kuwait. It also approved the use of force if Iraq did not comply. Meanwhile, Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

71

Saddam Hussein

international troops gathered along the Saudi Arabian border with Kuwait and Iraq to block any further advances of the Iraqi army while UN negotiations proceeded. Early in 1991, a coalition (of many countries) of forces led by the United States and Britain liberated Kuwait, but not before Hussein’s forces torched the oil wells across Kuwait as they retreated. Following his defeat, Hussein was faced with UN economic sanctions (restrictions) that included blockades of its oil exports. He agreed to abandon all chemical and biological weapons and submit to inspections within the country by UN observers. The economy and state infrastructure broke down as Iraqi citizens faced food rationing and the difficulties of living under strict military control. Those who could, fled to live abroad. The war had further divided the ethnic and religious factions in Iraq. Any uprisings were quickly repressed by Hussein in order to maintain control. The death toll due to the violence in the aftermath of the war was estimated at around thirty thousand persons. The U.S. government accused Hussein of continuous violations of the terms of the Gulf War’s ceasefire agreement. It also suspected Iraq was developing weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) and other banned weaponry. In December 1996, the deteriorating economic situation in Iraq prompted UN officials to adopt a program known as Oil-for-Food to feed its people. The program was intended to allow Iraq to sell its oil on the world market in exchange for food, medicine, and other humanitarian needs for ordinary Iraqi citizens without allowing Iraq to rebuild its military. However, increased tension over weapons inspections resulted in American and British missile strikes on Iraq between 1997 and 1998. By early 2001, their war planes were striking harder at suspected weapons sites near the capital city of Baghdad. UN weapons inspections considered inconclusive by the United States and Britain in January 2003 led to a buildup of military forces around Iraq. Most governments and the UN Security Council did not back military intervention and counseled for continued inspections. On March 17, 2003, the United States issued an ultimatum (final demand) to Iraq, calling for regime change (change in government leadership) within twenty-four hours. The ultimatum was rejected and air attacks on Baghdad began three days later. U.S. and British forces entered Iraq from Kuwait on April 9, 2003. They deposed Saddam as president of Iraq. Saddam and his aides went underground, but Saddam was eventually captured in a small town south of Tikrit on December 13 of that year. 72

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Saddam Hussein

A video image shows Iraqi president Saddam Hussein urging the people of Baghdad to ‘‘strike the enemy with force’’ in a speech broadcast on Iraqi television on April 4, 2003. He predicted victory over the invading U.S. and British troops. # RE UTE RS NE WM EDI A I NC. /C OR BIS .

Following his capture, Hussein and other members of the Baath Party became the key subjects of the Iraqi Special Tribunal. The tribunal was established to try Iraqi citizens charged with various serious crimes between 1968 and 2003 including crimes against humanity (murder of large groups of people), war crimes (those which violated international laws of war), and genocide (a deliberate destruction of a political or cultural human group). The trials involved hearings before five judges, no jury. Security became a major issue as one of the judges and two defense lawyers were assassinated in 2005 and 2006. Some world leaders, including top UN officials, believed Hussein could not receive a fair trial based on international standards (ability to offer a defense in front of a jury) in Iraq. For example, the judges included Shiite Muslims and other Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

73

Saddam Hussein

long-standing enemies of Hussein. The UN officials believed the International Criminal Court at The Hague, Amsterdam, or a UN war crimes court such as established in Rwanda would be more appropriate. However, Hussein’s trial remained in Iraq allowing the new Iraq government to seek justice for past crimes in its country. The first legal hearing in Saddam’s case was held on July 1, 2004. Hussein was accused of the 1988 poison attack at Halabja, the 1982 massacre of 148 Shiite Muslims in Dujail, invading Kuwait, ethnic cleansing by the removal of thousands of Kurds from the town of Kirkuk, and various actions against Kurds and other political opponents. On November 5, 2006, the court convicted Hussein and two other defendants of the 1982 massacre at Dujail and sentenced them to death by hanging. Saddam Hussein was hanged before dawn on December 30, 2006 in Baghdad, Iraq.

For More Information BOOKS

Anderson, Dale. Saddam Hussein. Minneapolis, MN: Lerner Publications, 2004. Balaghi, Shiva. Saddam Hussein: A Biography. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2006. Black, George. Genocide in Iraq: The Anfal Campaign Against the Kurds. New York: Human Rights Watch, 1993. Potter, Lawrence G., and Gary G. Sick, eds. Iran, Iraq, and the Legacies of War. New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2004. Shields, Charles J. Saddam Hussein. Philadelphia: Chelsea House Publishers, 2005. WEB SIT ES

‘‘Crimes Against Humanity: Iraqi Special Tribunal.’’ Human Rights First. http:// www.humanrightsfirst.org/international_justice/w_context/w_cont_10.htm (accessed on December 11, 2006). ‘‘The Iraqi Baath Party.’’ Aljazeera. http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/ AFBF5651-45AF-45E7-910E-ECA0AFEA24C1.htm (accessed on December 11, 2006). ‘‘Saddam’s Chemical Weapons Campaign: Halabja, March 16, 1988.’’ U.S. Department of State. http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/rls/18714.htm (accessed on December 11, 2006).

74

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Alija Izetbegovic B OR N: August 8, 1925  Bosanski Samac,

Kingdom of Serbs D I E D : October 19, 2003  Sarajevo, Bosnia and

Herzegovina

Bosnian president

‘‘Bosnia is a complicated country: three religions, three nations and those ‘others.’ Nationalism is strong in all three nations; in two of them there are a lot of racism, chauvinism, separatism; and now we are supposed to make a state out of that.’’

lija Izetbegovic (I-zet-beg-o-vic) was president of the nation of Bosnia and Herzegovina from 1990 to 2000. The decade of the 1990s was a time of great political and ethnic upheaval in the Bosnian region. He was first elected president of this Yugoslavia republic in December 1990 following the end of Communist domination of the region. Communism is a system of government governed by a single dominant political party that controls all aspects of society. Private ownership of property is prohibited and all religious practices are banned. Bosnia and Herzegovina was one of six republics of Yugoslavia at the time.

A

Alija Izetbegovic. A P IM AGE S.

The major ethnic groups in Yugoslavia were Serbs, Croats, Slovenes, Montenegrins, Albanians, and Bosnians. The Communist Party was replaced by a number of political parties. Each party was largely associated with a 75

Alija Izetbegovic

particular ethnic group. When Izetbegovic declared independence for Bosnia from Yugoslavia in April 1992, three years of bloody ethnic conflict followed between Serbs, Croats, and Bosnian Muslims.

A family of Muslims Izetbegovic was born in August 1925 in Bosanski Samac, a town located in northern Bosnia. He was one of five children. Izetbegovic’s father was an accountant and before Alija was born the family was well-to-do, living within the Serbian region of the Ottoman Empire (a vast Turkish empire comprising parts of Asia, Africa, and Europe, founded in the thirteenth century and dissolved after 1918). They were devout Muslims (worshipers of Islam). The Ottoman Turks had brought the Islamic religion to the region in the fifteenth century. They fled to Bosanski Samac in Bosnia after Serbia gained its political independence from the empire in 1918. They feared retaliation from the new leaders against those who prospered during the Ottoman rule. Izetbegovic’s grandfather was the mayor of Bosanski Samac. In 1929, when Izetbegovic was just four years old, his father declared bankruptcy and moved the family to the Bosnian city of Sarajevo. There Izetbegovic received his schooling. Ten years later in 1939, World War II (1939–45) began when German forces invaded Poland. Over the next few years, more European countries fell under German control. In 1941, German forces invaded Yugoslavia. Bosnia was placed under the rule of Croatia, where Germany had established a puppet government (a government controlled by a foreign country). Considerable ethnic violence occurred during the war. The Croatian government conducted mass murders of Serbs and Serbs massacred Bosnian Muslims and Croats. Still just a teenager, Izetbegovic joined a Muslim youth organization. It promoted a return to traditional Islamic values and rejection of nationalism (a very strong allegiance to a particular nation). With Germany still occupying Bosnia, he graduated from high school in 1943 and entered an agricultural school. He studied the next three years before becoming interested in law studies.

Promoting Islam in a communist state Near the end of the war in 1944, a multi-ethnic Yugoslav force led by Josip Broz Tito (1892–1980) forced out the Germans. He gained control of Yugoslavia and sought to end ethnic violence. Tito established a 76

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Alija Izetbegovic

communist government called the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and suppressed all ethnic and religious activities. Yugoslavia was under the direct influence of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union like other Eastern European communist governments created immediately after World War II. However, Tito was a strong ruler who maintained a greater degree of independence for Yugoslavia than was enjoyed by other nations. The new Yugoslav government imprisoned hundreds of thousands of ethnic Germans and those Yugoslavs who disagreed with his ethnic cleansing program to labor camps and executed tens of thousands. In 1946 Tito formed a secret police service (the UDBA) that executed Nazi collaborators, Catholic priests, and anyone who opposed the Communist-led government. His administration had become a virtual dictatorship. Izetbegovic had helped publish a dissident (opposed to the existing government) Islamic journal called Soldier of God in English. In 1946, the UDBA closed down the press and sent those involved with the publication to prison. Among them was Izetbegovic, who was convicted of hostile activity, including making anti-Soviet statements. In March 1946, he was sentenced to three years in prison. In 1949, Izetbegovic received his release from prison and enrolled in the University of Sarajevo, where he earned a law degree in 1956. For the next twenty-five years, he worked as a lawyer and advisor for two large public corporations in Sarajevo, one in construction and the other in communications. Izetbegovic married Halida Repovac and they had three children. One son, Bakir, later became the head of Izetbegovic’s security force. Izetbegovic resumed publishing dissident literature promoting the Bosnian Muslim perspective in Yugoslav politics and society. He argued for a more fundamentalist, or strict observance, approach based on Islamic principles. He did not want to see Bosnian Muslims become absorbed by Serbian and Croatian nationalism. He recorded his beliefs and concerns in a 1970 book, The Islamic Declaration. In it, Izetbegovic called for renewal of a strong adherence to an Islamic way of life. He argued for a united Islamic community based on the Qur’an (also known as the Koran, the main religious text of Islam), while promoting modern education and economic improvement. Many viewed his book as a radical statement since he condemned non-Islamic beliefs and societies. These viewpoints of the Bosnian Muslims like Izetbegovic were unpopular with Tito and his communist government. Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

77

Alija Izetbegovic

A longer prison term Tito died in 1980. Without a strong ruler like Tito around to keep ethnic tensions suppressed, social Bosnia is more formally referred to as Bosnia unrest began to surface. Also, anti-communist feeland Herzegovina. Bosnia refers to all of the ings developed in the region. Izetbegovic contribnation except for a small, mountainous region uted to this trend with his 1980 book Islam Between in the southwest known as Herzegovina. East and West. It is considered his most influential Located in southeastern Europe, Croatia is work. In it, Izetbegovic compared the basic eleBosnia’s neighbor to the north and west and ments of Islam with that of communism and Serbia and Montenegro to the east. Christianity. The Yugoslav government began The Ottoman Turks had gained control of cracking down on dissidents, including nationalists Bosnia in 1463. The Ottoman Turks ruled a vast and Muslim fundamentalists. Izetbegovic was once multi-ethnic region that included southeastern again arrested in 1983 for his publications. Europe, the Middle East, and Northern Africa In April 1983, Izetbegovic was tried in a for several centuries. In 1878, the AustroHungarian Empire that controlled much of Bosnian court with twelve other Muslim activists central Europe acquired control of Bosnia from for their alleged hostile behavior. Izetbegovic was the Ottomans and formally annexed the region convicted and sentenced to fourteen years in prison. as part of its empire in 1908. Serbia at the time Human rights organizations, including Amnesty had been seeking control of Bosnia because of International, were watching what was going on in the many ethnic Serbs living in Bosnia. In protest Yugoslavia. They strongly criticized the verdicts of of the Austro-Hungarian rule, Bosnian Serb militant group assassinated the crown prince of Izetbegovic and the others since the condemned had Austria while visiting Sarajevo in Bosnia in late used no force or even advocated the use of force June 1914. This event triggered World War I. against the government. Influenced by these organFollowing the defeat of the Austro-Hungarians izations, the convictions were appealed to the in 1918, Bosnia became part of the newly Bosnian Supreme Court. The court ruled that formed Yugoslavia, with the Serbs in power. indeed these were not criminal acts. However, Izetbegovic’s sentence was reduced by just two years. Izetbegovic considered these trials to be aimed more against Islam than against any individuals such as him. The Yugoslav public began viewing Muslims with suspicion after the publicity of the trials by the state-controlled media. As the communist government began crumbling, Izetbegovic received a pardon (a release from legal penalties) freeing him from imprisonment in 1988 after serving less than six years of his sentence. Nonetheless, while in prison Izetbegovic began suffering from heart disease leaving him permanently impaired.

Forming Modern Bosnia

Multi-ethnic politics The fall from power of the communist party in the late 1980s led to the rapid growth of multiple political parties, often based on ethnic 78

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Alija Izetbegovic

affiliations. Izetbegovic and other Bosnian Muslims formed the Party of Democratic Action (SDA) in 1989. Izetbegovic was elected its leader upon the founding of the party. Other ethnic groups of the region, including Croats and Serbs, came from Christian backgrounds and formed Catholic and Orthodox communities. They wanted independent ethnic states rather than a Muslim community, as Izetbegovic advocated. They considered the Muslims an outside influence to the region, introduced during the Turkish Ottoman occupation. In the November 1990 multi-party elections, the SDA received more votes than any other party for seats in the new government of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The election results reflected the overall ethnic makeup of the nation. To ease ethnic tensions, the presidency of Bosnia was created as a committee of seven members—two Croats, two Serbs, two Bosnian Muslims, and one non-ethnic affiliation. At the age of sixty-five, Izetbegovic was elected as one of the two Muslims and was unanimously selected by the new committee to be its leader on December 20, 1990.

Ethnic wars In 1991, about 44 percent of the population of Bosnia and Herzegovina was Muslim Slavs, 31 percent was Eastern Orthodox Serbs, 17 percent was Roman Catholic Croats, and the remaining 8 percent was of various mixed backgrounds. Prior to 1990, these groups were highly mixed in almost all of the country. This situation was about to dramatically change. By 1991, the Yugoslavian communist government had fully collapsed, leaving a federation of six republics. Through the early months of 1991, Izetbegovic proposed a new Yugoslav federation, or alliance, of the Yugoslav republics. They would be more politically independent of each other than before. However, this proposal was rejected by the Serbs and the Serbian leader Slobodan Milosevic (1941–2006). Soon, fighting between Serbs and Croats in neighboring Croatia began increasing ethnic tensions within Bosnia. During 1991, the other Yugoslav republics of Slovenia, Croatia, and Macedonia declared independence, leaving Serbia, Montenegro, and Bosnia as the sole remaining members of the Yugoslav federation. Though soft-spoken with a pleasant demeanor, Izetbegovic was to be a key figure in the ethnic conflicts that gripped the region for the next several years. From his presidential position, he tried to maintain peaceful relations within Bosnia. Izetbegovic hoped to make Bosnia a multi-ethnic Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

79

Alija Izetbegovic

state. However, both the Bosnian Serbs and Croats sought their own countries. They both pulled out of the shared Bosnian government. The surge for nationalism by different ethnic groups led to armed conflict. Within months, Serbian militia (small civilian armed units), with help from the Yugoslav army, had seized control of most of Bosnia. The Serbs began declaring independence for the areas they controlled by January 1992. Under pressure from other European nations, in January 1992 an agreement known as the Carrington-Cutileiro peace plan after the two diplomats who led in its development was signed by representatives of the Bosnian Serbs, Croats, and Muslims. The agreement would divide the country into three ethnic regions. Izetbegovic was the Bosnian Muslim representative. However, two weeks after signing the agreement, Izetbegovic withdrew his signature because he could just not accept dividing Bosnia into separate ethnic sections. He could not give up on the idea of a fully united Bosnia. The agreement fell apart.

Bosnian Muslims face ethnic cleansing Returning from the failed negotiations in Lisbon, Portugal, Izetbegovic called for a national referendum (general public vote) to determine the public support for independence for Bosnia. With the Bosnian Serbs boycotting (refusing to use or deal with) the referendum, the vote for independence by the Bosnian Muslim population was overwhelming. Based on the referendum results, the Bosnian parliament, or assembly, voted for independence from Yugoslavia on February 29. As president, Izetbegovic formally declared independence on March 3. On April 7, the European Union and the United States extended official recognition to Bosnia. Fighting continued between Bosnian Muslims and the Bosnian Serbs who did not want independence. Izetbegovic was hoping that formal recognition of Bosnia would bring international support including peacekeeping forces, but none were sent. The Bosnian Federation Army was poorly equipped. As a result, Bosnian Serb militias and Yugoslav armed forces maintained control over large areas of Bosnia. Izetbegovic became trapped in the besieged city of Sarajevo. The surrounding Serbian forces relentlessly shelled the town. In other parts of the country, the Serbs began a program of ethnic cleansing (deliberate attempt to eliminate an entire ethnic group) against the Muslims. They destroyed Muslim mosques (places of worship) and massacred Muslim populations by the thousands. 80

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Alija Izetbegovic

Receiving no support from the Western international organizations or countries, Izetbegovic sought assistance from Muslim countries. Iran, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Libya sent arms, money, and volunteers. This support alarmed other national leaders who feared a violent Islamic fundamentalist state might be developing in Europe, one similar to that of Iran. The Croats, still wanting their own independence, organized the Bosnian Croat army. In the spring of 1993, they began their own program of ethnic cleansing against Bosnian Muslims. A three-sided war now existed between Bosnian Serbs, Croats, and Bosnian Muslims, causing much confusion. The Bosnian government under Izetbegovic controlled about 25 percent of the country. The West still refused to come to Bosnia’s defense since some contended the fighting was a legal civil war and not international war crimes. By mid-1993, Izetbegovic was seeking a peace settlement that would maintain one single central government, but leave Bosnia divided into three ethnic territories. The idea was much like the agreement he had rejected the previous year. Bosnian Muslims also began calling themselves Bosniaks in September 1993, to downplay the Muslim association.

International assistance arrives In February 1994, the United States pressured Croatia to stop its attacks of Bosnia. The Bosnian Croats then joined forces with the Bosniaks against the Bosnian Serbs. In addition, the Western international community finally began providing military support through the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) organization. NATO is a military defense alliance established in April 1949 among Western European and North American nations. NATO planes began sporadic bombings of Serbian forces. They also enforced a no-fly zone over Bosnia that was designed to keep Serbian planes from bombing Bosnian targets. Military supplies began arriving. Croatia began supplying arms to the Bosnian Croat forces, and Izetbegovic was receiving military supplies from Iran. Throughout this time, Izetbegovic remained dependent on outside humanitarian relief and secret arms shipments. By August 1995, word of the Srebrenica Massacre atrocities had gotten out to the world. Serbian special forces had murdered over eight thousand Bosniak men within only a few days in July 1995. Srebrenica was a town inhabited by Bosnian Muslims that divided surrounding areas primarily inhabited by Bosnian Serbs. The Serbs decided to get rid of all Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

81

Alija Izetbegovic

Bosniaks living in Srebrenica and by early 1993 Serbian forces had isolated Srebrenica from other Bosnian Muslim areas. With its population running out of food, medicine, and water, the United Nations sent a small contingent of troops to help establish peace and get supplies to Srebrenica. However, by 1995 citizens were starving to death and in early July Serbian special forces moved into Srebrenica. As the group of lightly armed UN troops stood aside, the Serbs began the mass killings of the Bosnian Muslims. Endless truckloads of Bosniak males were taken from Srebrenica to killing sites in the country for execution. They were often bound and shot with automatic rifles before bulldozers pushed the bodies into mass graves with some wounded buried alive. In reaction, NATO stepped up its bombing of Bosnian Serb positions. Croatian and Bosniak forces were then able to regain lost territory. The country was left roughly split into two parts, one controlled by the Serbs and the other by the Croats and Bosniaks.

Dayton Accord With the country in ruins and fighting dragging on, Izetbegovic and other political and ethnic leaders of the region gathered to negotiate a ceasefire agreement. Since 1991, around 5 percent of the Bosnian population had been killed. Half of the population was now refugees (people who flee in search of protection or shelter). Very few areas in Bosnia remained ethnically mixed. The leaders came to the United States at WrightPatterson Air Force Base in Dayton, Ohio. It was the fourth effort to end hostilities since 1992. The talks at Dayton were difficult and lasted three long weeks. Finally, an agreement was reached in November 1995. It was formally signed later in Paris, France, in December. Known as the Dayton Accord, the agreement kept Bosnia as a single country but divided it approximately in half, into the Serbian Republic and the Croat-Muslim Federation. Izetbegovic, representing the Bosnian government, was reluctant to sign and recognize a Serbian region. He still preferred a unified multi-ethnic Bosnia. However, through the Accord, he was able to keep Bosnia as a single country. The new Bosnian presidency was to be shared by three people, each representing the three major ethnic groups of the Serbs, Croats, and Bosnian Muslims. Public elections were held in September 1996 to choose the three leaders. Each ethnic population selected the same person who had led them in war the previous years. This meant Izetbegovic was elected to represent the Muslims. He was also selected as the leader of the 82

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Alija Izetbegovic

Bosnian president Alija Izetbegovic (sitting right) and the presidents of Serbia and Croatia sign the Dayton Peace Accord in December 1995, as leaders from six other nations observe. # PET ER T UR NLE Y/ COR BI S.

committee of three. They had limited powers in the two regions under the new weakened central government. The Dayton Accord also called for sixty thousand peacekeeping NATO troops and a return of refugees to their homes. That same year, the United States began providing assistance to Bosnia, but only after Izetbegovic had cut ties with Muslim assistance, as demanded by the United States. Though peace had arrived, piecing the country back together would be a long, difficult process as it slowly gained back its political functions from the United Nationsappointed administrators one by one, such as the court system.

Retirement In August 1999, the New York Times published a report claiming that $1 billion of Bosnian public funds had been stolen by the leaders of the region. Izetbegovic denied the corruption charges. In June 2000, Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

83

Alija Izetbegovic

Izetbegovic announced his retirement of public life, claiming age and health as reasons for leaving. He left office in October of that year at seventy-four years of age. Considered a hero by many, Izetbegovic remained popular with Bosnians. He was often referred to by the nickname ‘‘Grandpa.’’ Others, particularly in the West, were more critical of his years as a leader. They considered him a supporter of radical Muslim fundamentalism and were relieved to see him step down. He was not a strong supporter of Western-style democracies. However, in comparison to other ethnic leaders in the former Yugoslav region during his time—such as Milosevic—Izetbegovic was politically moderate. He promoted a nationalism that included strong ethnic and religious affiliations. During the war crimes trials, Bosnian Serbs and Croats made accusations of genocide against Izetbegovic. However, no indictments ever resulted because of the lack of sufficient evidence. Izetbegovic maintained limited involvement in politics and provided public support to his former political party after retirement. This support helped the party rebound in the 2002 elections. In October 2003, Izetbegovic died from injuries suffered from a fall he had in his home. His injury was complicated by advanced heart disease.

For More Information BOOKS

Bennett, Christopher. Yugoslavia’s Bloody Collapse: Causes, Course and Consequences. New York: New York University Press, 1995. Izetbegovic, Alija. Islam Between East and West. Indianapolis: American Trust Publications, 1984. Kaplan, Robert. Balkan Ghosts: A Journey Through History. New York: Picador, 2005. Malcolm, Noel. Bosnia: A Short History. New York: New York University Press, 1994. Rieff, David. Slaughterhouse: Bosnia and the Failure of the West. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1996. Silber, Laura, and Allan Little. Yugoslavia: Death of a Nation. New York: Penguin Books, 1997. Woodward, Susan L. Balkan Tragedy: Chaos and Dissolution After the Cold War. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 1995. W E B SI T E

‘‘International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia.’’ United Nations. http://www.un.org/icty/ (accessed on December 11, 2006). 84

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Paul Kagame B OR N: October 23, 1957  Ntambwe, Rwanda

Rwandan president, military commander

‘‘We cannot turn the clock back nor can we undo the harm caused, but we have the power to determine the future and to ensure that what happened never happens again.’’

aul Kagame rose up to lead a tiny country in central Africa known as Rwanda following a horrific genocide of Tutsi Rwandans in the spring and early summer of 1994. Genocide is a planned, systematic attempt to eliminate a whole group of people by murdering all members of that group. Tutsi have long comprised approximately 14 percent of Rwanda’s population. The majority people, the Hutu, account for 85 percent of the population. Beginning on April 6, 1994, and continuing through June 1994, Hutu murdered between 800,000 and 1 million of their Tutsi neighbors. For centuries, the Tutsi and Hutu had lived peacefully side by side. However, arrival of European colonists, first from Germany in 1894 and later from Belgium in the early 1920s, led to prejudice and hatred between the two native groups. When the first Germans arrived in 1894 they quickly observed that the Tutsi and Hutu differed significantly

P

Paul Kagame. AP I MA GE S.

85

Paul Kagame

in physical characteristics. The Hutu were generally short with thick bodies and big heads, wide noses, and prominent lips. Tutsi were tall and thin with fine facial features, thin noses and lips, and straight, white teeth. The Europeans figured through their racial prejudices that the finefeatured Tutsi were a superior race that were responsible for Rwanda’s organized society. Further creating a myth of Tutsi superiority, the German colonizers described the Tutsi as gifted with intelligence, boundless energy, natural leadership abilities, refinement in speech manners, and capable of self-control and feelings of love and goodwill. The Hutu were considered an inferior race. Being favored by the colonists, the Tutsi were given all the positions of importance within Rwandan society. For sixty years, Hutu were deprived of all political and economic power. Coffee plants were introduced to Rwandans by the German colonists in 1904. By the 1930s the country began to depend on coffee as its key export crop and Rwanda’s main source of income. In 1959, the Hutu revolted and took control of Rwanda’s government. Hundreds of thousands of Tutsi became refugees (people who flee in search of protection or shelter) escaping across Rwanda’s borders to neighboring countries of Uganda, Burundi, Tanzania, and Zaire (present-day Democratic Republic of Congo). Hutu remained in power until 1994 when overthrown by Tutsi Paul Kagame and an efficient military force of Rwandan Tutsi refugees calling themselves the Rwandan Patriot Front (RPF). Despite taking Kigali, the Rwandan capital, Kagame and his RPF were too small a force to stop the genocide of their fellow Tutsi throughout the Rwandan countryside. Later in 2003, Kagame was elected president of Rwanda. He faced the daunting tasks of healing the rift between Tutsi and Hutu and putting an end to racial hatred, rebuilding the nation’s devastated economy, and securing the country’s borders.

Kagames become refugees Paul Kagame was born into a Tutsi family in 1957 in the Ntambwe commune, located 40 miles west of Kigali. He was one of six children, two boys and four girls. Kagame’s father, Deogratius, was a successful businessman and also had agricultural interests. Both Deogratius and Kagame’s mother, Asteria, were closely related to the royal family of Rwanda. However, with his independent business successes, Deogratius was proud to have no need of reliance on the royals. 86

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Paul Kagame

In 1959, as the Hutu revolution spread, two-year-old Kagame and his family fled their home with only the belongings they could carry. Groups of Hutu men systematically moved through village after village, looting houses belonging to Tutsi, killing the inhabitants, and burning the houses to the ground. The Kagame family escaped north to Kagame’s mother’s birthplace of Mutara, near the Ugandan border. By 1961, Deogratius concluded that Rwanda was too dangerous a place for his family. With no hope of security, no chance to pursue his businesses, and no education opportunities for his children, Deogratius moved his family to a border town inside Uganda. The Kagames began a new life as Rwandan refugees. They soon moved further north in Uganda as refugee camps were established. In 1962, the family settled in a camp known as Nshungerezi, in the Tori District of Uganda. Kagame was five years old and he would grow up in Nshungerezi. Prejudice against the refugees was severe. Although many had lived comfortable, even privileged, lives in Rwanda before the 1959 revolution, the refugees had few employment or educational opportunities in Uganda. Most became laborers for Ugandan farmers and earned very little.

An excellent student With the other refugee children, Kagame attended school in the camp where he learned English. English was spoken in Uganda, while French was the language of Rwanda. A bright student, nine-year-old Kagame went to primary school in the nearby town of Ntare. Kagame rose to the top of his class and put Ugandan school officials in a difficult position. The top three students at Ntare qualified for a grant to go onto secondary school (school equivalent to high school). However, since Kagame was Rwandan, prejudicial practice prevented him from advancing. Only after his father arranged for tuition assistance from a Rwandan refugee network in Europe was the boy able to go to secondary school.

Discrimination against Rwandan refugees Kagame continued to excel academically, as did other Rwandan refugee students who managed to obtain an education. Some moved into Ugandan cities, substantially improved their economic situation, and began to return to lifestyles similar to those enjoyed in Rwanda before 1959. Ugandans resented the success of young Rwandans and harassed and taunted them for being refugees. Discrimination in education and Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

87

Paul Kagame

employment was commonplace. Some Rwandans changed their names and tried to pass as Ugandans to attend school or find a job. Rwandans were not allowed citizenship in Uganda. The rejection young Rwandans experienced significantly impacted their thinking and attitudes, leaving them with a sense of not belonging and a desire to return to their homeland.

Exploring Rwanda In 1977, at the age of twenty-one, Kagame’s curiosity about his homeland led him to travel into Rwanda. He quickly located relatives still living there and contacted friends who had returned to Kigali to live. Kagame spent two months crisscrossing the country that he had only heard stories about. With a desire to learn further about the country of his ancestors and thoughts of someday returning permanently, Kagame visited Rwanda again in 1978. Rwanda was quiet during those years. Juvenal Habyarimana (1937– 1994) had taken leadership of the country in 1973, continuing the Hutu line of authority. Although there were many restrictions on Rwandans traveling away from their homes, Kagame assumed he was not suspicious, but was relatively safe as a student traveling alone. However, if Rwandan authorities had realized he was related to the former Tutsi royal family and a Rwandan refugee living in Uganda, his journey in Rwanda could have become perilous. While in Rwanda, Kagame learned of Habyarimana’s efforts to develop and improve the economy of the exceedingly poor nation. All Rwandans were expected to follow Habyarimana’s direction without questioning. Habyarimana promised reforms and a better life. Kagame listened and learned. His trips in 1977 and 1978, although only a few months of time altogether, greatly influenced his thinking and expanded his knowledge of Rwanda’s economic and political challenges. The idea of someday returning to Rwanda and being involved in the political process was firmly planted in Kagame’s mind.

Forming political philosophies Back in Uganda, Kagame’s emerging political awareness moved him to action. He joined a movement under the leadership of Ugandan rebel leader Yoweri Museveni (1944–). Museveni’s group, the National Resistance Army (NRA), seemed to Kagame the Ugandan faction most likely to lend support to the exiled Rwandan Tutsi. 88

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Paul Kagame

The philosophy on which Museveni founded the NRA and its political wing, the National Resistance Movement (NRM), was different from the countless other African resistance movements that had formed in the twentieth century. Rather than becoming a small group intent on dominating the population in yet another round of oppression followed by resentment, Museveni’s movement attempted to create a nationwide inclusive political community, one that included even those people in Uganda commonly discriminated against such as women, youth, and various minorities, including the Rwandan Tutsi exiles. Museveni believed in allowing people to vote for their leaders, but not in political parties, which he said soon would become tribal-like groups concerned with their own narrow interests. His movement also supported some capitalist-style an economic system in which production is privately owned, financed through private investments, and the demand for goods is established through an open market system largely free of government involvement) economic development. Kagame, by 1980 a young lieutenant in the NRA, absorbed Museveni’s basic ideas and would incorporate them when he returned to Rwanda as a rebel leader and ultimately president of Rwanda. Understanding these basic NRA philosophies, along with training as a guerrilla resistance fighter, would guide Kagame and numerous other young Tutsi exiles in their attempt to retake Rwanda in 1990. The NRA was victorious in 1986 when it overthrew the thenpresident of Uganda, Milton Obote (1924–2005). The NRA was fourteen thousand strong, and four thousand of its best fighters were Rwandan Tutsi refugees. Kagame, who rose to the rank of major, was chiefly involved in intelligence-gathering (obtaining information, sometimes secretly) throughout the Uganda countryside. With the 1986 victory, Museveni sent Kagame to Cuba for nine months to learn ways of building a permanent army, policies, and institutions from Fidel Alejandro Castro Ruz’s (1926–) administration.

Establishment of Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) After Kagame’s return and with the fighting Uganda over, the Rwandan fighters developed plans to retake their homeland. They organized into a more tightly functioning rebel movement determined to destabilize the Rwandan Hutu government and institute an entirely new rule in the country. The Rwandese Refugee Welfare Foundation (RANU) that had been founded in 1979 gained members and strength. In 1987, the Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

89

Paul Kagame

RANU changed its name to the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF). Fred Rwigyema (1957–1990), Kagame’s friend and fellow NRA rebel fighter, became president of the RPF. At the same time in Uganda, both Kagame and Rwigyema were serving in important government positions under Museveni. Kagame was head of military intelligence for the NRA and Rwigyema advanced to Deputy Minister of Defense.

Kagame sent to Kansas Despite Kagame and Rwigyema’s rise to prominent positions within Uganda’s government, Museveni knew that prejudice against Rwandan refugees was again growing within the country. The National Ruling Council, Uganda’s legislature, began attempts to bar Rwandans from owning property and to remove them from the army. By late 1989, feeling strong political pressure, Museveni removed Kagame and then Rwigyema from their posts. Museveni saw this as a way to distance himself from his Rwandan friends. In 1990, he sent Kagame for military training to Fort Leavenworth, Kansas; it was Kagame’s first visit to the United States. The assignment was, in reality, a way to get Kagame out of the country since Museveni knew Kagame and Rwigyema were quietly planning a military push into Rwanda that would be launched from inside Uganda. If Kagame was absent, Museveni hoped the plans for an invasion into northern Rwanda by the exiles would be halted.

Habyarimana’s government faltering Rwandan Tutsi exiles felt increasingly unwelcome in Uganda. The pressure mounted to return to Rwanda. The Rwandan exiles had continued to organize and arm the RPF. They had gained a great deal of experience fighting for Uganda’s NRA. By 1990, Rwandan president Habyarimana was struggling to stay in power. Coffee prices that had sustained Rwanda’s economy had fallen drastically in the 1980s due to competition from other coffee-growing countries. Most of Rwanda’s population no longer had enough food since it had long been purchased from other countries with coffee profits. There was increasing infighting among Habyarimana’s administration over what little money did come in, now chiefly aid from foreign countries. Habyarimana’s government seemed on the verge of collapse. It was time for the RPF to make its move. 90

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Paul Kagame

RPF invades Northern Rwanda Led by Rwigyema, the RPF began a military push into Northern Rwanda in October 1990. Kagame, who was a leader of the RPF but still in Kansas, was kept informed of all the action. Kagame immediately began the process to leave Fort Leavenworth. He arrived at the frontlines in Northern Rwanda to take command as news of Rwigyema’s death in battle reached him. From 1991 and through 1993, the RPF continued raids into Rwanda, then retreated back to the Ugandan border. On April 6, 1994, Habyarimana’s jet, which was returning to Kigali, was shot down. Everyone aboard, including Habyarimana, was killed. Within hours, Hutu extremists ordered the previously planned genocide of Tutsi to begin. The extremists had convinced Hutu peasants that killing all Tutsi would solve all of the country’s woes.

The Kagame Cup Despite attempting the superhuman task of reviving a nation shattered by the 1994 genocide, President Paul Kagame also shows the world a very identifiable regular guy—that of a sportsman. He is an avid tennis player and, just like a large portion of the world’s population, a great fan of soccer. His favorite team is, naturally, the Rwandan national team, Amavubi, mascot name the Wasps. When in 2002 the Confederation of East and Central African Football Associations (CECAFA) was out of money and its regional tournament seemed unlikely, Kagame donated $60,000 of his own money. He also donated money for a trophy. The tournament was saved. In appreciation, CECAFA officials named the tournament the Kagame Cup.

Kagame ordered his RPF to march to Kigali and attempt to take the city. On April 8 Kagame led his RPF into Kigali, where they battled the Rwandan army, the Forces Armees Rwandaises (FAR), and Hutu militias for control of the city. By April 12, the FAR and militias began moving southward, giving up the city. By late May, the RPF controlled the airport and, through June, pushed south and west. The FAR and militias retreated westward. Despite successes of the RPF, the genocide of Tutsi continued throughout the countryside. The retreating FAR and Hutu militias murdered all Tutsi—men, women, and children— in their paths. The RPF, although a highly efficient army, was small and concentrated on Kigali and the airport. It had no way to also halt the Tutsi massacres occurring countrywide. As the FAR and militias fled, millions of Hutu fearing for their safety left their homes and fled with them, an act that created millions of Hutu refugees. By July, Kagame’s forces were in complete control of Kigali. On July 19, 1994, officials were sworn in for a new Tutsi government called the Government of National Unity. Although Pasteur Bezinungu, a Hutu who supported the Tutsi, was placed in the position of president, Kagame held the real power in Rwanda. His official titles were vice president and commander-in-chief of the army. He and his administration set about Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

91

Paul Kagame

the overwhelming task of holding the peace and rebuilding the government. Kagame oversaw a country with little infrastructure (roads, buildings, airports, and other public facilities), destroyed roads, minimum access to air traffic, and little communication capabilities. When Kagame and the RPF took power, they were determined to have a multi-ethnic government. Although Kagame was the real leader, prominent Hutus within the new government included President Pasteur Bizimungu, prime minister Pierre-Celestin Rwigyema, and the minister of interior Seth Sendashonga. Kagame stressed cohesive cooperation, political education, and responsible accountability. Kagame’s approach closely mirrored Museveni’s philosophy in Uganda. His goals were ambitious, since Rwandans were largely illiterate (unable to read and write) and had no knowledge of political processes. Political information was supplied at a grassroots (level of common village people) level to every village. Kagame flatly refused a U.S.-style of democracy with multiple political parties. In African societies, he believed competing parties only served to further divide an already divided people. He knew each side would battle the other and only end up in another war. Kagame stated that no one still advocating division would be tolerated within the government. Also certain rights, such as a free press, were curtailed for the same reason. After only a few years, the multi-ethnic nature of Kagame’s government seemed to fall apart. Sendashonga was assassinated in Nairobi; Rwigyema resigned in February 2000 on charges of misconduct in regard to the misuse of educational funds which he denied and he fled to Germany and the United States. Bizimungu resigned at the end of March 2000, saying other RPF parliamentarians (elected members of the legislature) falsely accused him of tax avoidance and suspicious construction deals. In 2004 he was convicted of illegally forming a militia and embezzlement and sentenced to fifteen years in prison. Within a month of Bizimungu’s resignation, Kagame was elected president of Rwanda with 81 of 86 parliamentary votes. The Kagame government, despite its power, was a transitional (temporary) government. By the end of 2003, a permanent constitution, president, and legislative representatives were to be in place. The idea of having a constitution that defined the structure of government, rights of the people, and responsibilities of the elected officials was completely new to Rwandans. Before 1994, government was run at the whim and will of whoever was president. Nevertheless, the grassroots education campaigns 92

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Paul Kagame

Paul Kagame waves to a crowd of supporters at a campaign rally in Muvumba, Rwanda, a few days before the first presidential elections since the 1994 genocide. AP I MAG ES .

and informational meetings instituted by Kagame paved the way for approval of the constitution on May 26, 2003. Approximately 95 percent of voters approved the constitution. In opposition to his advisor’s wishes, Kagame insisted on universal suffrage, which meant all Rwandans eighteen years of age and older were allowed to vote. The constitution’s acceptance set the stage for the presidential election in August. By 2003, most Rwandans associated the relative stability of the past nine years with Kagame. Kagame and the highly organized RPF labeled his chief opponent, Faustin Twagiramungu, as a divisionist (one who creates disagreements among groups). Twagiramungu, living in exile in Belgium since 1995, was a moderate Hutu who had opposed the Habyarimana government and the genocide. When the genocide began, moderate Hutu were murdered along with Tutsi. Twagiramungu barely escaped by reaching the Zaire border. He returned to Rwanda in June 2003 to take on Kagame’s well-oiled political machine (well-organized Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

93

Paul Kagame

political party). He reasoned that since 85 percent of the population was Hutu, he surely would be elected. Instead, Kagame received a majority of Hutu votes in the August 2003 election. Strides in reconciliation between Tutsi and Hutu were apparent in their cooperation with each other, and the Rwandan economy was starting a slow but seemingly sure recovery. Kagame received 95 percent of the vote. By democratic standards there were many irregularities, such as the RPF arresting Twagiramungu’s campaign leaders two days before the election. But for a country struggling to overcome the effects of a genocide that occurred just nine years earlier, the vote clearly reflected who the Rwandans wanted to lead their nation. European election observers conceded the election had been peaceful and was a good start for the new Rwanda. On September 12, 2003, President Kagame was inaugurated (sworn in as president) before a massive crowd. The legislative election was not completed at the end of September. The RPF candidates also won an overwhelming majority in the parliament. Surprisingly, 39 of the 80 newly elected parliamentary representatives were women. Kagame is known as a extremely hard working president. He and his staff frequently keep long hours, sometimes working until 9 or 10 at night. His command of English, attributed to growing up in Englishspeaking Uganda, plays an important role in communication with two important international friends, the United States and Britain. U.S. and British officials refer to him as an excellent communicator, sincere and to the point. Kagame has visited U.S. president George W. Bush’s (1946–; served 2001–) ranch and spoken in numerous U.S. cities before audiences of academic and government officials and before Rwandans living in the United States. He has close relations with former U.S. president Bill Clinton, who has taken a special interest in the well-being of Rwanda since leaving the White House. By the mid-2000s, Kagame remained confident about Rwanda’s healing process and optimistic about its future.

For More Information BOOKS

Berry, John A., and Carol Pott Berry, eds. Genocide in Rwanda: A Collective Memory. Washington, DC: Howard University Press, 1999. Ilibagiza, Immaculee. Left to Tell: Discovering God Amidst the Rwandan Holocaust. Carlsbad, CA: Hay House, Inc., 2006. Melvern, Linda. A People Betrayed: The Role of the West in Rwanda’s Genocide. New York: Zed Books, 2000. 94

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Paul Kagame

Scherrer, Christian P. Genocide and Crisis in Central Africa: Conflict Roots, Mass Violence, and Regional War. Westport, CT: Praeger, 2002. WEB SIT ES

H. E. Paul Kagame, President of Rwanda. http://www.gov.rw/government/ president/index.html (accessed on December 11, 2006). PBS. ‘‘Rwanda Today: The International Criminal Tribunal and the Prospects for Peace and Reconciliation. An Interview with Helena Cobban.’’ Ghosts of Rwanda. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/ghosts/today (accessed on December 11, 2006).

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

95

Helen Keller B OR N: June 27, 1880  Tuscumbia, Alabama D I E D : June 1, 1968  Westport, Connecticut

American social activist, author

‘‘The public must learn that the blind man is neither genius nor a freak nor an idiot. He has a mind that can be educated, a hand which can be trained, . . . and it is the duty of the public to help him make the best of himself.’’

elen Keller was an international advocate for the disabled throughout much of the twentieth century. After overcoming, to a large extent, the effects of her own blindness and deafness, she toured the world promoting acceptance of the disabled in society. She showed that even severely handicapped persons are capable of making important contributions to society. Through her activism, she gave hope and inspiration to those facing various types of physical or mental disabilities. Through her numerous writings and lectures, Keller became known as one of the great humanitarians of the twentieth century. She substantially altered public perceptions of the disabled by reducing long-standing prejudices.

H

Helen Keller. LIB RA RY O F CON GR ESS .

97

Helen Keller

A devastating illness Keller was born in June 1880 on a cotton plantation called Ivy Green in the rural northwestern community of Tuscumbia, Alabama. Father Arthur H. Keller, a former captain in the Confederate Army during the Civil War (1861–65), was editor of the North Alabamian, a weekly local newspaper. Her mother was Kate Adams Keller. For the first eighteen months of her life, Keller was a perfectly normal child. But in February 1882, nineteenmonth-old Keller suddenly came down with a severe fever that left her unconscious and with little hope of survival. The fever lasted for just days before suddenly disappearing. Though doctors at the time diagnosed the disorder as ‘‘brain fever,’’ more modern physicians labeled it either scarlet fever or meningitis. Both illnesses can cause swelling of the brain and unconsciousness. The family was at first greatly relieved that the illness quickly passed. However, it soon became apparent that young Keller was left deaf and blind, conditions that created muteness (inability to speak). For the next several years, Keller received no formal schooling. She created a hand signal system with over sixty signs to communicate with her family. She also learned to do small things such as fold laundry and get things for others. Through these years her growing frustrations over her extreme physical limitations led to increased antisocial behavior. Her often violent temper tantrums made life miserable for the family. By the time she was six, Keller’s behavior was out of control, and her parents realized they needed help.

The arrival of Anne Sullivan In 1886, Keller’s mother read about the education of another deaf and blind girl, Laura Bridgman (1829–1889), by Samuel Gridley Howe (1801–1876). Desperate for solutions to the family plight, Kate traveled to see a specialist in Baltimore to seek advice. The doctor directed her to the famous inventor of the telephone, Alexander Graham Bell (1847– 1922), who lived in nearby Washington, D.C. Bell was pursuing his favorite interest, teaching deaf children. Keller was six years old when Bell examined her. Bell recommended her parents write to Michael Anagnos, the director of the Perkins Institution for the Blind in Boston, where Bridgman had been educated. Following Bell’s advice, the Kellers contacted Anagnos, who promised to find a personal tutor for Keller. He soon hired a former student from Perkins Institution, Anne Sullivan (1866–1936). Sullivan, the daughter of poor Irish immigrants, nearly lost her sight at the age of 98

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Helen Keller

five. Anne contracted the eye disease at a poorhouse where she was sent in February 1876, after her mother had died and her father disappeared. She entered Perkins in 1880 for specialized instruction. While at Perkins she had two operations that helped her regain partial sight. After graduating, Anne had trouble finding work her limitations would allow her to do. Therefore, at just twenty years of age, Sullivan eagerly accepted the job as Keller’s tutor. Sullivan traveled to Keller’s home in Alabama, arriving on March 3, 1887. Sullivan would instruct and assist Keller for the next forty-nine years until Sullivan’s death. Sullivan first had to overcome Keller’s severe behavior problems and instill discipline in her. To do this, with the support of Keller’s family Sullivan and Keller moved into a small garden house behind the main home and began working for hours each day, staying apart from others. To communicate with Keller, Sullivan drew letters with her finger in the palm of Keller’s hand. During the first few weeks, progress was painstakingly slow. Keller had trouble understanding what the words Sullivan was spelling actually meant in the real world. Then one day in early April, Sullivan took Keller to a well on the property. There, with water running over one of Keller’s hands, Sullivan made motions for the word ‘‘water’’ in the palm of her other hand. Suddenly and for the first time, Keller understood the ways of language. The words actually stood for various physical things. From that day on, progress was fast. Keller demanded names for all familiar objects. She also learned to read sentences by following raised words on cardboard. She then began making her own sentences by arranging words in a frame.

Learning to read and speak From 1888 to 1890, Keller and Sullivan spent the winters in Boston at the Perkins Institution, learning to read Braille. With the assistance of Sullivan she also began writing letters, as she corresponded with numerous people across the country who were learning of her accomplishments. In addition, Keller wrote diary entries and short stories, which Sullivan shared with Anagnos. Eager to show the world what a deaf and blind person was capable of doing, he published many of them in articles he wrote about Keller. They received circulation nationwide and Keller became a celebrity. In 1888, Keller even traveled to Washington, D.C., where she met U.S. president Grover Cleveland (1837–1908; served 1885–89 and 1893–97). She also met various other celebrities, such as humorist Mark Twain (1835–1910). Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

99

Helen Keller

In 1890, Keller learned of a deafblind Norwegian girl who had learned to speak. Keller was eager to try. She began learning to speak under the direction of Sarah Fuller at the Horace Mann School for the Deaf in Boston. At the same time, Sullivan began having Keller touch the lips and throat of others as they spoke, to feel the vibrations and help her learn to lip read while she (Sullivan) finger-spelled the words being spoken into the palm of Keller’s free hand. Keller was a fast learner. Not only did she learn English, but French, German, Greek, and Latin as well. Problems arose in 1891, when Anagnos published a short story written by Keller. Charges of plagiarism (inappropriately copying the work of others) erupted. It turned out the story was strikingly similar to one that had been read to Keller years earlier. Keller never got over the questioning by the public and Anagnos of her honesty. Her relation with Anagnos and the Perkins Institution ended. In 1894, fourteen-year-old Keller and Sullivan moved to New York City to attend the Wright-Humason School for the Deaf. There Keller improved her lip-reading skills over the next two years while working on her new speech abilities. Despite working at speech since she was nine years old and quickly gaining rudimentary (the most basic) speech, her vocalizations always remained high-pitched. She was usually not understandable to people hearing her for the first time. Her speech was also inaudible (unable to be heard) in large public meetings. Keller did learn to use a typewriter and used handwriting only for signing her name. In conversation with others, she needed interpreters to fingerspell in her hand. She then responded by the interpreter vocalizing her finger-spelled replies.

A college education By 1896, Keller and Sullivan had returned to Massachusetts where Keller enrolled in the Cambridge School for Young Ladies in preparation for attending college. Her studies included history, mathematics, physics, and literature. As before, Sullivan attended classes with Keller, spelling the lectures, letter-by-letter, into Keller’s hand. Sullivan also helped with homework, finger-spelling reading assignments. Keller also studied two years with a private college tutor in addition to Sullivan. She passed the Radcliff College admissions examinations in 1899 and was now ready for college studies. In 1900, Keller entered Radcliff, located in Cambridge, Massachusetts. She was the first deafblind person to enter an institution of higher learning. It was long and hard work for both Keller and Sullivan. While at Radcliff, Keller wrote her first book using both a Braille and a regular typewriter. It 100

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Helen Keller

Helen Keller reads with her teacher, Anne Sullivan. While Keller attended Radcliffe College, Sullivan helped her with her studies by fingerspelling books into the palm of her hand. # CO RB IS .

was an autobiography titled The Story of My Life. Harvard professor and literary critic John Macy edited the book. The book did not sell well upon its publication in 1903, but later after she gained fame for her outstanding work with the blind and deaf it became a classic. After four years of study, Keller graduated magna cum laude (with high honors) at the age of twentyfour. Keller was the first deafblind person to earn a college degree in the United States. In May 1905, Sullivan married Macy, who became one of Keller’s regular interpreters. The three of them lived together in Wrentham, Massachusetts. Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

101

Helen Keller

Establishing a writing and speaking career With Macy’s college professor income being limited, Keller sought other sources of income to support her and her activities. Since early childhood and as her fame began to grow, Keller received donations from philanthropists (those who devote much time or money to help others) including American industrialists John D. Rockefeller (1839–1937) and Andrew Carnegie (1835–1919). Keller’s writing also provided some income. In 1908, she published her second book The World I Live In. Though well received, it generated little income. Through Sullivan and Macy, Keller authored eleven books and hundreds of magazine articles in popular publications such as Ladies’ Home Journal and Atlantic Monthly. These articles earned her some money. In 1906, Keller was appointed to the Massachusetts Commission for the Blind, which promoted inclusion of the disabled into mainstream society. She traveled and lectured throughout the world, encouraging establishment of similar commissions in other states and countries. As Keller toured, she began speaking out on other social issues, including women’s suffrage (right to vote). Promoting justice for all and improvements in living conditions of the working class, Keller became a self-proclaimed socialist (one who supports a government system that controls economic production and distribution of a nation). In 1909, she joined the Socialist Party of Massachusetts and began speaking on its behalf. Frustrated by the Socialist Party’s lack of effectiveness in improving the working conditions of laborers, in a bold move she joined the radical labor union (an organized group of workers joined together for a common purpose, such as negotiating with management for better working conditions or higher wages), the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW), in 1912. The IWW, which was founded in Chicago in 1905 and peaked in membership in 1923, often used violent tactics to challenge industrial leadership in seeking a new economic system with improved working conditions for industrial laborers. It was one of the few unions at the time to welcome women and minorities to its membership. The following year, she published Out of the Dark, a series of essays about socialism. The public would slowly cool to Keller’s political activism.

Lecture circuit Needing more money for living expenses than donations and book sales could provide, Sullivan and Keller began charging a fee for their public 102

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Helen Keller

talks in 1913. They joined the Chautauqua lecture circuit in 1914, the same year that Sullivan’s marriage to Macy fell apart and they separated, though never divorcing. The Chautauqua program was a popular summer traveling lecture series in the early twentieth century that started each year from the rural lakeside village of Chautauqua in southwest New York, which sponsored a range of famous speakers including famous lawyer and three-time presidential candidate William Jennings Bryan (1860–1925). As their income increased, Keller and Sullivan hired Polly Thomson, a Scottish immigrant, to be their secretary. The trio traveled across the country, giving inspirational talks about overcoming handicaps and speaking against disability prejudices. A great deal of prejudice against blindness existed at the time because it was commonly associated with the venereal disease (a sexually transmitted disease) of a parent. The disease caused blindness at birth. Keller and Sullivan dispelled the myth that all blindness was caused by such disease. Keller advocated for improved services for the disabled of all types. The talks brought good income from the large crowds they steadily drew. In 1915, Keller established Helen Keller International, a nonprofit organization dedicated to the prevention of blindness through education. Keller saw success in arguing against the handicapped being placed in asylums and institutions. Placing handicapped individuals in institutions was a normal practice in those days in order to shut off handicapped people from mainstream society. In 1916, Keller was involved in her first romantic relationship and became engaged to be married to Peter Fagan, whom she and Sullivan had hired as a secretary. However, they cancelled their marriage plans after Keller’s mother repeatedly tried to discourage their marriage. When the lecture circuit crowds and the income they generated began decreasing, Keller and Sullivan joined a vaudeville (a multi-act theater entertainment popular from the 1880s to 1920s) company, the Orpheum Circuit, from 1922 to 1924. They continued giving similar presentations much as they had on the lecture tours. Their worldwide fame continued to grow and they now made $2,000 a week, a large sum for that time. In addition to the United States, they toured Europe, Asia, South America, and Africa. They traveled to thirty-nine countries including Japan, where they were exceptionally popular. The Chautauqua and vaudeville stage act had a consistent pattern. First, Sullivan would come on stage and recall the first efforts to teach Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

103

Helen Keller

Keller. Then Keller would enter, and together they demonstrated methods used to teach the deaf to speak. Next, Keller would give a talk followed by a question and answer period with the audience. Keller showed much wit in her interactions with the crowds. Her wit charmed the audiences and help them realize that deafblind people were, in reality, little different from people considered normal. By 1924, Keller’s political activities as a socialist began attracting increased criticism from the public. Though socialism was attractive to so many laborers and workers at that time who wanted greater government control of industry due to often harsh working conditions imposed on them by the wealthy company owners. On the other hand, socialism was seen as a threat to the upper classes and government who advocated for very little regulation of business. As attendance began dropping off, she decided to withdraw from political activism and focus once again on fighting prejudice against the disabled. Leaving the vaudeville circuit, Keller and Sullivan began making fund-raising appearances for the American Foundation for the Blind. The appearances were again very popular and raised considerable funds for the organization. In 1927, Keller decided to take a break from the speaking circuit to write another book. She published My Religion that year in which she described her interest in Swedenborgism, a religious movement that Keller identified closely with during her life. Swedenborgism was established in England in 1787, a variation of Christianity based on the earlier writings of Emanuel Swedenborg (1688–1772). The public viewed the book with mixed emotions, some disappointed she did not associate with a major religion. Following its publication, Keller returned to fund-raising for the Foundation. By 1930, Keller had established the Helen Keller Endowment Fund for the Foundation. In return, the Foundation established a trust fund to provide the financial support Keller needed. Traveling the world, Keller and Sullivan met numerous dignitaries, including King George (1895–1952) and Queen Elizabeth (1900–2002) of Britain. A major change in Keller’s life came when Sullivan died in October 1936. She was buried at St. Joseph’s Chapel in Washington Cathedral in Washington, D.C. Thomson took over as the key assistant and interpreter for Keller. The two women moved to Westport, Connecticut, where Keller would live the rest of her life. Keller continued advocating for improved treatment of disabled persons. By 1937, about thirty states had established commissions for the blind. Keller published another book in 1938, this one titled Helen Keller’s Journal. 104

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Helen Keller

An Inspirational Story Helen Keller and Anne Sullivan were the inspiration for a number of plays and movies. The first was a silent movie titled Deliverance, released in 1919. In it, Keller played herself in her adult years. In 1953, a film documentary was released about Keller’s life titled The Unconquered. It won an Academy Award. In 1957, a successful live television play appeared. The Miracle Worker, written by William Gibson (1914–), focused on the breakthrough in communication that occurred between Keller and Sullivan the day at the well. Gibson then rewrote the drama into a Broadway play that opened in

October 1959. The play was a major hit and ran on Broadway for almost two years. It won a Pulitzer Prize in 1960. The play was next made into a Hollywood movie and released in 1962. Actress Anne Bancroft (1931–2005), who played the role of Sullivan, received an Academy Award for Best Actress. Patty Duke (1946–), who played Keller, received an Academy Award for Best Supporting Actress. The Miracle Worker was again made into television movies in 1979 and 2000. Another television movie about Keller’s life titled The Miracle Continues was released in 1984.

During World War II (1939–45) she worked with blinded soldiers teaching them how to adapt to life without eyesight. She also reentered politics briefly in 1944 to campaign for the successful reelection of U.S. president Franklin D. Roosevelt (1882–1945; served 1933–45), who was seeking a fourth term in office. Following the war, Keller published other books. Her most famous book, which was about her longtime teacher and friend Sullivan, and simply titled Teacher, was published in 1955. Keller followed that with The Open Door in 1957. Thomson suffered a stroke in 1957 and died in March 1960. Her nurse, Winnie Cobally, took care of Keller after Thomson’s death. Keller suffered the first of several strokes in October 1961. Keller received numerous awards throughout her later years and was recognized for her humanitarianism (providing assistance to others in need). She received honorary doctorate degrees (an award to recognize special achievements in education and research) from various institutions of higher learning including Glasgow (in Scotland), Harvard, and Temple University. She was the first woman to receive a doctorate degree from Harvard. She also received awards from various nations including Britain, France, and Yugoslavia. In September 1964, U.S. president Lyndon B. Johnson (1908– 1973; served 1963–69) awarded her the prestigious Presidential Freedom Award, one of the two highest awards given to civilians in the United States for her tireless crusade to help the disabled. The following year, Keller was elected to the Women’s Hall of Fame in New York City. Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

105

Helen Keller

Keller died in her sleep at her Easton, Connecticut, home in June 1968 just short of her eighty-eighth birthday. She was buried next to Sullivan in the Washington Cathedral. In 2003, the state of Alabama honored Keller by issuing a state quarter featuring her likeness. The Helen Keller Hospital in Sheffield (northwestern Alabama) was dedicated to her. In 2005, a documentary of her life, Shining Soul: Helen Keller’s Spiritual Life and Legacy, was produced by the Swedenborg Foundation.

For More Information BOOKS

Herrmann, Dorothy. Helen Keller: A Life. New York: A. Knopf, 1998. Hurwitz, Johanna. Helen Keller: Courage in the Dark. New York: Random House, 2003. Keller, Helen. The Story of My Life. New York: Modern Library, 2003. Keller, Helen. Teacher: Anne Sullivan Macy, A Tribute by the Foster Child of Her Mind. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1955. Lash, Joseph P. Helen and Teacher: The Story of Helen Keller and Anne Sullivan Macy. New York: AFB Press, 1997. W E B SI T E

Helen Keller International. http://www.hki.org (accessed on December 11, 2006).

106

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Leontine Kelly B OR N: March 5, 1920  Washington, D.C.

American religious leader

‘‘We were not reared that politics was not a part of a Christian’s duty. If we were going to pray for liberation and equality, then we also had to work for it.’’

eontine T. C. Kelly was the first black American woman to be elected to the top ministerial (leader of a worship service) office of a major religious denomination. In 1984, she became a bishop in the United Methodist church and was assigned to administer the Nevada and California Conferences. Known as an excellent administrator and dynamic preacher, Kelly served over one hundred thousand members in nearly four hundred churches during her tenure as bishop. Because of her position, Kelly became the first woman to preach on the National Radio Pulpit of the National Council of Churches in 1984. She also served as president of the Western Jurisdiction College of Bishops and on the Executive Committee of the Council of Bishops. In October 2000, Kelly was inducted into the National Women’s Hall of Fame in Seneca Falls, New York.

L

Religious prejudice Leontine Turpeau was born in Washington, D.C., on March 5, 1920. She was born in the parsonage, or church house, of Mount Zion Methodist Episcopal Church where her father, the Reverend David De Witt Turpeau Sr., was minister. Her mother, Ila Marshall Turpeau, joined her husband in ministry and was an active supporter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People 107

Leontine Kelly

(NAACP). Founded in 1909, the NAACP is one of the oldest and most influential organizations dedicated to eliminating racial and other forms of prejudice through legal action, educational programs, and encouraging voter participation. Her parents’ leadership roles in ministry as well as social activism were a strong influence on Leontine and her seven siblings while growing up. In the late 1920s, the family moved briefly to Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, before settling in Cincinnati, Ohio. In 1939 the Reverend Turpeau entered politics and was elected to the Ohio legislature for four terms. Being raised in the parsonage of a Methodist Church proved to be a valuable education for Leontine for her future career path. She learned the rites and lessons of the Methodist faith and observed as her parents made their church the economic, cultural, and political center of their community. Methodism has its religious roots in eighteenth-century England. John Wesley (1703–1791), an ordained Anglican priest, and his brother Charles (1707–1788) founded the Methodist movement on the Oxford University campus around 1729 and it quickly grew. The movement originally became known as Methodism because of the consistent, religious practices Methodists followed. The movement soon came into conflict with the official Church of England. The resulting religious prejudice led to an anti-Methodist sentiment that brought much criticism aimed toward Methodist converts. In the early 1770s, Francis Asbury (1745–1816) accepted John Wesley’s call for volunteers to become missionaries in the American colonies. Asbury joined other itinerant (travel to different communities) preachers who spread Methodism to all the colonies and their frontier settlements on horseback. He was a leading force in Americanizing (make more independent from England’s religious organizations) the church after the Revolutionary War and, in a move sanctioned by Wesley, organized the Methodist Episcopal Church in America in 1784. In 1794 the first black African Methodist Episcopal (AME) church was dedicated and in 1816 Bishop Asbury ordained Richard Allen (1760– 1831) as America’s first black bishop. Racial prejudice leading to segregation (separation of the races in public places) was deeply entrenched in society during the Civil War (1861–65) and, although Methodists opposed slavery, deep divisions developed within the church. By the early twentieth century, the church was facing many serious challenges including a split over racial equality in society as well as opposition to American involvement in World War I (1914–18) based on their pacifist beliefs. 108

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Leontine Kelly

The Underground Railroad The Underground Railroad was a network of homes, businesses, and churches across the United States that helped runaway slaves escape throughout the nineteenth century. The slaves were escaping the American South to slave-free states in the Northern United States and to Canada. The system was made up of people, both black and white, who formed a loose network to aid runaways needing food, shelter, and a guide on their escape route. Participants faced great personal risk in aiding fugitive slaves for it was a federal crime to help slaves flee from their owners. The terminology of the Underground Railroad developed in the 1830s when steam railroads were coming into use. Once slaves managed to escape from a slaveholder, they were taken to a place called a depot or station where they could rest and eat. Sometimes a conductor would enter a plantation posing as a slave to guide the

runaways to a station. Conductors also had the dangerous responsibility of guiding runaways from one station to the next. The stations were run by stationmasters who received money or goods from stockholders. Stockholders provided money as well as letters of recommendation to help runaway slaves find jobs. The Underground Railroad operated until emancipation (freedom from slavery) was achieved in the late nineteenth century in the United States. Memories of the Underground Railroad and those who participated in helping slaves escape including former slave Harriet Tubman (1822–1913) provided inspiration to social activists, such as Bishop Leontine Kelly, in the twentieth century seeking to end racial prejudice in America. Tubman made thirteen trips guiding some seventy slaves to the North and was responsible for providing information to another seventy slaves who made it north.

Racial missionaries Leontine and her siblings found a tunnel leading from the basement of their Cincinnati parsonage to the church next door. It had once been a station of the Underground Railroad (see box). The children were told how previous church members had taken great personal risk in helping fugitive slaves seeking aid from them during difficult times. Leontine was excited to be a part of such a church. However, she also questioned her father about the barriers of race and gender that persisted in their religious tradition during her lifetime. Her father explained that it was the duty of black Americans to be racial missionaries to the larger white church and to be patient while they worked for social change. The Turpeaus instilled a strong sense of self-confidence in their children and a deep commitment to the social and economic advancement of minorities. The lessons were not lost on Leontine as an adult. Leontine received her basic education in Cincinnati’s public schools and graduated from Woodward High School in 1938. She enrolled at Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

109

Leontine Kelly

West Virginia State College (later West Virginia State University) and completed her junior year in 1941. Leontine left the college without completing her degree in order to marry fellow student Gloster Current. The couple had three children. During World War II (1939–45), as they had earlier in World War I, Methodist church leaders professed pacifism (strongly opposing war). They were very vocal in calling for alternatives to international armed conflict. Following World War II church leaders supported the establishment of the United Nations (UN; an international organization founded in 1945 composed of most of the countries in the world) as a means for nations to resolve their disputes that were commonly driven by nationalism and ethnic prejudice.

The Galilee United Methodist Church Leontine and Gloster divorced in 1955. Leontine was deeply affected by the divorce. She immersed herself in prayer and Bible study in order to deepen her own faith and spirituality before moving on with her life. Ready to begin a new life, Leontine married James David Kelly, a United Methodist minister, in 1956. They moved to Knoxville, Tennessee, where he was the minister of the East Vine Avenue Methodist Church. She resumed studying for her bachelor’s degree at Knoxville College. In the mid-twentieth century, the Methodist Church was facing internal problems of unity. Out of this strife a movement grew, its goal to join with other Protestant denominations. Two issues central to the controversy had to do with a growing uneasiness with the problem of racism, both in the church and in the nation, and with women’s rights to full clergy status. As a result, women were granted full clergy rights in 1956. In 1958, James was reassigned to Richmond, Virginia. Leontine transferred to the Virginia Union University in Richmond and completed her degree with honors in 1960. That same year, she was certified as a lay speaker (church members who are not ordained as ministers) in the Methodist church and began teaching social studies at the local high schools. Finally in the later 1960s, a merger of church organizations came about. The Methodist Episcopal Church became the United Methodist Church. In 1966, James was reassigned to Edwardsville, Virginia, to pastor the Galilee United Methodist Church. When James died in 1969, the congregation asked Leontine to serve as layperson in charge of the church and 110

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Leontine Kelly

temporarily fill the vacancy left by her husband. It was at this time that Leontine felt the call by God to become an ordained (granted priestly authority) minister herself. Because her father, brother, and both of her husbands had been ministers, she was comfortable with the responsibility and began formal studies toward ordination. Kelly completed the course of study for ordained ministers and was ordained as a Deacon in the Methodist church in 1972. Kelly left the Galilee Church in Edwardsville in 1975 to serve as Director of Social Ministries for the United Methodist Virginia Conference Council on Ministries until 1977. Continuing her studies, Kelly earned her Master of Divinity degree from Union Theological Seminary in Richmond in 1976. She was ordained as an Elder (one who assists pastors during worship services as well as conducts other church administrative duties) in the church in 1977. Throughout the 1970s, Kelly became increasingly involved with the United Methodist clergywomen’s movement. The goal of the movement was to break down the barriers posed by gender prejudice and gain greater access for clergywomen in all the church’s administrative positions, including the office of bishop. Kelly left the Virginia Conference Council in 1977 when she received a call to pastor the Asbury-Church Hill United Methodist congregation in Richmond. While at Asbury through the early 1980s, Kelly became active in educational programs. She served on the Richmond School Board and was director of a cooperative urban outreach ministry that was headquartered at Asbury.

Bishop Kelly Kelly left Asbury in 1983 to join the United Methodist Church’s national staff. She served as Assistant General Secretary in the area of Evangelism (spirited traveling preachers) for the Board of Discipleship in Nashville, Tennessee. Kelly also served on the Health and Welfare Ministries Division of the General Board of Global Ministries. Earlier in 1980, the United Methodist Church had elected its first female bishop, the Reverend Marjorie Swank Matthews (1916–1986). Due to mandatory (required) retirement policies, Matthews left her position in 1984, leaving the church once again without a female bishop. With nineteen new bishops due to be elected that year, Methodist clergywomen recruited competent female candidates to apply for the position. Kelly was selected as one of the candidates and eventually was accepted into the position. On July 20, 1984, Kelly was consecrated (dedicated to religious service) as bishop in the Western Jurisdiction of the United Methodist Church. Her selection made her the second woman, and the first black Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

111

Leontine Kelly

woman, to be elected to the top ministerial office of a major religious denomination in the United States. Bishop Kelly moved to the San Francisco area from Tennessee to assume her duties over the California and Nevada conferences. She was now responsible for supervising over one hundred thousand members in 386 churches. Kelly used her tenure as bishop to increase the church’s involvement in community development to help the poor and needy. She was an advocate especially for women and ethnic minorities within her jurisdiction. Bishop Kelly accepted several church leadership roles during her term. She was selected to serve on the executive committee of the Council of Bishops, was chosen as president of the six-member Western Jurisdictional College of Bishops, and was also a member of the General Board of Church and Society. Upon her retirement in 1988, at the age of sixty-eight, Kelly taught for one year as a part-time visiting professor at the Pacific School of Religion in Berkeley, California. In her retirement from the ministry, she became active in several Methodist church projects including the Bishops’ Initiative on Children and Poverty, and the Africa University in Zimbabwe. In 2000, Bishop Kelly was inducted into the National Women’s Hall of Fame in Seneca Falls, New York.

For More Information BOOKS

Hine, Darlene Clark. ed. Black Women in America. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc., 2005. Lanker, Brian. I Dream A World: Portraits of Black Women Who Changed America. New York: Stewart, Tabori & Chang, Inc., 1989. Salem, Dorothy C., ed. African American Women: A Biographical Dictionary. New York: Garland Publishing, 1993. Salzman, Jack, David L. Smith, and Cornel West, eds. Encyclopedia of AfricanAmerican Culture and History. New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan, 1996. Smith, Jessie Carney, ed. Epic Lives: One Hundred Black Women Who Made a Difference. Detroit, MI: Visible Ink Press, 1993. WEB SIT ES

‘‘History of the Church.’’ The United Methodist Church. http://archives.umc.org/ interior.asp?ptid=1&mid=346 (accessed on December 11, 2006). 112

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Leontine Kelly

PBS. ‘‘The Underground Railroad.’’ Africans in America: Judgment Day. http:// www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part4/4p2944.html (accessed on December 11, 2006). ‘‘Women of the Hall: Bishop Leontine Kelly.’’ National Women’s Hall of Fame. http://www.greatwomen.org/women.php?action=viewone&id=92 (accessed on December 11, 2006).

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

113

Ruhollah Khomeini BORN: c. 1902  Khomein, Iran D I E D : June 3, 1989  Tehran, Iran

Iranian religious cleric, political leader

‘‘Islam was dead or dying for nearly fourteen centuries; we have revived it with the blood of our youth. . . . We shall soon liberate Jerusalem and pray there.’’

he Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini was an Iranian political and spiritual leader who founded the Islamic Republic of Iran. He served as its Supreme Leader until the time of his death. Opposed to Western influence and the secularization (separation of government from direct religious influences) of Iran, Khomeini joined the revolution that deposed the Shah of Iran in 1979. Officially ordained as the Leader of the Revolution, he called for Islamic revolutionaries across the Muslim world to follow Iran’s example. The Iran Hostage Crisis and the Iran-Iraq War (1980–88) occurred under his leadership. He was named Time Magazine’s Man of the Year in 1979 and appeared on its cover again in 1980 and in 1987.

T

A Persian heritage Ruhollah Khomeini. H ULT ON AR CH IV E.

Ruhollah Khomeini was born in the rural town of Khomein, south of the capital city of Tehran, Iran. His exact date of birth is disputed but generally is 115

Ruhollah Khomeini

The Constitutional Revolution in Iran At the turn of the century, Iran was in a state of chaos with Russian influence in the north and British influence in the south of the country. The central authority of the Shah (king) in Tehran was limited by the power of rural chieftains and khans (landowners), in addition to the interference by foreign powers. In an effort to modernize the political system and end foreign influence, a group of intellectuals and high-ranking clerics proposed a written code of laws for Iran. Their stated goal was to establish a democratic government where the people would rule themselves. Opponents viewed the reforms as the Westernization of Muslim Iran. The resulting dispute brought about the Constitutional Revolution in 1905. An elected government was established and a constitution was written in 1906. The parliamentary system limited the scope of royal power. Many clerics joined the new order as teachers and legislators. Although

the constitution still relied on Islamic law, other clerics remained resentful about the events that altered their role and authority in Iranian society. The Nationalists who supported the Shah, and the Democrats who supported the Constitution, briefly lived together peacefully. However, the Shah soon had many Democrats detained on a variety of charges. Some were killed and others sought asylum (safety) with foreign embassies. After bloody riots broke out in the streets of Tehran, the Shah dissolved the National Assembly and declared martial law (law enforcement placed in the hands of a military rather than civil authorities). The fighting ended in 1909 with the Democrats gaining complete control of the capital and the government. The Shah was forced into exile in Russia and his thirteen-year-old son was named as his successor. The National Assembly continued to struggle for control of the country throughout the difficult years of World War I and into the 1920s.

recorded between 1900 and 1902, the same time as the birth of the Constitutional Revolution in Iran (see box). Ruhollah was the son and grandson of Shiite mullah’s (Muslim religious leaders) who were minor landowners. His grandfather, Seyyid Ahmad, migrated to Khomein from India, but the family historically originated in northeastern Iran. Men in the family assumed the title of Seyyid because they claimed descent from the Prophet Muhammad (571–632). Ruhollah’s father, Seyyid Mostafa, died while Ruhollah was an infant. His mother, Sadiqeh, and an aunt raised Ruhollah and his four siblings in Khomein. His early education was in the local religious school with private tutors added later for special subjects such as logic and science. Before his sixteenth birthday both his mother and his aunt had died, leaving Ruhollah under the guardianship of his elder brother, Morteza. As World War I (1914–18) came to an end, Ruhollah prepared to continue his education in an Islamic (see box) seminary. In 1921, he chose the seminary in Arak in order to study under some of the most 116

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Ruhollah Khomeini

prominent clerics of his time. Seminary students wore skull caps and short jackets until they commited themselves to religious learning and were initiated at a special ceremony. Ruhollah was initiated in the summer of 1922. He exchanged his skull cap for the customary turban, which identifies a true seeker (talabeh) who has publicly committed to a new way of life. It is a symbol of respect and responsibility in Muslim society and is worn with a long cloak and tunic. Ruhollah’s turban was black because he was a seyyid. Non-seyyids who are members of the clergy wear white turbans and are known as sheikhs. After his initiation, Ruhollah followed his teacher and mentor to the emerging seminary at Qum (also spelled Qom), located ninety miles south of Tehran. Attaching oneself to a successful mentor was very important in the competitive atmosphere of a seminary because major scholars were assured monetary support from wealthy Muslim donors. Under the guidance of his mentor, Ruhollah studied law and Islamic taxation. He also took a special interest in mystical philosophy (Irfan). After graduation, Ruhollah spent many years teaching as well as writing extensively on these subjects. In 1929, he married Khadija Thaqafi, the daughter of a wealthy and respected cleric. They had several children during their sixty-year marriage.

The turban and the crown In 1921, Reza Khan Mirpanj (1878–1944) led a coup (surprise overthrow of the government) in Iran that eventually gave him supreme power as the King of Kings. He became Shah and founded the Pahlavi dynasty to carry on his line of descent. Reza Khan believed that adopting Western institutions and creating a modern economy was the only way for the country to rid itself of poverty and foreign interference. He pursued a secular (not related to religion) campaign with a dress code which required men to wear European suits and hats. Mullahs had to apply for a permit in order to keep their religious dress and traditional turbans. Ruhollah helped his students with their exams to ensure they qualified to keep their clerical dress. Ultimately, Reza Khan introduced a controversial law forbidding women to wear veils. The religious community resisted Reza Khan’s move toward republicanism (a government run by representatives elected by the public) and fought any legal changes that might weaken Islam. In 1941, British and Soviet troops occupied Iran forcing Reza Khan into exile in South Africa. His son, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, was sworn in as the Shah while still in his early twenties. Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

117

Ruhollah Khomeini

Islam Islam is the youngest of the world’s great universal religions in the twenty-first century. A follower of Islam is called a Muslim (one who submits). The founding of the Muslim community began under Muhammad the Messenger, born around 571 CE in the stony valley of Mecca, in current day Saudi Arabia. The final word of Allah (God) given to his prophet Mohammed is recorded in the Qur’an (also known as the Koran). This divine revelation of commands, rewards, and punishments was originally written in Arabic. Its central article of faith states that ‘‘There is no God but Allah.’’ After the Qur’an, the next most important Islamic text is the Hadith. It is a record of the acts and sayings of the Prophet Muhammad and his Companions. The Hadith transmits the sunna, the traditions and practices of the Prophet, to illustrate what he would approve of even into modern times. Islam emphasizes the brotherhood of men in fulfilling the will of Allah. So it is a matter of great concern that a clear direction specifically outlines the moral and social regulations for living a good life. A Muslim communes (intimately communicates) with Allah at all times.

Therefore, there is no separation between faith and life, including politics and business, to a believer. Mecca remains the most holy city in Islam. It is a focal point for all Muslims as well as the center of the hajj, the foremost of all Muslim rituals. The hajj is a compulsory pilgrimage to Mecca that is undertaken by over two million Muslims each year. Muslims conceive of their religion as a community that obeys Allah not with passive acceptance, but in the joyful performance of the Sharia (Way), which is the Law of Islam. The Sharia is seen as a comprehensive legal system that governs all phases of Islamic life. For the first four centuries of Islam, the collecting of the Hadith and the codification of the Law were the chief activities of Muslim scholars. Of the various law schools that formed, four survived as the main body of Sunni (Traditional) Muslims. The four accepted schools that define religious duties and interpretations of the law are the Hanafi, Maliki, Shafii, and Hanbali. Branching off of the main body of Muslims are a variety of sects, Shiites, who feel they are set apart from all other Muslims and regard Sunnis as enemies of the faith.

Ruhollah led a delegation of mullahs to Tehran in order to protest the continuation of the Pahlavi dynasty when Mohammad-Reza was sworn in. However, he returned to Qum without having experienced much support. The following year he published the first version of his booklet Kahf-olAsrar (Key to the Secrets), which condemned anyone who criticized Islam. Three years later, an author he had specifically mentioned in his booklet was murdered by the terrorist group Fedayin-e-Islam (Martyrs of Islam) for criticizing the faith and therefore betraying Islam. In the 1950s, Ruhollah was acclaimed as an ayatollah (major religious leader). He changed his surname to the town of his birth in accordance with clerical tradition. The Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini had long been interested in politics. He was widely read on the subject but now took an 118

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Ruhollah Khomeini

active role in the process. Initially, like his mentor before him, Khomeini viewed the clergy’s role in politics as supervisory rather than as outright rule. He was reluctant to claim personal leadership. Ultimately, he would side with the activist faction of Islam to promote an Islamic state. The Shah had already indicated he no longer needed the support of the clerics as he proceeded with his father’s secular modernization throughout the 1950s. The government announced a legislative bill in 1962 that would allow women to vote for the first time. It also did not require candidates for local councils to be Muslims. Khomeini considered this an attack on traditional Islam and began a political campaign against the Shah. His power base was among the bazaar (a market place where many kinds of goods are sold) merchants, guilds (an association of people in the same trade or business), and lower clergy of Iran who were not opposed to Islamic reform but traditionally resisted challenging government power because of the possible financial penalties. This group was now open to disputing the authorities because they felt their livelihood was threatened by the Shah’s attempt to shift power toward the new commercial and industrial middle class. With the passing of time, it became evident that there was a need for a new style of leadership in the clergy if the mullahs were to fight secularization and the narrowing of their powers. People were looking for an individual leader to unite the faithful and bring together all the diverse views of Islam, especially in Iran and Iraq. With his position of leadership established, Khomeini easily found followers among the devout. His black turban ensured financial contributions could be counted on. Muslims believed a donation tax to Khomeini would gain Allah’s favor because he was a descendant of the prophet Muhammad. The money he brought in allowed Khomeini to increase his influence among the clergy by spending it in the theological centers. In 1963, Khomeini began to use his position as a spiritual leader in Iran to publicly denounce the government of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. He went on to condemn the United States and Israel as co-conspirators with the Shah in their efforts to erase Islam. The Shah responded by forcing Khomeini into exile in 1964. He first went to Turkey, then Iraq, and finally to France in 1978.

The rule of the Ayatollah During his exile, Khomeini continued to agitate for revolution. He sent tapes of his sermons to circulate in bazaars and homes in Iran. Over time, he became the acknowledged leader of the opposition. Khomeini wrote a Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

119

Ruhollah Khomeini

Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini greets the crowds at Tehran University after his return to Iran from exile in France during the Iranian revolution. # AL AI N DE JEA N/ SY GMA /C OR BIS .

book titled Guardianship of the Islamic Jurists that outlined his plan for an Islamic republic in Iran. When the Shah was deposed in January 1979, he fled to the West for safety. Khomeini was invited to return to Iran, where he declared a provisional (temporary) government while elections were prepared. Former members of the overthrown monarchy faced vigilante (groups of people administering punishment outside the law) bands who were merciless in the wake of the revolution. Human rights violations included mass interrogations (questioning) and executions of anyone who opposed the revolutionary government. The Iranian people voted overwhelmingly to replace the monarchy with an Islamic republic and a new constitution. Every eight years, the citizens of Iran would elect a group of clerics called the Assembly of Experts. This assembly would select and monitor the Supreme Leader, who would have absolute authority in the theocratic system (government ruled by religious authority). The constitution also required that a 120

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Ruhollah Khomeini

president be elected every four years from a group of approved candidates. Khomeini was officially ordained as the Leader of the Revolution and initiated as the Supreme Leader for life in the new Islamic Republic of Iran. Anti-American sentiment was running high in Iran. In reaction to the American refusal to return the Shah to Iran for trial, Khomeini supporters seized the U.S. embassy in Tehran on November 4, 1979, taking hostages. Additional hostages were taken at the Iranian Foreign Ministry. Khomeini announced that Iran’s Parliament would decide the fate of the American embassy hostages. Before long, the Americans launched a failed rescue mission. Fifty men and two women were held hostage for 444 days before their release was finally negotiated.

Islamic revolution Sharia (Islamic law) was introduced under the Ayatollah Khomeini’s rule with a dress code for both men and women. Freedom of speech and freedom of the press were allowed only as long as they did not contradict Islamic law. Opposition to the religious rule of the clergy or Islam was not tolerated at any level. Those who disliked post-revolutionary Iran were allowed to leave the country. Khomeini called for Islamic revolutionaries across the Muslim world to follow Iran’s example. He called his campaign an effort to export the revolution. The secular state of neighboring Iraq viewed Khomeini’s campaign as dangerous because it threatened to incite Iraq’s majority Shiites as it had done in Iran. Believing Iran to be in a weakened position, Iraq launched a full-scale invasion of Iran in September 1980, an act which started the Iran-Iraq War. Iraq’s aggression was supported by the West, who feared the possibility of the spread of Islamic revolutions throughout the oil-rich Persian Gulf states. The high costs of the eightyear war finally convinced the involved parties to accept a truce negotiated by the United Nations (an international organization founded in 1945 composed of most of the countries in the world). Nothing was gained by either party. In early 1989, the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini issued a fatwa (religious decree) against a British Muslim author named Salman Rushdie. Although Rushdie had no ties to Iran, Khomeini considered his novel, The Satanic Verses, offensive to Islam and to the prophet Muhammad. Khomeini called for Muslims everywhere to kill Rushdie if given the opportunity, as it was their religious duty. Rushdie went into Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

121

Ruhollah Khomeini

hiding and eluded capture. Suffering from cancer, Khomeini died a few months later. However, the fatwa lived on, contributing to the bitterness existing between Iran and the West. Millions of Iranians mourned the loss of their leader, who was buried at Behesht Zahra cemetery in Tehran.

For More Information BOOKS

Hoveyda, Fereydoun. The Shah and the Ayatollah: Iranian Mythology and Islamic Revolution. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers, 2003. Martin, Vanessa. Creating an Islamic State: Khomeini and the Making of a New Iran. New York: I. B. Tauris & Co., 2000. Moin, Baqer. Khomeini: The Life of the Ayatollah. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1999. Taheri, Amir. The Spirit of Allah: Khomeini and the Islamic Revolution. Bethesda, MD: Adler & Adler Publishers, Inc., 1986. WEB SIT ES

‘‘Time 100: Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.’’ Time Magazine. http://www. time. com/time/time100/leaders/profile/khomeini.html (accessed on December 11, 2006).

122

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Nelson Mandela B OR N: July 18, 1918  Transkei, South Africa

South African social activist, politician

‘‘I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society. . . . It is an ideal which I hope to live for and to achieve. But if needs be, it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die.’’

elson Mandela is a South African political leader and lawyer who emerged as a national voice in the fight against apartheid. Apartheid is an official policy of racial separation and discrimination that literally means ‘‘separateness.’’ In his struggle against racial discrimination, Mandela became a leader in the African National Congress and cofounder of the African Youth League. He was also a cofounder and leader of Umkhonto we Sizwe (Spear of the Nation). His political activities resulted in a long imprisonment that made him an international symbol of the conflict in South Africa. Mandela’s prison number, 46664, has been immortalized in song and film in recognition of his role as a cultural icon (familiar symbol) of freedom and equality worldwide. From 1994 until 1999, Mandela presided over South Africa as the first president to be elected in a multi-racial democratic election. Faced with a deeply divided nation, he received global praise for his diplomacy in bringing

N

Nelson Mandela. # D AV ID TU RN LEY /C OR BI S.

123

Nelson Mandela

South Africa into the twenty-first century and was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1993. In South Africa, he is respectfully known as Madiba, an honorary title descending from his elders, who ruled in the eighteenth century.

Rolihlahla: The troublemaker Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela was born on July 18, 1918, in the tiny village of Mvezo, South Africa. He is the son of Nosekeni Fanny and Gadla Henry Mphakanyiswa, appointed chief of Mvezo by the Thembu tribal king. The village is located in the district of Umtata, capital of the Transkei, which is situated 800 miles east of Cape Town and over 500 miles south of Johannesburg. Transkei is home to the Thembu, who belong to the Xhosa nation and speak the Xhosa language. Gadla named his son Rolihlahla, which literally means ‘‘pulling the branch of a tree,’’ but whose meaning would more accurately translate as ‘‘troublemaker.’’ Gadla was an advisor to the king of the Thembu people and a historian of the Xhosa nation. Each Xhosa belongs to a clan that is named after a male ancestor. Mandela belongs to the Madiba clan, named after a Thembu chief who ruled in the eighteenth century. When Mandela was seven years old, he became the first member of his family to attend school. His mother Fanny was a Christian and sent him to a nearby Methodist mission school where he would receive an English education. On his first day of school, his teacher, Miss Mdingane, told him his new English name was Nelson. Two years later, Gadla died and Mandela was informally adopted by Jongintaba Dalindyebo, reigning king of the Thembu people. He would be Mandela’s guardian and benefactor (one who assists another) for the next ten years. Mandela transferred to a Methodist school next door to the palace and received all the benefits and advantages provided to the king’s other children. At the age of sixteen, Mandela participated in the Xhosa ceremony, which marked his passage to manhood. He received the name Dalibunga, meaning ‘‘Founder of the Bungha.’’ Bungha is the traditional ruling body of the Transkei.

A continuing education As a member of the royal household, Mandela was being prepared to counsel (officially advise) the rulers of the tribe, just as his father had done before him. In order for that to happen, it was necessary that Mandela continue his education. In 1937, nineteen-year-old Mandela traveled to Healdtown to attend the Methodist College at Fort Beaufort. He received a liberal arts education. He also developed an interest in long-distance running and boxing as well. An excellent student, Mandela finished his 124

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Nelson Mandela

courses with such high marks that he was enrolled in the South African Native College at Fort Hare to begin work on his bachelor of arts degree. The College at Fort Hare was the only residential center of higher education for blacks in South Africa. Anglican, Methodist, and Presbyterian churches combined their resources to establish the college. It drew scholars from all over Southern, Central, and Eastern Africa. To receive a degree from the college ensured personal advancement in any career then open to black Africans. Mandela arrived in 1938 wearing his first suit, an outfit given to him by Jongintaba to celebrate the occasion. During Mandela’s second year at Fort Hare, he reacted to university policies he found objectionable. He participated in a boycott (to stop buying a certain product until demands are met) of the Students’ Representative Council and was asked to leave the institution. Upon his return home, King Jongintaba announced that he had arranged marriages for both his son Justice and for Mandela, according to Thembu law and custom. Both young men were displeased with the selections made for them. They agreed that their best option was to escape. They departed for Johannesburg.

Life under apartheid Mandela managed to find work as a clerk in a law firm in Johannesburg. With ambitions of becoming a lawyer, he registered at the University of South Africa (UNISA) and completed his degree by correspondence course (method of schooling where study materials and tests are mailed between instructor and student) in 1942. Early in 1943, Mandela enrolled at the University of Witwatersrand to work on a bachelor of laws degree, or LL.B. Witwatersrand, also located in Johannesburg, was one of only four English-speaking universities in South Africa that allowed blacks to attend courses in specialized fields. For the first time, he attended classes with white students. It was a new experience for Mandela as well as for the university because he was the only black student. His law professor was not especially encouraging, as he held the view that neither women nor Africans were meant to be lawyers. He believed they all lacked the discipline to master the fine points of the law. Keenly aware of the racist laws that separated whites from nonwhites in South Africa, Mandela chose to dedicate himself to the liberation of his people. In 1943, he and other young members of the African National Congress (ANC) formed the African Youth League (AYL) to work for social change in their country. In 1944, Mandela married Evelyn Mase. They had four children together. Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

125

Nelson Mandela

The AYL advocated non-cooperation with the ruling political party by encouraging strikes and boycotts (to stop using a certain service or buying a certain product). Racial tensions were high in South Africa as World War II (1939–45) came to an end. The Nationalist Party (NP) proposed a system of government called apartheid (a policy of racial separation and discrimination). The NP won the general election in 1948 and immediately began putting laws in place to impose apartheid in South Africa. That same year, Mandela was admitted to the bar. He and a partner set up the country’s first black legal practice. His law firm provided affordable legal counsel to many blacks who were caught up in the increasing discrimination of the apartheid system but had no other means to fight back. Mandela continued in an active role with the ANC, and when it launched the Defiance Campaign in 1952, he was the national organizer. For his part, Mandela was arrested and given a nine-month suspended sentence. Under the national Suppression of Communism Act, Mandela’s name was added to the list of those who were banned from public meetings and had their movements and activities severely restricted. Mandela used some of his newfound free time to renew his interest in the sport of boxing. In 1955, South Africa’s nonwhite population formed the Congress of the People to oppose the policies and practices of apartheid. They met outside of Johannesburg that year and adopted the Freedom Charter, a formal declaration of freedom. The NP responded by arresting 156 individuals and charging them with treason (attempting to overthrow the government). The Treason Trials lasted until 1961, with all of the accused being acquitted (found not guilty). Mandela’s marriage to Evelyn ended in divorce in 1957 and the following year he married Winnie Nomzano. They had two children together.

Spear of the Nation The Treason Trials had served to focus the world’s attention on South Africa and its racial policies by the time they ended in March 1961. Continuing oppression and escalating violence within the country resulted in the NP banning the ANC in the spring of 1960. Lacking a political outlet for liberating his people, Mandela no longer focused on nonviolent methods. He joined other ANC leaders in forming Umkhonto we Sizwe, meaning the ‘‘Spear of the Nation,’’ in November 1961. Mandela was chosen as their leader. The fight was taken underground (secretly conducted) with a campaign of sabotage. The movement targeted government offices used to administer apartheid and military bases used to enforce it. 126

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Nelson Mandela

Stephen Biko Stephen Biko became a prominent opponent to apartheid while a student at the University of Natal Medical School. Convinced that nonwhites in South Africa needed an organization of their own, he cofounded the South African Students’ Organization (SASO) in 1969 and was elected its first president. The SASO urged blacks to reject their physical and mental subjection. Biko encouraged all races, not just blacks, to work together toward that end. In 1972, Biko began working full time for the Black Community Programmes (BCP). He also submitted articles to the SASO newsletter under the pen-name (a name used by an author other than their real name) Frank Talk. The BCP’s purpose was to draw the black community’s attention to its own oppression and to encourage a sense of pride with the slogan of black consciousness. His efforts

resulted in the influential Black Consciousness Movement (BCM), with Biko as a leading voice. Biko was banned by the apartheid government in 1973, which meant he could neither talk to more than one person at a time nor make speeches. His movements were restricted to his home town of King William’s Town. The popular young activist was arrested four times between 1975 and 1977 for organizing protests against laws of discrimination. Biko was arrested under the Terrorism Act following the Soweto Riots of 1977 and suffered fatal injuries while in police custody. His death caused outrage in South Africa and international condemnation against the apartheid government. Biko was seen as a martyr by a generation of black students. In 1987, his story was told in Richard Attenborough’s film Cry Freedom.

Mandela began a life on the run from the authorities. He secretly left the country and met with African leaders in Algeria and elsewhere in January 1962. He returned at the end of summer and was arrested, charged with incitement (urging civil disobedience), and sentenced to five years in prison. In 1964, this became a life sentence when Mandela was convicted with other prominent ANC leaders at the Rivonia Trial. Charges involved sabotage and crimes of treason. Mandela was moved to a high-security prison on Robben Island, off the coast of Cape Town, to serve out his life sentence. While at Robben Island, a movement began to secure Mandela’s release, with Winnie Mandela campaigning constantly on behalf of her husband. Mandela’s name became closely associated with anti-apartheid campaigns. Global interest grew in the future political actions of South Africa. International condemnation of South Africa increased in the aftermath of the Soweto Riots in 1976. The rioting occurred between black youth and government authorities when Stephen Biko (see box), the popular young anti-apartheid leader, died in police custody. Biko became an immediate worldwide symbol, second only to Mandela, in the struggle against apartheid. From prison, Mandela called for continuing pressure Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

127

Nelson Mandela

by the people to crush apartheid in order to create a democratic and free society. After eighteen years in his tiny cell at Robben Island, Mandela was moved to a prison on the mainland called Pollsmoor because of his ill health. His refusal to make a political deal to secure his own release in 1985 gave him almost mythical status to black South Africans. It also resulted in an outpouring of honors and tributes from around the world.

Rise to the presidency Mandela was finally released in February 1990, after twenty-eight years in prison. South African president F. W. de Klerk (1936–) called for the release of political prisoners and officially ended apartheid’s forty-twoyear rule in South Africa. The ban on the ANC was lifted and Nelson Mandela became its president. His triumph was somewhat marred in 1991 when Winnie Mandela was sentenced to six years in prison on four counts of kidnapping a fourteen-year-old black activist who was eventually murdered. Her sentence was suspended and a fine was imposed. The couple separated in 1992 and divorced in 1996 on grounds of Winnie’s adultery (extramarital affairs). The laws of apartheid took years to unravel, but the last whites-only vote was held in 1992. The government negotiated a multi-racial government and a new constitution for South Africa. In 1993, Mandela and de Klerk were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for their work in promoting a new democratic nation. General elections in 1994 resulted in a win for the ANC, and Mandela became the new president of South Africa. From 1994 until 1999, Mandela presided over South Africa’s transition while faced with a devastated economy and ecology. He was praised for his international diplomacy and his ability to heal the wounds of apartheid while bringing the nation into the twenty-first century. Mandela personally promoted racial harmony by publicly embracing former enemies and proponents of apartheid. He invited his prosecutor from the Rivonia trials to lunch as an example of the spirit of tolerance required to heal the divided nation. In 1998, Mandela married Graca Machel, widow of Samora Machel, former president of Mozambique. Nelson Mandela’s political success was tempered by the ruinous HIV/AIDS epidemic that devastated South Africa at the end of the twentieth century. Mandela and his administration were severely criticized for their ineffectiveness in dealing with the disease that took many lives. Following his time in office, Mandela sought every opportunity to bring attention to the tragedy in his country in order to educate 128

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Nelson Mandela

Nelson Mandela exits prison in February 1990; he was held there as a political prisoner for twenty-eight years. # PAT RI CK DUR AN D/ CO RB IS S YG MA.

and promote research internationally. In 2003, his prison number was used in the 46664 AIDS fund-raising campaign. Despite declining health, Mandela spoke at the XV International AIDS Conference in Bangkok in the summer of 2004. His eldest son died of the disease in January 2005. Mandela continued to lend his voice to educational organizations of all kinds that promote the ideals of international understanding and peace.

For More Information B O O KS

Benson, Mary. Nelson Mandela: The Man and the Movement. New York: W. W. Norton and Company, 1986. DeLuca, Anthony R. Gandhi, Mao, Mandela, and Gorbachev: Studies in Personality, Power, and Politics. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers, 2000. Juckes, Tim J. Opposition in South Africa: The Leadership of Z. K. Matthews, Nelson Mandela, and Stephen Biko. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers, 1995. Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

129

Nelson Mandela

Mandela, Nelson R. Long Walk To Freedom: The Autobiography of Nelson Mandela. New York: Little, Brown and Company, 1994. Meredith, Martin. Nelson Mandela: A Biography. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1997. WEB SIT ES

Nelson Mandela Foundation. http://www.nelsonmandela.org (accessed on October 28, 2006). ‘‘Nelson Mandela.’’ Nobel Peace Prize. http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/ laureates/1993/mandela-bio.html (accessed on December 11, 2006).

130

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Wilma Mankiller B OR N: November 18, 1945  Tahlequah,

Oklahoma

Native American political leader, social activist

‘‘Prior to my election, young Cherokee girls would never have thought that they might grow up and become chief.’’

ilma Mankiller, a member of the Cherokee Nation (Native American tribal government located in Oklahoma), became a social activist in the 1960s, seeking an end to prejudice and discrimination against Native Americans in the United States. When she became Principal Chief of the Cherokee Nation in 1985, Mankiller was the first female chief of a major tribal government in the United States. The Cherokee Nation was the second largest tribe in the United States. Only the Navajo had more members. During her ten years as Principal Chief, Mankiller was a driving force in the economic development of the tribe, with a goal of becoming economically self-sufficient.

W

Native American poverty Wilma Mankiller. STEPHEN SHUGERMAN/GETTY IMAGES.

Wilma Pearl Mankiller was born at Tahlequah, Oklahoma, in November 1945. Tahlequah was the capitol of the Cherokee Nation. Her father, Charlie Mankiller, was of Cherokee ancestry and her mother, Irene Mankiller, of 131

Wilma Mankiller

Dutch-Irish. She had six brothers and four sisters. Her family had a farm on Mankiller Flats in remote Adair County, where she grew up. The name Mankiller came from an old military title acquired by one of Wilma’s ancestors, reflecting the rank of a person responsible for protecting a village. Mankiller’s great-grandfather was among sixteen thousand Native Americans who were forced to relocate as white settlement spread throughout the southeastern United States. They were sent to newly set aside lands for Indians west of the Mississippi River in the late 1830s. The Native Americans affected were primarily members of Indian tribes living in the Southeastern United States referred to by American white society as the Five Civilized Tribes for their pursuit of farming, living in relatively permanent villages, and ownership of slaves. They included the Cherokee, Choctaw, Creek, Chickasaw, and Seminoles. The U.S. government abandoned efforts to civilize, or develop, Indian peoples by forcing them to become full-time farmers. Instead, it adopted policies to isolate Indian peoples often through forced removals to new areas. The 1830 Indian Removal Act led to mass relocations of those surviving Indian peoples still remaining east of the Mississippi River. By the end of 1836 some 6,000 Cherokee had voluntarily moved to the new territory set aside for them in the future state of Oklahoma. However, thousands refused to leave and remained in their traditional homelands of the Southeast. Finally, in March 1838 an American military force of 7,000 soldiers under the command of General Winfield Scott (1786–1866) began rounding up Cherokee in Georgia. From there he moved to Tennessee, North Carolina, and Alabama. In all some 17,000 Cherokee were taken at gunpoint from their homes, not allowed to pack or take belongings. They were first taken to gathering areas in preparation for the long march to the west. The 1,800-mile, six-month forced march became known as the Trail of Tears. They traveled by boat, foot, and wagon. Onefourth of those who embarked on the long wintertime march died along the way. Many more died after arriving in the newly established Indian Territory that later became the state of Oklahoma. Mankiller’s greatgrandfather, John Mankiller, survived the ordeal. He was given the family farm in 1907, the year Oklahoma gained statehood, as part of the government settlement for the forced relocation of the Cherokee.

A move to California After the Mankiller farm suffered two straight years of drought (little to no rain), the family decided in 1956 to accept an offer through the U.S. 132

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Wilma Mankiller

government Indian relocation program to move to San Francisco and start a new life. Mankiller was ten years old when they moved. Their experience in California proved very difficult. Wilma’s father was never able to get stable employment as promised by the program, and they faced very strong prejudice. Even her name attracted taunts in school. A family tragedy occurred in 1960, when one of her brothers died from burns suffered in a home accident in the state of Washington, where he lived and worked as an agricultural laborer. After graduating from high school, Mankiller enrolled in Skyline Junior College in San Bruno, California, and then switched to San Francisco State College where she attended classes from 1963 to 1965 before leaving without graduating. Mankiller studied sociology and found a job while in school as a social worker. At San Francisco State College she met Hector Hugo Olaya de Bardi. They married in November 1963 when she was still just eighteen years of age. They had two daughters in the mid-1960s. In 1971, Mankiller’s father died in San Francisco of a kidney disease. The family took him back to Oklahoma to be buried. Mankiller herself would soon suffer the same kidney disease, but would be able to treat it.

Social activist The hardships and disappointments Mankiller faced growing up in Oklahoma and San Francisco inspired a social activist spirit. She met other young American Indian activists at San Francisco State who formed an organization known as United Indians of All Tribes. Among other activities and protests, these activists adopted a plan to occupy and reclaim Alcatraz Island in San Francisco Bay as Indian country. The leader was Richard Oakes (1941–1972), a San Francisco State student and member of the Mohawk tribe. The Alcatraz occupation (see box) inspired not only Mankiller, but a new Indian rights movement called the American Indian Movement (AIM). This movement would join other social movements active at the time such as those centered around civil rights, gay rights, and women’s rights. She decided to commit her life to helping American Indian peoples. Mankiller participated in other demonstrations in the San Francisco area and also served as a volunteer for San Francisco attorney Aubrey Grossman, who defended American Indians in legal cases. She also worked in preschool and adult education programs for the Pit River Tribe in Northern California. During the early 1970s, she gained skills in community organization and program development. Mankiller’s timeconsuming and emotional commitment to social justice and making a Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

133

Wilma Mankiller

Indian Occupation of Alcatraz Island Cherokee political leader Wilma Mankiller began her fight against ethnic and racial prejudice as a student at San Francisco State University in the late 1960s. In 1969, a group of American Indians from many different tribes, who called themselves United Indians of All Tribes, seized control of Alcatraz Island. They occupied the island for eighteen months. Alcatraz Island, located in the middle of San Francisco Bay, had been used as a U.S. military installation after 1850 and was converted to a federal maximum security prison in 1934. In 1963, the prison operation was closed and

it became a historical site. The United Indians claimed that the island should be returned to Indian ownership as it had been prior to 1850. The protest group also wanted to establish a native education and cultural center there. The Indians were finally forcibly removed by federal law enforcement agents, and many were arrested. However, the dramatic occupation inspired the beginning of the American Indian Movement and the social activism of many people like Mankiller. American Indian groups continued using the island for ceremonies into the twenty-first century.

difference eventually strained her marriage. In 1974, she divorced and became a single parent and returned to her ancestral home in Oklahoma in 1976.

A return to Oklahoma Upon returning to her home, Mankiller found a job as community development director of the Cherokee Nation. She tackled various rural development projects that involved repairing housing for the poor and improving water systems. Mankiller also resumed her academic studies. She enrolled in the Union for Experimenting Colleges and Universities, where she earned a degree in social science in 1977. She then entered graduate school, majoring in community planning at the University of Arkansas in Fayetteville in 1979. This meant a long commute from her home in Oklahoma. One morning when returning from school, Mankiller was struck in a head-on collision with another car that was passing on a curve. Mankiller was seriously injured and barely survived. The driver of the other car, who died in the crash, was one of her best friends. Mankiller persevered through almost twenty operations to repair the injuries from the accident. Her leg was barely saved from amputation. During her long period of recovery, she had time to reflect further on her life, and she deepened her spiritual commitment to helping others. 134

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Wilma Mankiller

However, other health issues followed in the aftermath of the accident. In 1980, Mankiller came down with myasthenia gravis, a serious condition that involves a deterioration or weakness of muscles. Eventually Mankiller recovered from her injuries and was able to successfully treat the muscle disease. She resumed work for the Cherokee tribe, trying to improve the educational opportunities and economic conditions not only for the Cherokee Nation but for the region of northeastern Oklahoma in general. Her popularity increased as her programs, including community revitalization projects, brought national attention. Her reputation as an expert in community development became well established.

Government leadership In 1983, Ross Swimmer, who had been serving as Principal Chief of the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma since 1975, asked Mankiller to run as his Deputy Chief in the next election. Mankiller accepted the invitation. The tribe consisted of seventy thousand tribal members and controlled approximately 45,000 acres of land in Oklahoma. During her candidacy, she faced considerable gender prejudice in the male-dominated tribal society of the Cherokee. She received repeated threats on her life and had her car tires slashed. Despite the prejudices Mankiller experienced, she and Swimmer were victorious in the tribal elections. Mankiller took office on August 14, 1983, and served as Deputy Chief for over two years, until Swimmer received an appointment to be head of the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs in Washington, D. C. Swimmer resigned his position and Mankiller was sworn in as Principal Chief on December 5, 1985. Her gender continued to be an issue at first, as some male tribal members held back support for her new programs. However, she soon won respect by showing her capable leadership skills, and dedication for tribal economic improvement. For example, Mankiller helped Cherokee members establish small businesses through creation of the Cherokee Nation Community Development Department and other programs.

A role model for women Mankiller remarried in October 1986 to longtime friend Charlie Soap. Soap had been the tribal director of economic development before she took the position. In 1987, Mankiller received much satisfaction when she ran for the tribal leadership office on her own and won with 56 percent of the vote. Mankiller had clearly become accepted as a legitimate leader despite old gender prejudices. Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

135

Wilma Mankiller

President Bill Clinton congratulates Wilma Mankiller after presenting her with the Presidential Medal of Freedom for her strong leadership of the Cherokee Nation, January 1998. AP M AG ES.

Mankiller received many awards for her dedication to improving the lives of American Indians and being at the forefront of American Indian politics as a woman. She had become a role model for American Indian women, and the recognition she achieved reflected that. In 1986 she received the American Leadership Award from Harvard University in 1986 in recognition of her political leadership skills and was inducted into the Oklahoma Women’s Hall of Fame. She received an honorary degree from Yale University in 1990. Four years later, she entered the National Women’s Hall of Fame in New York City and the general Oklahoma Hall of Fame. Health problems returned to plague Mankiller toward the end of the twentieth century. In 1990, she needed a kidney transplant to survive. 136

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Wilma Mankiller

Her brother Donald provided the kidney. Despite her health condition, she chose to run for another term of office in 1991. She won election once more, this time in a landslide victory that garnered 82 percent of the vote. In 1993, Mankiller published an autobiography titled Mankiller: A Chief and Her People. The book made the national best-seller list. In the book, she provided a history of the Cherokee people. Mankiller also addressed the modern problems of the Cherokee Nation, including the need for improved opportunities for jobs, education, and healthcare. She identified the need to maintain and reinvigorate elements of Cherokee culture, such as Cherokee language. For that purpose, she established the Institute for Cherokee Literacy.

Retirement from tribal office In August 1995, Mankiller decided not to run for reelection. She departed from her position as Principal Chief largely due to health problems and to pursue other, local issues. In 1998, U.S. president Bill Clinton (1946–; served 1993–2001) awarded Mankiller a Presidential Medal of Freedom, the nation’s highest civilian award given for distinguished service to society. She had clearly become the most popular Cherokee of the twentieth century. The population of the Cherokee increased from 55,000 to 156,000 during her tenure as leader. The tribe had around 1,200 employees and an annual budget over $75 million. Mankiller remained active into the twenty-first century as an inspiration for others. In 2004, she published the book Every Day is a Good Day: Reflections by Contemporary Indigenous Women. Female activist Gloria Steinem (1934–; see entry), who was married at Mankiller’s home, wrote a foreword for the publication.

For More Information B O O KS

Birchfield, D.L. The Trail of Tears. Milwaukee, WI: World Almanac Library, 2004. DeCapua, Sarah. The Cherokee. New York: Benchmark Books/Marshall Cavendish, 2006. Dell, Pamela. Wilma Mankiller: Chief of the Cherokee Nation. Minneapolis, MN: Compass Point Books, 2006. Elish, Dan. The Trail of Tears: The Story of the Cherokee Removal. New York: Benchmark Books/Marshall Cavendish, 2002. Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

137

Wilma Mankiller

Kucharczyk, Emily Rose. Wilma Mankiller: Native American Leader. Detroit, MI: Blackbirch Press, 2002. Mankiller, Wilma. Mankiller: A Chief and Her People. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1993. Mankiller, Wilma. Every Day Is a Good Day: Reflections by Contemporary Indigenous Women. Golden, CO: Fulcrum Pub., 2004. Salas, Laura Purdie. The Trail of Tears, 1838. Mankato, MN: Bridgestone Books, 2003. WEB SIT ES

American Indian Movement. http://www.aimovement.org/ (accessed on December 11, 2006). National Congress of American Indians. http://www.ncai.org/ (accessed on December 11, 2006). ‘‘Wilma Mankiller Former Principal Chief of the Cherokee Nation.’’ http:// www.powersource.com/gallery/people/wilma.html (accessed on December 11, 2006).

138

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Golda Meir B OR N: May 3, 1898  Kiev, Russia D I E D : December 8, 1978  Jerusalem, Israel

Russian-born prime minister of Israel, feminist

‘‘Peace will come when the Arabs will love their children more than they hate us.’’

olda Meir was the fourth prime minister of the State of Israel since its establishment in 1948. At the age of seventy-one, Meir became the third female prime minister of government in modern history. With the establishment of Israel in 1948, Meir was appointed the first ambassador to the Soviet Union. The following year, she was elected to the first parliament (government) of the State of Israel. She was eager to help form the developing nation. In 1956, Meir became Israel’s foreign minister, one of the first female foreign ministers in the world. Meir served as Israel’s prime minister from 1969 until 1974. Throughout her term of office, Meir focused on the rights of Jewish people to settle in Israel. The major event of her administration was the 1973 Yom Kippur War fought between Israel and an Arab coalition (alliance) led by Egypt and Syria.

G

The kibbutz of Merhavia Golda Meir. AP I MA GE S.

Golda Mabovitch was born in Russia in 1896 to Blume Naiditch and Moshe Yitzhak Mabovitch. Like most Jews living in Eastern Europe, Meir’s family 139

Golda Meir

celebrated all the Jewish holidays and festivals, although the Mabovitchs were not particularly religious people. Moshe was a skilled carpenter who had moved his family from their hometown in Pinsk to Kiev, the largest city in the Russian Ukraine region, before Golda was born. He won a government contract to make furniture for school libraries. However, the job was canceled soon after they arrived. As a result, the family faced grueling poverty. The population of Kiev was infamous (had a horrible reputation) for its hostility toward the Jewish people who lived in the city. The Mabovitch family spoke Yiddish in the home and the synagogue (Jewish place of worship), but they spoke Russian when they ventured outside of these safe places. Even as a child, Meir was aware that the fear and hardships her family suffered were because they were Jewish. Meir’s parents moved her and her two sisters back to Pinsk in 1903, when rumors began to circulate that a pogrom (organized massacre of a minority group) would soon be coming to Kiev.

Pogroms When the territories of Poland were divided among several neighboring countries in the eighteenth century, Russia became home for the largest body of Jewish people in the world. The government’s response to an anticipated problem of controlling the Jews was to establish a program known as the Pale of Settlement. The Pale mapped out provinces where Jews were allowed to settle. Their movement outside those areas required government approval. In the early twentieth century, civil war in Russia was dividing the nation. Jews became scapegoats (people blamed unfairly for others’ difficulties). The government blamed Jews as the source of many problems afflicting Russia, including its severe economic difficulties. Revolutionists hoping to overthrow the government sought to incite a general uprising among the people. Relying on the anti-Jewish sentiment that existed in the country, they made false accusations against the Jews in order to increase religious prejudice. Prejudice directed at Jews in Russia resulted in violent pogroms against them. Angry mobs of people attacked the homes, shops, and synagogues of Jewish people with the intent to destroy them. Windows were smashed, doors broken down, and buildings looted of their contents. What was not stolen was destroyed. Civil and military authorities often showed little concern or had insufficient forces to offer protection from the mobs. By the mid-twentieth century, tens of thousands of Jews had been murdered during the pogroms and many thousands more had been wounded. 140

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Golda Meir

Zionism Zionism is the name given to a movement that calls for the reuniting of Jewish people and the resumption of Jewish reign in the Land of Israel. The term Zionism was coined late in the nineteenth century. The idea gathered greater momentum early in the twentieth century. Zionism was especially important in Eastern Europe because of widespread persecution of Jewish people who made their homes there. Inspired by the writings of Theodor Herzl (1860– 1904), small groups of Zionists began arriving in the Arab province of Palestine, the spiritual center of Jewry throughout the centuries. Herzl, a Jewish journalist from Austria, was founder of the World Zionist Organization. He is commonly called the father of the State of Israel. Jews across the globe joined the Zionist movement to work together for the creation of a Jewish state. The social climate in many European countries became increasingly anti-Jewish following World War I (1914–18). Zionist youth movements formed around the world, motivated

by the desire for a Jewish homeland. By World War II, they had played an important role in keeping the dream alive through education and political awareness. Following the war and the Holocaust, many survivors settled in Palestine and were instrumental in building the kibbutz movement (a collective farm or settlement in modern Israel). The large number of Jewish immigrants arriving in Palestine created a great deal of tension. The majority of Palestinian citizens were Arab Muslims. The stage was set for the long-term Arab-Israeli conflict into the twenty-first century. Following the establishment of the State of Israel, Jews became a religious majority of the nation’s population. The new state included a Minister of Religions in its cabinet to address the need for Jews, Christians, and Muslims to coexist in Israel. Citizens of the first generation born in Israel were called Sabras. Although intensely proud of their Jewish heritage, many considered themselves to be more Israeli than Jewish.

Leaving prejudice behind Seeking to escape their extreme poverty, the family immigrated (left their country of origin to reside permanently in another) to the United States in 1906, when Golda was eight years old. They settled in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and began the process of fitting in to a new country and learning a new language. Golda began school for the first time and also worked behind the counter of her mother’s small grocery store. Along with her family, Golda embraced Zionism (see box). In 1915, she joined the Poale Zion (Labor Zionist Organization). Following graduation from high school, Golda enrolled at the Teachers’ Training College that was part of the University of Wisconsin in Madison. Golda married Morris Myerson in 1917 and they immigrated to Palestine in 1921. After nearly two months aboard the SS Pocahontas, the couple arrived in Palestine and settled in the Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

141

Golda Meir

kibbutz of Merhavia. A kibbutz is a large commune based mainly on agriculture, but which relies somewhat on industry.

A declaration of independence Golda Myerson soon became involved in political and social activities. She joined those that favored the establishment of a Jewish national home in Palestine-Eretz Israel (Land of Israel). Being a gifted orator (public speaker) in both English and Yiddish, Golda rose rapidly in leadership positions. She and Morris had two children after they left the kibbutz and moved to Jerusalem. In 1934, Golda was invited to join the Executive Committee of the Histadrut (Jewish Labor Federation), becoming the Secretary of its Council for Women Workers. The German Nazi Holocaust (1933–45) dominated European Jewish lives from the late 1930s to the mid-1940s and thereafter. Approximately six million Jews and millions in other targeted groups, such as Gypsies and homosexuals, were murdered in mass killings that often involved gas chambers in specially constructed concentration camps. The camps were designed to kill as many people as possible, as quickly as possible. The escalation of anti-Jewish sentiment was fostered to some degree by the earlier pogroms. During the Holocaust, Meir lost all but one of her extended family members. They had remained in Pinsk after she and her family fled. Immediately following the war, Golda was chosen president of the political bureau of Jewish Agency in 1946. The British held a mandate over the territory of Palestine, meaning they had been assigned the responsibility by the League of Nations, an international organization formed after World War I, to administer the government of territories formerly ruled by the defeated Turkish Ottoman Empire. British authorities had arrested most of the Jewish community’s senior male leadership for seeking independence from Britain. These important posts placed Meir at the negotiating table with the British. This experience gave her invaluable training as a statesman (a person with experience in administering governmental affairs). On November 29, 1947, the United Nations (UN) General Assembly adopted the resolution to partition (divide) Palestine. The UN is an international organization formed in 1946 following the end of World War II (1939–45) to help resolve disputes between nations when necessary and maintain peacekeeping efforts at all times. 142

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Golda Meir

Golda Meir, as Israel’s Foreign Minister, attends the United Nations General Assembly in November 1956. A P IM AG ES.

On May 14, 1948, Jewish leaders in Palestine signed a declaration of independence and the new State of Israel was proclaimed. Just days before the state was formally recognized, Meir was sent in disguise as an Arab woman on a dangerous mission to meet with King Abdullah I (1882–1951) of Jordan. Her goal was to persuade him not to join in the anticipated Arab attack on Israel following the British withdrawal. Arab Palestinians, with the help of other Arabs, planned to drive the Jews out of the region before the land could be subdivided. Meir was unsuccessful in her mission because the King had already decided his army would join other Arab nations and invade the Jewish state. In the months following the UN decision to partition Palestine, the country was plunged into war. Israel prevailed in defending its new state. The war of 1948-1949 is often called the Israeli War of Independence. With the establishment of Israel, Meir was appointed as its first ambassador to the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union and the United States were left as the two world superpowers following World War II. Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

143

Golda Meir

She was elected to the first Knesset (parliament of the State of Israel) in the elections of 1949 on behalf of the Israeli Labor Party known as the Mapai. Morris Myerson died in 1951. Several years later Golda took the Hebrew version of her name, Meir, in 1956. That same year, she became Israel’s Foreign Minister. Meir was well known on the international political scene and spoke frequently at the United Nations, especially following the Sinai Campaign. The Sinai Campaign occurred when the Israeli army occupied the Sinai Peninsula in eastern Egypt in October and November 1956, in response to Egyptian terrorist attacks and blockades. Meir retired from the Foreign Ministry in 1965 after serving almost a decade in that position. She became a leader of Mapai.

The Six-Day War Between June 5 and June 10, 1967, Israel participated in another war. This time, the fighting was against the armies of Egypt, Jordan, and Syria. The Israelis quickly defeated the Arab forces. At this time, Meir was able to use her growing political popularity to unite several labor political parties in Israel. In 1968, the Mapai, Rafi, and Ahdut ha-Avodah parties joined together as the new unified Israel Labor Party. Meir was their secretary general. Following the death of Prime Minister Levi Eshkol (1895–1969) in March 1969, Meir was chosen to become the fourth Prime Minister of Israel. Throughout her tenure as Prime Minister, Meir continued to focus on the rights of Jewish people to settle in Israel. On October 6, 1973, Israel was once again found itself at war with its Arab neighbors. Egypt, Syria, Jordan, and Libya forces combined in a massive coordinated assault against Israeli forces along the Suez Canal in the south and at the Golan Heights in the north. Israel was unprepared for the attack, and the Arab forces won a number of initial victories. The United States intervened in the war by supplying military weapons that allowed Israel to resist its enemies and maintain its borders. Because the war began on the Jewish holy day called Yom Kippur, it is often referred to as the Yom Kippur War. A postwar inquiry led to heated debates over who was to blame for Israel being caught off-guard by the attack. Demands for new leadership in the country escalated. Nonetheless, Meir and the Labor Party were reelected at the end of 1973. However, due to the decline in political support, she was unable to get her cabinet members (key governmental advisors) to agree on policies. Meir resigned in April 1974. She died on December 8, 1978, and was buried on Mount Herzl in Jerusalem. 144

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Golda Meir

For More Information B O O KS

Claybourne, Anna. Golda Meir. Chicago, IL: Heinemann Library, 2003. Hertzberg, Arthur. Judaism. New York: George Braziller, Inc., 1962. Mann, Peggy. Golda: The Life of Israel’s Prime Minister. New York: Coward, McCann & Geoghegan, 1971. Meir, Golda. A Land of Our Own: An Oral Autobiography. Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society of America., 1973. Meir, Golda. My Life. New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1975. WEB SIT ES

‘‘Golda Meir.’’ Jewish Virtual Library: A Division of the American-Israeli Cooperative Enterprise. http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/ biography/meir.html (accessed on December 11, 2006). ‘‘Golda Meir (1898–1978). Israel’s Third Prime Minister.’’ 2006 Orthodox Union. http://www.ou.org/chagim/yomhaatzmauth/golda.html (accessed on December 11, 2006).

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

145

Slobodan Milosevic B OR N: August 29, 1941  Pozarevac, Serbia D I E D : March 11, 2006  The Hague,

Netherlands

Serbian political leader

‘‘We are not angels. Nor are we the devils you have made us out to be.’’

lobodan Milosevic was a political leader of Serbia and a key figure in the Yugoslav ethnic wars of the 1990s and the breakup of the socialist federation of Yugoslavian states. Milosevic led Serbia’s Socialist Party from 1992 to 2001. He maintained power by suppressing political opponents and controlling the media. Milosevic pursued nationalist policies involving strong ethnic prejudice. He was the first sitting head of state in history to be charged by an international tribunal for alleged war crimes (violating international laws of war). He was indicted (formally charged with a crime) by an international tribunal in May 1999 for crimes against humanity (murder of large groups of people) and later charges were added for genocide (the deliberate destruction of a racial, religious, or cultural group).

S

Slobodan Milosevic. # B AS C ZE RWI NS KI /R EUT ER S/ C OR BI S.

An educated background Milosevic was born in August 1941 in Pozarevac, Serbia, at a time when the region was occupied by German forces during World War II (1939–45). 147

Slobodan Milosevic

His parents were both of Montenegrin background. His father, Svetozar Milosevic, was a deacon in the Serbian Orthodox Church. His mother, Stanislava Milosevic, was a schoolteacher. They separated shortly after Milosevic’s birth. Both later committed suicide. His father died in 1962 and his mother hanged herself in 1974. Milosevic studied law at Belgrade University, where he became active in politics. At eighteen years of age he joined the Communist Party of Yugoslavia, which later in 1963 became known as the League of Communists of Yugoslavia. Communism is a system of government in which the state controls the economy and a single party holds power. Milosevic became head of the ideology (guiding ideas) committee of the student branch. During this time, he made friendships through the party that would be critical to his later climb to political prominence. One key friend was Ivan Stambolic (1936–2000), president of Serbia in the 1980s.

Entering the business world Following graduation with his law degree, Milosevic became an economic advisor to the mayor of Belgrade in 1964. In 1965, he married a childhood friend, Mirjana Markovic. Mirjana was a professor and also politically active in the League of Communists. She would serve as one of Milosevic’s political advisors throughout his career. They had two children, a son and a daughter. In 1968, Milosevic went to work in an executive position for Tehnogas, a state-owned natural gas company. In just five years, he became its president. By 1978, Milosevic became head of one of Yugoslavia’s largest banks, Beobanka. His banking business took him on frequent travels to the United States and France,where he learned English and French.

A political rising star As he did in business, Milosevic rose fast in politics. He became a member of the Serbian Communist Party’s central committee and then in 1982 a member of the presidium, the Party’s top decision-making authority. Serbia had long been in a region of political instability. Following World War I (1914–18) and the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, the Serbian kingdom joined the kingdom of Montenegro and various ethnic groups who had been ruled by the Ottomans. Among them were the Slovenes, Croats, Slavic Muslims, and Serbs. Together these groups formed Yugoslavia. The Serbs held political dominance. When World War II broke out in 1939, the German army and its allies overran Yugoslavia and divided 148

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Slobodan Milosevic

it for military occupation. In 1944, Communist forces pushed the Germans out, and a new Yugoslavian government formed; it was composed of six republics. Josip Tito (1892–1980) strictly ruled the new Yugoslavia, suppressing all ethnic hostilities, until his death in 1980. Mounting ethnic tensions led to an eight-person shared presidential position. Milosevic became active full time in the League of Communists by 1984, when he began serving as an advisor to former law school friend Stambolic. Milosevic was elected to follow Stambolic as chairman of the Belgrade City Committee of the League of Communists in April 1986. In that position, Milosevic became a prominent leader in Serbian politics. He gained much popularity among Serbs by publicly protesting the treatment of Serbs in Kosovo, a southern province of Serbia dominated by ethnic Albanians who controlled local governments. Milosevic charged ethnic persecution including police brutality.

Gains political leadership Milosevic’s public charges fueled confrontations between Serbs and Albanians. Milosevic claimed Serbian leaders—including Stambolic, who was now head of the League of Communists of Serbia—were not doing enough to protect Serbs. Milosevic’s constant attacks finally led to the resignation of Stambolic as leader of the League of Communists in December 1987. He remained president of Serbia. In February 1988, Milosevic replaced Stambolic as head of the Communists of Serbia. As party leader, Milosevic quickly began orchestrating elections of Serbs into key regional political positions, including in Kosovo itself in early 1989. He had an Albanian leader in Kosovo arrested. With the growth of Milosevic support in Serbian politics, the Serbian assembly ousted Stambolic as president in 1989, replacing him with Milosevic. In full leadership of the government by 1990, Milosevic led the National Assembly of Serbia in reducing the autonomy (independence) of Serbia’s provinces of Kosovo and Vojvodina. This was a very unpopular move in Kosovo, where Albanians greatly outnumbered Serbs. As a result, the new Serbian leaders in Kosovo ruled harshly, so as to keep Albanians under control. This caused alarm in other Yugoslavian provinces and among international human rights organizations. With a declining economy, there was a growing clamor for economic and political reform in Serbia. Milosevic wanted to maintain strong government control over the economy, known as socialism. Milosevic Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

149

Slobodan Milosevic

adopted populist (promotes the interests of common people) strategies, while at the same time promoted socialist state control of the economy.

Breakup of Yugoslavia With the collapse of the Soviet Union and European Communist governments in 1990, nationalism (belief that a particular nation and its culture, people, and values are superior to those of other nations) rose in importance as the unifying influence of ethnic groups. The LCY separated into various political parties. Readily adapting to the changing political conditions in the region, Milosevic led the transition of the Yugoslav League of Communists in Serbia to the Socialist Party of Serbia (SPS) by July 1990. He also guided the adoption of a new Serbian constitution by September 1990 that gave the president strong powers. In December, the first elections under the new constitution were held. Milosevic retained his political leadership of Serbia and his Socialist Party won a large majority of the vote for other elected positions. In the Kosovo province, most ethnic Albanians boycotted the elections. The elections showed that Milosevic was truly a popular leader among Serbs. Milosevic’s plan during this realignment of Yugoslav peoples was to establish a strong Serbian state that included all Serbs in the region, including those in Bosnia and Croatia. This idea, referred to as Greater Serbia, created an anti-Serbian backlash in other Yugoslav republics. Elections led to new governments in the other Yugoslav republics of Croatia and Slovenia. The new leaders promised greater political independence for their regions. In 1991, Milosevic was unwilling to accept a proposal from leaders of Croatia and Slovenia to create a new Yugoslavia composed of a loose confederation of largely independent states. The old federation of Yugoslavia had lost political unity. In March of that year, Milosevic declared that the federation was officially dead and Serbia was politically independent. This change gave the Serbs and Milosevic greater domination in domestic politics in their own country. In response, Slovenia and Croatia both declared their political independence in June 1991. Macedonia did the same in September 1991 and Bosnia-Herzegovina in March 1992. Milosevic’s Greater Serbia idea caused the breakup of the Yugoslav federation to speed up. With the departure of these various former Yugoslav states, the new Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was formed in May 1992. It included only Serbia and Montenegro. Though Dobrica Cosic was elected the first president of the Federal Republic, Milosevic held the true power from his Serbian president position. 150

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Slobodan Milosevic

The Srebrenica Massacre On June 2, 2005, prosecutors presented evidence at the war crimes trial of Slobodan Milosevic concerning the mass murder of Bosnians by Bosnian Serbs known as the Srebrenica Massacre. Until then, many Serbs had not heard of the extent of the tragedy or had been unwilling to accept that it actually occurred. However, after the evidence was presented at the trial, the Serbian public became outraged by the past actions of their special forces. Criminal investigators estimated that the Serb special forces under the direct command of General Ratko Mladic (1943–) murdered 8,106 Bosnian Muslim males of all ages. It was the largest mass murder in Europe since the Holocaust of World War II. In the early 1990s, conflicts between various ethnic groups in Yugoslavia escalated. Once such conflict occurred between the Serbs and Bosnian Muslims, who had begun calling themselves Bosniaks in 1993. When Bosnia and Herzegovina declared their political independence from Yugoslavia in October 1991, Serbian president Milosevic vowed to carve out some Bosnian territory for Serbia. Fighting between Bosniaks and Serbs followed. While the Bosnian Serb forces were well equipped with tanks and artillery, the Bosniaks were poorly armed. One key area the Serbs wanted was Srebrenica, a Bosnian Muslim area dividing surrounding areas primarily inhabited by Bosnian Serbs. Serbs decided to get rid of all Bosniaks living in Srebrenica. By early 1993, Serbian forces had isolated Srebrenica from other Bosnian Muslim areas. Its population was running out of food, medicine, and water. The United Nations sent a small contingent of troops to help establish peace and get supplies to Srebrenica.

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

By 1995 the situation was near catastrophic. Citizens were starving to death. In early July, Serbian special forces made their move and entered UN-controlled areas. As the group of lightly armed UN troops stood aside, the Serbs began the mass killings of the Bosnian Muslims. The Serbs would move through the crowds of panicked Bosnians, picking out males to be executed. Endless truckloads of males were taken from Srebrenica to killing sites in the country for execution. They were often bound, blindfolded, and shot with automatic rifles. Then bulldozers pushed the bodies into mass graves. Many people were wounded and buried alive with the dead. Women, children, and the elderly were placed on buses to be displaced to Bosnian territory elsewhere. Hundreds of the women and female children were raped while on their way to other territories. Thousands of males initially escaped and attempted a long march to safe areas, but most were killed by Serb forces who tracked them down and fired on them with tanks, machine guns, and artillery. Many committed suicide, sensing the futility of the situation. Within only a few days, the massacre was over. In an effort to hide or destroy the evidence of mass murders, in late 1995 Serbs moved many of the graves using heavy equipment. Reports by the few survivors led to investigations. By 2005, the UN had recovered about six thousand bodies in an effort to document the mass killings. They searched for and excavated mass graves. Mladic and other Serb military officers were indicted for genocide and various other war crimes. Investigators claimed it took considerable planning to kill so many people in only a few days.

151

Slobodan Milosevic

Milosevic further fueled ethnic conflict by charging that the Croats were intent on exterminating Serbs in Croatia. The Serbs in Croatia began seeking independence from the new Croatia in 1991. Milosevic sent Serbian militias (armies composed of citizens who are not professional soldiers) to assist the Serbs in Croatia. This led to open conflict that lasted into early 1992. The ethnic fighting spread in March 1992 to Bosnia and Herzegovina. Bosnian Serbs gained control of 70 percent of the country. Hundreds of thousands of non-Serbs were displaced from the Serb-controlled area. Thousands were killed and raped. One of the war’s atrocities was the Srebrenica Massacre (see box). As in Croatia, the Serbian government and its leader Milosevic were directly involved in the fighting. Alarmed by the deteriorating situation in the former Yugoslav region, the United Nations (UN; an international organization founded in 1945 composed of most of the countries in the world) imposed trade sanctions (restrictions) on the new Federal Republic in 1992 due to its interference with Croatia and Bosnia. Additionally, the new Yugoslavia was not admitted to the UN and was excluded from many other international organizations. During this time Milosevic often sought Russian assistance. He even visited leaders in China in November 1997. Fighting continued in Bosnia and Croatia into 1995, as the Serbian economy declined due to the international sanctions. Finally, Milosevic pulled out Serbian forces and reduced support for the Serbian rebellions. As a result, Croatian forces overran Serbs in August and forced them from Croatia into neighboring Bosnia and Serbia. In September, the Bosnian Serbs were defeated by Croatian and Bosnian ground forces supported by North Atlantic Treaty Organiztion (NATO) air strikes. NATO is a military defense alliance established in April 1949 among Western European and North American nations. Hundreds of thousands of Serbs were displaced. Ready to see the UN sanctions lifted, Milosevic signed the Dayton Agreement in November 1995 along with Bosnian, Croat, Serb, and Muslim leaders and the Croatian president. This officially ended the Bosnian conflict. While Bosnia remained a single state, it was divided into two ethnic areas to preserve the peace. Milosevic was now considered a peacemaker by many.

War in Kosovo By 1996, Milosevic’s second term of office as president of Serbia was running out and the constitution did not allow a third term. Therefore, seeking to retain control, he ran for the less important position of president 152

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Slobodan Milosevic

A graveyard in Serbia marks the individual remains of numerous Kosovo Albanians who were among the thousands killed in the 1999 war. The bodies were previously buried in a mass grave. This site was one of the key pieces of evidence in the trial of Slobodan Milosevic. # T HOR NE A NDE RS ON/ CO RB IS.

of Yugoslavia. He won easily and assumed his new office in July 1997. A friend and supporter of Milosevic won his former Serbian office. The long-standing conflict between Serbs and Albanians in Kosovo finally broke into open hostilities in 1997. The Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA), an armed Albanian group seeking independence for Kosovo from Serbia, began attacks against Serbian security forces and politicians. The fighting continued to escalate into 1999, when Serbian forces retaliated with greater intensity by launching a major offensive. Several thousand Albanians were killed and most of the Albanian population in Kosovo was displaced. In response, NATO launched numerous air strikes for ten weeks in the spring of 1999, forcing back the Serbian forces in Kosovo. Kosovo came under control of the United Nations and its peacekeeping force. Many Serbs now fled Kosovo, fearing retaliation by Albanians. During the Kosovo War, about ten thousand people were killed and four thousand remained missing. Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

153

Slobodan Milosevic

War crimes charges In May 1999, the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) located in The Hague, Netherlands, indicted (formally charged with a crime) Milosevic and four other top Serbian officials on war crimes and crimes against humanity (murder of groups of people) allegedly committed in Kosovo. The charges cited mass population displacements and murder of three hundred ethnic Albanians. Despite the charges and military loss in Kosovo, Milosevic still received strong popular support in Serbia. Milosevic and his supporters claimed the ICTY had no legal basis to charge him and others for crimes. On September 24, 2000, Milosevic ran for reelection as president. Yugoslav’s economic problems had worsened and Milosevic’s popularity was declining. Despite losing the election, he refused to accept the results. A mass public demonstration against Milosevic in Belgrade on October 5 led him to concede the end of his political career. With Milosevic gone, the UN added the new Yugoslavia as a member state on November 1. Following his departure from office, Yugoslavia’s new administration charged Milosevic with corruption and abuse of power. His actual arrest did not come until some time later on April 1, 2001, when he surrendered to Yugoslav authorities after an armed standoff at his fortified Belgrade rural home. Enticed by Western countries offering large amounts of financial aid, the Yugoslav authorities turned Milosevic over to the ICTFY for his war crimes trial on June 28. The resulting public outrage that Milosevic had been sent away forced Yugoslav officials to resign the following day. Within days, war crimes investigators began finding mass graves in Kosovo. On October 1, the ICTFY added further charges of genocide in Bosnia and war crimes in Croatia.

The trial Milosevic’s trial began on February 12, 2002. With his training as a lawyer and unwillingness to accept the legitimacy of the court, Milosevic served as his own lawyer. Many of his supporters in Serbia agreed with Milosevic’s opinion of ICTFY, and his popularity rose again. A legal team located back in Belgrade assisted in pulling together documents for him. The lawyers for the prosecution had to prove that Milosevic as president of Serbia had direct responsibility for the events that unfolded within Croatia and Bosnia. The prosecution took two years in presenting its case against Milosevic. Throughout that period, they provided detailed 154

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Slobodan Milosevic

summaries of the wars in Bosnia, Croatia, and Kosovo. The recounting of events drew much attention from the populations of the former Yugoslav federation. Despite this ongoing trial and publicity of the prosecution’s evidence, Milosevic ran for a seat in Serbia’s parliament in December 2003; he was defeated. As the trial progressed, Milosevic’s health steadily declined. He suffered from high blood pressure and experienced a severe case of influenza. The illnesses led to repeated delays in the trial. As time came for him to provide his defense to the court, the judge required that he use the services of two court-appointed British attorneys due to his poor health. Always known for his stubbornness and unwillingness to compromise on issues, the defense attorneys found that not only was Milosevic uncooperative, but many defense witnesses refused to appear due to their disdain for the court proceedings. In December 2004, the judge ordered the two lawyers to continue despite Milosevic’s lack of cooperation with them. Other criminal investigations also took place. In the summer of 2000, Stambolic was kidnapped. His body was not found until 2003. Milosevic was accused of ordering Stambolic’s murder. In 2005, former members of the Serbian secret police, along with several criminal gang members, were convicted of various murders including Stambolic’s. Milosevic’s trial came to an abrupt end on March 11, 2006, when Milosevic was found dead in his detention cell. He died of a heart attack. Just before his death, Milosevic had requested another delay in his trial so he could travel to see a physician in Russia. However, ICTY was hesitant to approve such a request for fear he would escape while under Russian supervision. Supporters claimed the tribunal hastened his death due to less than adequate medical attention. Opponents lamented that he avoided punishment and embarrassment. A memorial ceremony was held in Belgrade. It was attended by tens of thousands of supporters. Milosevic was buried in his hometown of Pozarevac.

For More Information B O O KS

Cohen, Lenard J. Serpent in the Bosom: The Rise and Fall of Slobodan Milosevic. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 2002. Doder, Dusko, and Louise Branson. Milosevic: Portrait of a Tyrant. New York: Free Press, 1999. Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

155

Slobodan Milosevic

Lebor, Adam. Milosevic: A Biography. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2004. Sell, Louis. Slobodan Milosevic and the Destruction of Yugoslavia. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2002. Silber, Laura, and Allan Little. Yugoslavia: Death of a Nation. New York: Penguin Books, 1997. WEB SIT ES

International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. United Nations. http://www.un.org/icty/ (accessed on December 11, 2006).

156

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Mine Okubo B OR N: June 27, 1912  Riverside, California D I E D : February 10, 2001  New York, New York

Japanese American artist

‘‘On February 19, 1942, by executive order of the President, the enemy alien problem was transferred from the Department of Justice to the War Department. Restriction of German and Italian enemy aliens and evacuation of all American citizens and aliens of Japanese ancestry was ordered.’’

hough she was born an American citizen, Mine Okubo was one of 112,000 Japanese Americans imprisoned by the U.S. government during World War II (1939–45). The removal of Japanese Americans from the West Coast was the largest mass evacuation of citizens in U.S. history simply because of their race. Treatment of Japanese Americans during the war represents one of the most striking chapters of ethnic prejudice (a negative attitude towards others based on a prejudgment about those individuals with no prior knowledge or experience) in U.S. history, resulting in endless hardships and misery. Though Okubo had never been to Japan and spoke little Japanese, she was imprisoned simply because her parents had come to the United States from Japan years earlier in order to give their children a better life in America. Prior to the war, Obuko had studied and worked hard to build an art career. She had studied in California and trained in Europe. However, unexpectedly she applied her artistic skills to record the Japanese American experience in the various stark, isolated internment camps scattered across much of the western United States for the next several years. Her drawings and written accounts documented the gross

T

157

Mine Okubo

ethnic injustice toward a part of the American population. Later generations could learn these lessons about the consequences of prejudice through her art and writing. She survived her imprisonment and built a highly acclaimed, long-standing art career.

An artist mother The daughter of Japanese parents, Okubo was born in June 1912 in Riverside, California. She had six brothers and sisters. Her parents were born in Japan, but while young had traveled to the United States, where they met. Her mother had graduated from the Tokyo Art Institute and was an artist specializing in calligraphy (ornamental line drawing) and painting. In 1903, Japan sent her mother to the St. Louis Exposition of Arts and Crafts to show her work. Liking America, she later came back and eventually met her husband, a landscaper and gardener. Though poor, they were able to sustain themselves and raised a family. She gave up her art to care for her family. Okubo was greatly influenced by her mother and developed her own artistic skills. In 1933 and 1934, Okubo attended Riverside Junior College, where she majored in art; later she transferred to the University of California at Berkeley. Like many students during the Great Depression (1929–41; a time of severe economic hardship worldwide), she worked at various jobs while going to school. She was a seamstress, housemaid, agricultural fieldworker, waitress, and tutor. During her graduate studies at Berkeley, Okubo learned the art techniques of fresco (an ancient form of painting by mixing paint with glue) and mural painting. She earned her bachelor’s degree in 1935 and a master’s degree in fine arts in 1936. In 1938, Okubo won Berkeley’s highest art honor, the Bertha Taussig Traveling Scholarship. Inspired by an uncle who spent much time in Paris, France, as an artist, Okubo used her scholarship to travel to Europe. She visited France, England, Sicily, and Italy to experience various art traditions. For eighteen months, she lived on a very modest budget. In Paris, she studied under noted painter Fernand Leger (1881–1955). The trip greatly influenced Okubo’s art style by adding life, color, and vitality to her creations.

World War II begins When Germany invaded Poland in September 1939 starting World War II, Okubo was traveling in Switzerland. New travel restrictions were adopted in Europe because of the war. These restrictions delayed Okubo’s return to her home base in France by several months. Upon her return, word arrived that her mother was seriously ill. With her mother ill and war breaking out, 158

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Mine Okubo

Okubo decided it was time to return to the United States after eighteen months of travel. When her mother died shortly after her return, Okubo moved back to Berkeley. She took along her younger brother, Toku, who enrolled in college at Berkeley. The Great Depression was still underway with jobs scarce. She was able to find work through one of the governmental programs creating jobs for unemployed citizens, the Federal Arts Project (FAP). The FAP was established by the federal government in 1935 to provide employment to unemployed artists. It goal was to provide artwork for non-federal public buildings. Until 1941 FAP artists painted over 2,500 murals and created almost 18,000 sculptures in addition to other art forms. As part of her duties, Okubo demonstrated fresco painting at the Golden Gate International Exposition on Treasure Island. At the exposition, she was able to work with famous Mexican artist Diego Rivera (1886–1957) who was painting an 1,800-square-foot mural depicting Latin American unity. While Rivera worked up on his scaffolds, Mine answered visitors’ questions below. Okubo also created mosaics and fresco murals commissioned by the U.S. Army at Fort Ord and the Oakland Hospitality House. Like many other artists of the Depression, Okubo’s work was influenced by the economic hardships and prejudice she saw around her. In 1940 and 1941, she held two exhibitions of her work at the San Francisco Museum.

Enemy aliens The surprise Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor in Hawaii on December 7, 1941, would forever alter Obuko’s life and that of thousands of other Japanese Americans. The U.S. government labeled Japanese Americans as enemy aliens along with German and Italian Americans, meaning they were citizens of countries officially at war with the United States and viewed with some suspicion. Within hours of the attack, agents from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) swept into Japanese American communities, arresting prominent (important) people they thought might have feelings of loyalty to Japan. Okubo’s father had long been active in traditional Japanese religious organizations in the United States and was among those arrested. The government sent him to a detention camp (a temporary facility created to hold political prisoners, war prisoners, and others deemed undesirable) in Missoula, Montana, and later to Louisiana. The government also closed all banks operated by Japanese Americans and froze (prohibited withdrawals from) Japanese American bank accounts. Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

159

Mine Okubo

Executive Order 9066 required all persons of Japanese ancestry, whether U.S. citizens or not, from areas of California, Washington, Oregon, and Arizona to sell their homes and possessions and report to a central relocation station. KA THL EE N J. E DG AR.

Only a few weeks later, U.S. president Franklin D. Roosevelt (1882– 1945; served 1933–45) ordered the removal of Japanese Americans from the West Coast. At the time, 112,000 Japanese Americans lived along the West Coast, with 93,000 (including Obuko’s family) living in California. The public was very fearful that the Japanese might attack the U.S. mainland. Despite the lack of any evidence, ethnic prejudices grew as they suspected that most any Japanese American could be a spy or 160

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Mine Okubo

saboteur (person who deliberately destroys property of enemies during wartime). The policy affected all Japanese-Americans, even those with only one parent of Japanese ancestry. The U.S. government ordered Okubo to report to a central relocation station established at Berkeley’s First Congregational Church on April 26, 1942. The government assigned Obuko and her brother a number that would serve as their personal identification for the next few years: 13660. The government gave them just three days to sell or store their belongings and report for relocation. They could only take with them what they could carry on board the buses in which they were transported. Toku was scheduled to receive his degree from the University of California only a few weeks later, a date he would be forced to miss. On May 1, government officials transported them to the Tanforan Race Track in San Bruno, California. Others were taken to abandoned stockyards and unused fairgrounds. Upon arrival, they were all given tests of loyalty to the U.S. government in the form of a series of questions quickly read to them in English, a language many did not speak well if at all. Mine and Toku stayed at Tanforan for six months, in horse stalls only slightly changed for human use, while waiting for permanent relocation camps located away from the coast to be constructed. Like Obuko and her brother, two-thirds of the 112,000 Japanese Americans rounded up were American citizens. Finally, the permanent camps were finished. The Obukos were sent to the Topaz camp in the high desert country of Utah. In addition to Mine, her younger brother, and her father, other family members went elsewhere. The government sent her older sister to the relocation camp at Heart Mountain in Wyoming. The military drafted (forced into service) her older brother, not realizing because of his large size that he was a Japanese American. By June 1942, all Japanese Americans living on the West Coast had been uprooted from their homes.

Recording camp experience As was true for all Japanese American detainees, life in these remote camps was challenging for Okubo. At one point, camp authorities discovered Okubo and her brother were siblings and not spouses. They tried to separate them because of the lack of privacy within the small living quarters, but Okubo successfully resisted. Japanese Americans were not allowed to have cameras, so Okubo began using her art skills to sketch scenes of daily life for the outside world to eventually see. Camp authorities did not know she had her sketching supplies with her. Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

161

Mine Okubo

Japanese evacuees are pictured at the Tanforan Assembly Center in California preparing to depart for a permanent relocation camp, 1942. # COR BI S.

Instead of using the bright, energetic colors she used in Europe and Berkeley, Obuko chose to use stark black-and-white drawings. They reflected the moods of imprisonment. Not only did Okubo want to capture the pain of confinement in her artwork, but also the Japanese American culture at the time. In all, she drew around two thousand sketches during her lengthy detention, completing as many as fifty drawings in a single month. Because privacy was almost nonexistent in the camps, Okubo would nail a quarantine sign on her door to keep from being discovered while drawing and then hid her drawings. In addition to sketching, Okubo joined with others at Topaz to publish a camp magazine called Trek. Camp authorities allowed this 162

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Mine Okubo

Japanese American Relocation Camps At first the War Relocation Authority (WRA) was going to place the uprooted Japanese Americans in existing communities away from the West Coast. But quickly they discovered no communities would accept the Japanese Americans. So, hurriedly, they constructed ten camps in seven states. Most were located in the remote, barren desert country. California and Arizona each had two camps. Others were located in Utah, Wyoming, Colorado, and Idaho. Two other camps were placed in Arkansas. The prison camps were surrounded with barbed wire and armed guards. They included wooden barracks and community bathing, toilet, and eating facilities. There was no privacy, and sanitation was very poor. Thin walls divided the barracks into small, one-room apartments lit with bare light bulbs. Cots were provided for sleeping. A family shared each apartment.

The government released all remaining detainees in December 1944. The detention of Japanese Americans during World War II was a great tragedy. In addition to having no legal rights to challenge their imprisonment, Japanese Americans lost an estimated four hundred million dollars in property and income. Despite the prejudice and fears aimed at Japanese Americans, no Japanese American was ever charged with war crimes. In fact, about thirty-three thousand Japanese Americans served in the U.S. armed forces, fighting for the very government that imprisoned their families on the home front. A Japanese American regiment fighting in Europe became the most decorated army unit of World War II. More than four decades after the internment of Japanese Americans in the United States, a formal U.S. government apology was issued in 1988 by President Ronald Reagan (1911–2004; served 1981–89).

activity because distribution was limited to people within the camp. Using equipment and supplies they could scavenge, they published three issues, one in December 1942 and others in February and June 1943. The publication described Topaz camp experiences. As the art editor, Okubo drew the cover illustrations that showed the collective efforts of the camp detainees. The first cover showed a family in camp preparing for Christmas. While at Topaz, Okubo witnessed the difficulties of prolonged imprisonment for families with young children. Parents struggled to raise children as normally as possible while surrounded by armed guards and barbed wire. Through time, detainees built a self-sufficient community in the desert. With the few materials available they built homes, schools, churches, and even a jail. Okubo’s art showed the pain felt by people shoved aside by the society they lived in. Parents who had worked hard to provide their children opportunities in America had lost everything and had no time left in their lives to start over. Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

163

Mine Okubo

Okubo finds a way out In 1943, the government began permitting detainees to leave the camps if they could show proof of employment. It was not easy for a person of an ethnic minority, imprisoned in a remote desert camp, to land a job. Nonetheless, about one-third of detainees were able to leave by early 1944. Most jobs found through friends or family were as field laborers, since a shortage of field workers existed. From Topaz, Okubo mailed some camp sketches to an art show in San Francisco. Her work won an award and led to a job offer from Fortune magazine to illustrate an article for them. In January 1944, Okubo received her release and moved to New York. She began working on the April Fortune issue, which focused on Japan. Given the ongoing ethnic prejudice against Japanese American, Okubo still faced many challenges. For example, she had difficulty finding an apartment available to her in New York. In spite of the prejudice, Okubo’s art quickly gained attention. With her new income, she could now afford to resume painting. Later in 1944, she held an art exhibit at the prestigious Rockefeller Center in New York. The following year, Obuko joined a traveling art show in which paintings and drawings of Japanese relocation camps were shown. Columbia University Press published a collection of her camp sketches in a 1946 book titled Citizen 13660. Obuko’s book was the first published account of Japanese American internment. That same year, the Riverside Public Library, located in her California hometown, proudly featured her work in an exhibit. The wide recognition of her work allowed Okubo to work as an independent illustrator for the next decade. Her illustrations appeared in most leading magazines. Besides Fortune, titles included Life and Time magazines and newspapers like the New York Times. Her drawings appeared in children’s books and as anatomical (dealing with biological parts of humans, plants, and animals) drawings in medical books. Forever influenced by the prejudice she experienced, she continued to address social issues in the United States in her artwork. After her war internment experience, Okubo wanted to get closer to her ancestral roots and turned more to Japanese folk art for inspiration.

A celebrated artist While working as an illustrator from 1950 to 1952, Okubo returned to Berkeley to lecture in art at the university. She also appeared in a 1965 CBS 164

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Mine Okubo

television news program investigating Japanese American internment. All the while, she kept busy with various art exhibits across the country, from California to Massachusetts. She won many awards for her work. Among the numerous publications her work appeared in during this time was a 1970 Time-Life book on life in America in the 1940s and 1950s. In 1972, she had her first major show of her work on the West Coast, held at the Oakland Museum in California. In 1981, Obuko testified at a public hearing in New York City before the U.S. Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians. Okubo stressed the need for the continuing education of American youth about the consequences of prejudice and the need for a formal U.S. apology to those detained during the war. Her book Citizen 13660 won the 1984 American Book Award, an award established in 1978 by the Before Columbus Foundation to recognize outstanding achievements by American authors. The award focuses on multicultural diversity in American literature. The book continued to be used in classrooms in history and ethnic studies classes into the early twentyfirst century. In 1991, Okubo received a Lifetime Achievement Award from the Women’s Caucus for Art. Okubo never married. Faced with the pronounced prejudices through her life, she pursued a lifelong search for her own self-identity, and a study of social relations. Her art continued to be showcased at various museums across the nation including the Oakland Museum. She died on February 10, 2001, at her home in New York’s Greenwich Village.

For More Information B O O KS

Burgan, Michael. The Japanese American Internment: Civil Liberties Denied. Minneapolis, MN: Compass Point Books, 2006. Dudley, William, ed. Japanese American Internment Camps. San Diego, CA: Greenhaven Press, 2002. Elleman, Bruce. Japanese-American Civilian Prisoner Exchanges and Detention Camps, 1941–45. New York: Routledge, 2006. Okubo, Mine. Citizen 13660. New York: Columbia University Press, 1983. Sun, Shirley. Mine Okubo: An American Experience. San Francisco: East Wind Printers, 1972. WEB SIT ES

Japanese American National Museum. http://www.janm.org (accessed on December 11, 2006). National Japanese American Historical Society. http://www.nikkeiheritage.org (accessed on December 11, 2006). Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

165

Rosa Parks B OR N: February 4, 1913  Tuskegee, Alabama D I E D : October 24, 2005  Detroit, Michigan

American civil rights activist

‘‘I would like to be known as a person who is concerned about freedom and equality and justice and prosperity for all people.’’

y not giving up her bus seat to a white man on December 1, 1955, Rosa Parks’s quiet defiance triggered the escalation of a major social movement by black Americans seeking equality under the law. Parks, a reserved, hardworking black woman, became one of the great contributors to the growing Civil Rights Movement in the 1950s. The Civil Rights Movement was a largely nonviolent struggle between 1945 and 1970 by black Americans who sought to bring full civil rights and equality under the law to all black Americans. Civil rights are the protections and privileges that law gives to all citizens in a society, such as the right to a fair trial, freedom from discrimination (treating some people differently than others or favoring one social group over another based on prejudices), right to privacy, right to peaceful protest, right to vote, and freedom of movement. The movement eventually ended legally enforced racial segregation (keeping races separate, such as in public places) in the South in the

B

Rosa Parks. AP I MA GE S.

167

Rosa Parks

1960s, though discrimination continued to be a major factor in everyday life. Parks herself remained active in her fight against racial prejudice (a negative attitude towards others based on a prejudgment about those individuals with no prior knowledge or experience) into the twenty-first century. She was a worldwide symbol of freedom and social justice.

Growing up in the South Parks was born Rosa Louise McCauley on February 4, 1913, in Tuskegee, Alabama. Her father, James McCauley, was a carpenter and her mother, Leona McCauley, a teacher. Her parents soon separated as James was eager to find greater opportunities in the North. Rosa, along with her mother and younger brother, Sylvester, moved to her grandparents’ farm in Pine Level, Alabama, 30 miles south of Montgomery. There she grew up in a rural southern setting with her mother the only teacher in a one-room schoolhouse. Rosa experienced the daily consequences of laws designed to keep blacks separate from whites in public. Known as Jim Crow laws, the state and local governments in the South passed numerous laws and ordinances since the 1890s, enforcing racial segregation. Hostility by whites toward blacks was severe. Rosa later remembered lying in bed hearing the Ku Klux Klan, a white supremacist terrorist organization, riding by in the dark of night. She also heard stories of lynching (killing by mob action, as by hanging or burning) in the area. Leona sent Rosa at age eleven to Montgomery to live with a widowed aunt so she could enroll in a private school for black youth, the Montgomery Industrial School for Girls. Founded by liberal-minded (not tied to traditional social roles) women from the North and partly supported by the Congregational Church, the school introduced Rosa to philosophies of selfworth along with strict discipline. Parks cleaned the classrooms in the school to help pay her tuition. The school also taught Rosa to take advantage of the few opportunities that come along for a black woman in American society. Rosa next attended classes at Alabama State Teachers College, later renamed Alabama State University, but left before graduating to get married.

Settling into Montgomery In 1932, at the age of nineteen, Rosa married Raymond Parks. They settled in Montgomery, Alabama. Raymond had been an orphan and trained as a barber. He worked at the Atlas Barber Shop while Rosa worked at various jobs as a file clerk, insurance saleswoman, and seamstress. With both of them employed, they enjoyed a modest level of prosperity. 168

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Rosa Parks

National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) Founded in 1909, the NAACP is one of the oldest and most influential organizations dedicated to eliminating racial and other forms of prejudice. The organization has always emphasized combating the many outcomes of prejudice, such as discrimination and violence, by providing legal services in key court cases and lobbying, or petitioning, legislatures including the U.S. Congress for stronger laws recognizing equality. Discrimination in employment, education, and healthcare has been a frequent issue addressed. The NAACP grew out of efforts by thirty-two prominent black Americans who began meeting in 1905 to take action against the many challenges facing people of color. The group had to first meet in Canada, near the U.S. border, because of racial segregation at American hotels. Harvard scholar W. E. B. DuBois (1868–1963) and anti-lynching activist Ida B. Wells-Barnett (1862–1931) played key roles in the founding. The American Jewish community also provided significant financial assistance. The first decades of the NAACP were spent fighting the Jim Crow laws of the South, which enforced

racial segregation in society, and lobbying for antilynching laws. The organization was unsuccessful throughout the 1930s in gaining passage of antilynching legislation. Successes in fighting segregation were slow but steady until they finally reached the 1954 landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Brown v. Board of Education, which ended statesponsored racial segregation in public elementary schools. The success in Brown spurred further efforts to end segregation. These efforts included the Montgomery bus boycott after the arrest of Rosa Parks for not giving up her bus seat to a white man. While other black organizations throughout the late 1950s and 1960s emphasized more direct action against discrimination and segregation— such as public protests and marches—the NAACP maintained its focus on legislation and court battles. The NAACP’s national office in the early twentyfirst century was located in Baltimore, Maryland, with seven branch offices situated from New York to California. In 2004, the organization had approximately 500,000 members.

Both Rosa and Raymond were also active in civil rights work all of their adult lives, and sought to improve life for blacks in the South. They both joined the local chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP; see box). Rosa was one of the first women to join the Montgomery chapter. During the 1930s, Raymond volunteered his time to help the legal defense of nine young black men charged with the rape of two white women based on hearsay, or word of mouth, and no evidence. The case became infamous (well known in a negative way) with the black youth becoming known collectively as the Scottsboro defendants (despite lack of evidence and a good defense, the defendants were found guilty by an Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

169

Rosa Parks

all-white jury). Rosa was youth adviser for the Montgomery NAACP and worked as the chapter’s secretary from 1943 until 1956. Rosa was also active in the Montgomery Voters League, dedicated to increasing black voter registration, worked with the black labor union Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters, and did volunteer work for the African Methodist Episcopal church. Parks persistently fought the Jim Crow laws of the South. In mid1955, Parks received financial assistance to attend a workshop at an education center in Tennessee known as the Highlander Folk School. The workshop taught skills in organizing and mobilizing black citizens to fight for workers’ rights in labor unions and racial equality, including school integration. In 1954, the U.S. Supreme Court had issued the landmark decision in Brown v. Board of Education.

Bus rules Parks passionately disliked the Montgomery city bus system and the Jim Crow laws and rules of behavior that applied. For example, blacks were often required to first step on board and pay their fare at the front of the bus, then get back off and go to the door near the rear to board for their seat. Sometimes the white bus driver would pull away before they could get back on. Once Parks refused to get off the bus after paying her fare and go to the rear door. The driver threw her off the bus. After the Brown decision, blacks were no longer willing to tolerate segregation on the buses and became increasingly frustrated with the slow changes. According to other city bus rules, the front several rows on a bus were reserved for whites. Blacks could not sit in them, even if the section was empty and the black section was standing room only. If the white section was full, then whites could request that blacks seated in the ‘‘colored’’ section get up and move further toward the back. That would not only include the person sitting in the seat desired, but others in that row as well. The NAACP, along with the Women’s Political Council (WPC), had tried working with the city bus company to improve treatment of blacks, but with little success. By 1955, the NAACP was looking for an incident that could be used to legally challenge the bus rules. In March 1955, fifteen-year-old Claudette Colvin, a high school student in Montgomery, Alabama, was arrested for refusing to give her seat to a white passenger. After consideration, the NAACP decided not to take the case because they feared the teenager would not be mentally strong enough to withstand the controversy and personal attacks that would accompany the lawsuit challenging segregationist policies. 170

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Rosa Parks

The fateful challenge On December 1, 1955, forty-two-year-old Parks boarded a city bus at the end of a day’s work as a seamstress at Montgomery Fair department store. Carrying a bag of groceries, she sat in the colored section immediately behind the full white section. A white man boarded the bus and approached Parks, asking that she give her seat to him, a move that would require the other three black passengers on that row to move as well. Tired of the constant humiliation at the hands of whites, Parks refused to obey, although the others got up and moved. The bus driver next ordered her to move to the back of the bus, but she still refused. The police were called and took Parks to the police station. She was booked, fingerprinted, and jailed. They charged her with disorderly conduct for violating a city bus ordinance. Allowed one phone call, Parks called E. D. Nixon, leader of the Montgomery NAACP, and informed him of her arrest. Nixon notified the WPC and word of Parks’s arrest spread quickly through the Montgomery black community. A meeting of fifty local black leaders was called for the following night. Participants at the meeting formed the Montgomery Improvement Association led by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. (1929–1968), the young pastor of the Dexter Avenue Baptist Church. Parks was named to the executive committee of the organization. The organization called for blacks to boycott the city buses on December 5. Since approximately 70 percent of the people who rode the city buses were black, this action posed a great financial threat to the bus company. Around forty-two thousand blacks car-pooled, rode taxis driven by black cabbies who only charged bus rates, or walked instead.

A legal landmark After her arrest Parks lost her job at the department store. Parks was found guilty on December 6 and fined fourteen dollars. The Improvement Association called for the bus boycott to continue indefinitely. The bus boycott sparked further protests against racial segregation in other parts of the South and the Civil Rights Movement received a great boost. Finally, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on November 13 that city bus segregation was unconstitutional. The Montgomery boycott lasted 382 days until December 20, 1956, when the city ended its segregationist rules in response to the Court decision. The boycott was financially devastating to the bus company which resisted changing its rules until forced by the Court ruling. The NAACP leaders decided that Parks would be an excellent defendant, perhaps because she was so familiar with NAACP activities Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

171

Rosa Parks

Rosa Parks (center) riding at the front of a newly integrated bus following the 1956 Supreme Court decision outlawing racial segregation in public transportation. DON CR AVE NS /TI ME LIF E PI CT URE S/ GE TTY IMA GE S.

and because of her history of social activism. After discussing it with her husband and mother, Parks agreed to accept the NAACP’s assistance in challenging her conviction. White lawyer Clifford Durr, an outspoken critic of racial prejudice, took the case for the NAACP. Parks had at times worked for Durr and his wife, Virginia, as a part-time seamstress. A lower court overturned Parks’s conviction and the law that it was based on. The city appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. In November 1956, the Court upheld the lower court’s decision that the Montgomery city ordinance was unconstitutional (conflicts with a nation’s constitution). The decision outlawed racial segregation in public transportation, marking yet another major setback for Jim Crow laws.

Move to Michigan Because of her defiant actions, Parks and her family faced continuous threats during this time period. Eventually, her husband Raymond suffered a 172

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Rosa Parks

nervous breakdown. In 1957, with her legal case freshly resolved, Parks, her husband, and her mother moved to Detroit, Michigan, to start a new life and be closer to her brother. Parks worked as a seamstress there for eight years. Then from 1965 to 1988, she served as an administrative assistant on the congressional staff of U.S. Representative John Conyers (1929–). She also remained active in the NAACP and joined the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), an organization formed in 1957 following the successful Montgomery bus boycott to promote nonviolent civil disobedience of unjust laws. Parks took part in marches and rallies in support of civil rights issues, including the famous 1965 march from Selma to Montgomery in protest of racial barriers to black voting rights. She also supported the end of apartheid (separateness of races by minority white government) in South Africa in the 1980s. Ten years after Raymond’s death, Parks founded the Rosa and Raymond Parks Institute of Self Development in 1987 in Detroit. The Institute promotes education and career training for black youth. Among its activities was a summer program for youth called ‘‘Pathways to Freedom.’’ The participating youth toured the country in buses learning about the nation’s history and particularly the civil rights movement. They visited locations of critical events in the movement’s history. Parks frequently joined the tours.

Highly recognized Known for her grace and dignity in her fight against racial prejudice, Parks received numerous honors and traveled extensively, meeting various world leaders. Detroit renamed Twelfth Street in 1969 in her honor, now called Rosa Parks Boulevard. In 1980, readers of Ebony magazine (founded in 1945, one of America’s oldest African American periodicals) chose Parks as the woman who had accomplished the most in advancing the black cause in the United States. She received at least ten honorary college degrees. The SCLC established an annual Rosa Parks Freedom Award named in her honor. She was inducted into the Michigan Women’s Hall of Fame in 1983 and the Alabama Academy of Honor in September 1999. In February 1990, on her seventy-seventh birthday, Parks was honored at Washington’s Kennedy Center by a gala event. Parks received the Medal of Freedom award from President Bill Clinton (1946–; served 1993–2001) in 1996. She also received the U.S. Congressional Gold Medal of Honor in July 1999, the highest honor a civilian can receive in the United States. The Rosa Parks Library and Museum was dedicated in November 2001 at Troy State University in Montgomery. In January 2002, Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

173

Rosa Parks

Parks’s former home in Alabama was added to the National Register of Historic Places. Parks wrote of her experiences. She published an autobiography, Rosa Parks: My Story, in 1992 and a book, Quiet Strength, in 1994. In 2002, the CBS television network released a movie made for television that directly involved Parks in its production titled The Rosa Parks Story starring actress Angela Bassett. Not all experiences in the 1990s were good for Parks. In 1994, twenty-eight-year-old Joseph Skipper, a young black man, broke into her home and attacked Parks, stealing $53 in cash. He was caught the next day. The public was outraged by the attack on such a highly respected and elderly woman. Parks lamented that social conditions would be such that youth would beat up elderly women for modest sums of money. In the early twenty-first century, Parks still lived much of the year in Detroit but spent winters in Los Angeles. She remained active in the civil rights causes. The actual bus she boarded on December 1, 1955, became a permanent exhibit at the Henry Ford Museum in Michigan. Parks died in October 2005 at her Detroit home of natural causes. Her death attracted considerable national attention in recognition of the central role she played in changing American society. Parks was only the twenty-ninth person and the first woman to lie in honor in the rotunda of the nation’s Capitol building as thousands strolled by her casket to pay respects. The cities of Detroit and Montgomery reserved the front row seats of their buses in tribute to Parks following her death until her funeral.

For More Information BOOKS

Brinkley, Douglas. Rosa Parks. New York: Viking, 2000. Greenfield, Eloise. Rosa Parks. New York: HarperCollins, 1995. King, Martin Luther, Jr. Stride Toward Freedom: The Montgomery Story. New York: Harper, 1958. Miller, Jake. The Montgomery Bus Boycott: Integrating Public. New York: Rosen Publishing Group, 2004. Parks, Rosa. Quiet Strength: The Faith, the Hope, and the Heart of a Woman Who Changed a Nation. Grand Rapids: MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1994. WEB SIT ES

National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). http:// www.naacp.org/ (accessed on December 11, 2006). Rosa and Raymond Parks Institute for Self Development. http:// www.rosaparks.org/ (accessed on December 11, 2006). 174

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Soraya Parlika 1944  Afghanistan

Afghan social activist

‘‘It was a very emotional moment. After years, the women of Afghanistan came out in the open. Under the Taliban we all wore burkas and did not know each other. Now we all know each other’s faces.’’

oraya Parlika was one of the foremost female activists in Afghanistan, even during the period in the 1990s when the country was under severe Islamic rule of the Taliban. For twenty-two years—from 1979 to 2001—Afghan women faced severe deprivations, first under Soviet Union domination, followed by civil war, and later Taliban rule. They were subjected to rape, forced marriages, domestic violence, torture, persistent fear, and general exclusion from society. These conditions caused not just physical harm, but long-lasting mental problems. Because the Taliban banned females from education, Parlika operated secret schools for young women in the Afghanistan capital of Kabul during their rule from 1996 to late 2001. She also secretly hosted women’s rights meetings in her home. Parlika had a great concern for the poor of the world and found the women of Afghanistan as impoverished as any group of people in the world.

S

Soraya Parlika. AP I MA GE S.

175

Soraya Parlika

The Red Crescent When the Taliban took control of Afghanistan in 1996, Soroya Parlika was head of the Afghan Red Crescent organization. The Red Crescent is the same humanitarian organization that people in the Western world associate with the Red Cross. The goal of the Red Crescent and Red Cross organizations is to ease human suffering often caused by prejudice and its resulting violent consequences. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) was founded in Geneva, Switzerland, in 1863. A branch was founded in each of almost two hundred nations, including creation of the American Red Cross in 1881, in the United States. During a war between Russia and Turkey in the late 1870s, a new symbol was adopted in place of the

Red Cross—the Red Crescent. It was feared the Christian likeness of the cross would alienate Muslim soldiers. The Red Crescent, they believed, would be more acceptable. The ICRC adopted the Red Crescent as an official symbol of the humanitarian organization in 1878 for non-Christian countries. In 1919, following World War I, the League of Red Cross Societies was established to better coordinate Red Cross activities. By 1983, the League was renamed the League of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies to reflect the growing number of Red Crescent branches that represented almost all nations that had majority Muslim populations. They included around 33 of 185 worldwide branches.

Communist oppression Soraya was born in 1944 to wealthy parents. Parlika was a Pashtun, a long-standing ethnic group that lived in parts of Afghanistan and neighboring Pakistan. During the 1970s, the Communist government of the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan was established under the watchful eye of the Soviet Union. Communism is a system of government where a single political party controls all aspects of society including all economic production and distribution. All religious practices are banned. Parlika and her brother became active Communist Party members. He was appointed a foreign minister in the Afghan government. Parlika was a good student and earned a university degree. She stayed in the academic setting as a university administrator. Parlika also became head of the Afghanistan Red Crescent, the Middle East branch of the Red Cross (see box). By the late 1970s, Communist rule was becoming increasingly harsh toward its citizens, particularly toward Afghan women. Political opponents were frequently executed or sent to prison. The oppressive strategies only increased the number of people in Afghanistan opposed to the Communist rule. Many Afghans fled to neighboring Pakistan and Iran, where they organized resistance movements (groups of people fighting 176

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Soraya Parlika

invaders of their country either through force or nonviolence) seeking independence from Soviet control. In 1979, Parlika was arrested and sentenced to eighteen months in prison for organizing a women’s movement that opposed the policies of Afghan president Hafizullah Amin (1929–1979) and his Communist rule. While in prison, she was tortured and bore for life the scars from cigarette burns on her arms. The government officials wanted the names of the women in her women’s rights group, but she refused to tell them.

Civil war and rise of the Taliban As nationalism (desire for independence) increased in Afghanistan, the Soviets grew uneasy. Islamic guerillas known as the mujahideen proved increasingly effective against the Afghan army. In late December 1979, Soviet secret police assassinated Amin as regular Soviet troops launched an invasion into Afghanistan to reestablish firm control. The mujahideen with U.S. backing proved very effective in their war against the Soviet Union, and eventually achieved victory in 1989. The end of Communist rule left a void in Afghan political leadership. Much of the country was locally ruled by various rival militant leaders known as warlords. Various factions competed for control, which led to a civil war by 1992. During the Afghan civil war, women suffered greatly as the country experienced tremendous destruction. The modest economic development accomplished under Soviet rule was devastated. Many women were murdered and raped by the mujahideen factions as civil strife raged for several years. The Taliban finally established control in 1996. With their rise to power, the Taliban suppression of the warlords was often brutal with executions. After 1996, the Taliban ruled about 70 percent of the Afghan population. Others remained under local rule. As described by Elaheh Rostami Povey in her 2003 article ‘‘Women in Afghanistan: Passive Victims of the Borga or Active Social Participants,’’ the Taliban placed new restrictions on women. For example, one restriction was that they had to wear burkas (long flowing garments that cover the whole body from head to feet) at all times in public to conform to the modesty expected of women. Women who disobeyed could face execution. Meanwhile, the Afghan economy slowed to a halt. Hunger and poverty became widespread, affecting women and children the most. The Taliban denied women their basic rights to education. Within three months of taking power in Kabul in 1996, the Taliban sent Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

177

Soraya Parlika

103,000 girls home from schools; 4,000 women studying at Kabul University were forced to leave. They also fired 7,800 female teachers comprising 70 percent of all teachers, and 50 percent of government workers who were female.

Poorest of the poor As reported by Povey, amid these changes existed some 3,500 femaleheaded households in the country. The number of these households increased following the death and devastation during the Soviet war and civil war. Women’s husbands and other male kin had been killed at alarming rates during more than twenty years of fighting. These women were frequently referred to by other members of society in a derogatory fashion as ‘‘unprotected women.’’ According to Povey, they were marginalized (unable to enjoy full benefits of society like others) from society. Unable to find work and not allowed to obtain an education, they became the poorest of the poor in Afghanistan. They received food and clothes from female neighbors and relied on women’s support networks for basic necessities, such as simple things like soap. The unprotected faced persistent discrimination and violence. They even received less food and few other necessities such as soap from aid agencies, largely because they were not registered citizens, and so basically did not have the official paperwork needed to receive aid. To survive, women made handicrafts and sold them to other women. Others simply begged. The Kabul streets were full of women and children beggars. Many suffered malnutrition and disease.

Afghan women’s movement During the years of civil war and Taliban rule, Parlika became leader of a small underground (secret) women’s movement that steadily gained membership throughout the 1990s. At the time of the Taliban rise to power in 1996, Parlika lived on the third floor of a Soviet-built block tower apartment complex in Kabul. It was bullet-riddled from the wars fought in Kabul. The apartment became a secret gathering place for women from all across the city. The Afghan women’s movement, as in the West in the 1960s and 1970s, was largely composed of well-educated women of means, such as doctors, teachers, and lawyers. Reaching out to the unprotected and other women, many women such as Parlika risked their lives by using their own homes for schools and support centers. These networks were able to 178

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Soraya Parlika

sustain some social unity in the region during these traumatic times of upheaval. This was critical for the process of reconstructing Afghanistan society that began in 2002 after twenty years of war.

A network of secret schools As described by Povey in her 2003 article, in the early 1980s, the Women’s Vocational Training Center was established in Kabul. It offered courses in English and other languages, computer skills, handicraft, animal husbandry, and other skills like sewing and knitting women could use to earn money. With the rise of the Taliban, these training programs had to go underground (into secrecy). The women participating in the underground schools risked imprisonment and torture. The courses continued to teach women how to make their own clothing and other necessities. Parlika organized a network of secret schools for girls. They were located in private apartments across the city of Kabul. These loose networks of schools had little knowledge of each other. Courses included mathematics, computers, weaving, English, and music. The number of women in these home schools usually numbered from five to ten. The parents paid $1 each month for each course. Students had to hide their school books, notebooks, pens, and pencils under their head-to-toe burkas. Boys were also included in these networks and many men supported these schools, too. Not all Afghani men supported the subordination of women in society. The Taliban’s religious police from the Department for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice regularly patrolled the city looking for the secret classrooms in the network of schools. They often used tips from informers. They would raid a house and arrest and beat the women found there. Sometimes the men who owned the house were beaten as well. Usually detention lasted several hours.

Northern Alliance takes control The deadly terrorist attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001, brought worldwide attention to Afghanistan. The Al-Qaeda Islamic terrorist group was accused of carrying out the attack. The Taliban were accused of providing a safe haven for Al-Qaeda operations, including training camps. With extensive military support from the United States, in late 2001 a coalition of various Afghan groups calling themselves the United Islamic Front for the Salvation of Afghanistan, also known as the Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

179

Soraya Parlika

Northern Alliance, started a war against the Taliban to gain control of Afghanistan. By early 2002, the Northern Alliance had gained control of most of Afghanistan. A transitional Afghan government led by Hamid Karzai (1957–), a Pashtun like Parlika, was established with the Northern Alliance maintaining a strong influence.

After the Taliban Though the Taliban were gone from Kabul and other areas of Afghanistan, those leaders replacing them still held much the same attitudes about women and their place in society. Afghanistan society remained very conservative and male-dominated. Gender prejudice and discrimination persisted. Men remained resistant toward anything that resembled a women’s activist movement. Parlika, like others, did manage to change from the full-length burka to a light-weight head scarf. Immediately following the fall of the Taliban, Parlika planned a march of unveiled Afghan women to the United Nations compound in Kabul. The goal was to demand that women be included in the new Afghan government. However, the Kabul police warned that even with the Taliban gone, they could still not guarantee safety for her and her followers. Parlika canceled the protest march realizing that the warning about security problems given by the government was just an excuse. The government really did not support women’s activism and their improvement in society. Nonetheless, around two hundred women still gathered outside Parlika’s apartment and lifted their veils in unison. Following the emotional moment, they left with burkas back in place covering their faces. It was a symbolic gesture toward greater social freedom for women. They also voiced demands for greater job opportunities as well. Two women were appointed to leadership roles in the new Afghan government. By late November 2001, Parlika had become a public figure sought out by the international news media. However, the Northern Alliance was again seeking the names of participants in her civil rights group that totaled some four thousand women.

A new start With the fall of the Taliban in late 2001, female teachers began preparing to return to work in the following spring when schools reopened for a new year. Afghan schools usually closed during the winter months because of 180

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Soraya Parlika

Soraya Parlika, pictured here in September 2005 addressing a crowd on a campaign stop, was one of many women running for the Afghan legislature. SH AH M AR AI/ AF P/ GET TY I MA GES .

the lack of heating. Girls were to take placement exams after missing five years of school. However, approximately ten thousand girls and women had kept up their schooling in the secret school networks and could return at higher class levels than when they left. They could earn certificates of skills learned during the Taliban years. Parlika sought to maintain her network created during the Taliban rule to continue helping disadvantaged youth. She hoped to expand the courses offered. Parlika called her network the Afghan’s Women’s Cooperative Association. The network provided an after-school tutoring program. The program was to help students catch up from the years missed and provide help on homework for those who had lost fathers or older siblings who might have ordinarily helped. Another program provided skills training for boys who had lost fathers. Parlika had to look toward international aid to pay her teachers, since the Afghan government had trouble paying its regular school teachers on a regular basis. Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

181

Soraya Parlika

As reported by Povey, despite continued gender prejudice in Afghan society, women became more visible in public. In February 2002, the Cultural Journal of Afghanistan Women was created. Also, a daily newspaper was started that focused on women’s issues. However, major obstacles were left to overcome in Afghan society. By 2002, about 35,000 female-headed households existed in Afghanistan. Around three thousand female-headed households lived in just one of the refugee centers in Kabul. The goal of Parlika and other Afghan women leaders after 2002 was to further break the cultural taboos against women and change society. She helped establish the National Union of Women of Afghanistan to help professional Afghan women. They looked at changes that had already occurred in other predominantly Muslim countries, including Iran where women could pursue college educations, vote in public elections, and hold public office. These examples gave hope to Parlika and others.

Political gains A major part of Parlika’s effort after 2001 was lobbying, or petitioning, for the new Afghan government to be more representative of the ethnic and religious diversity of Afghanistan. Due to Parlika’s activism, the United Nations (UN) encouraged the various Afghan political factions to include women in their delegations. However, the rise of the Afghan women’s movement caused unease among Afghan’s leaders. Karzai easily won reelection in 2004 as Afghan president. In the meantime, the Northern Alliance splintered into a number of political factions. The Afghan National Army took over military responsibilities from the Northern Alliance. In September 2005, at the age of sixty, Parlika was one of many women running for the Afghan legislature. It was the first such election held in Afghanistan in over thirty years. Since women were still hard to reach while campaigning, Parlika had to focus on the vote of men. Approximately 2,800 candidates—including nearly 600 women—were competing for 249 seats in the lower house of parliament (assembly of people that make laws of a nation). The youngest candidate was a twentyfive-year-old female basketball player. However, the elections also attracted a resurgence in Taliban guerilla warfare in the southern and eastern portions of the country. The election results were announced on November 12, 2005, after many charges of corruption. Women won 28 182

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Soraya Parlika

percent of the lower house seats, more than the 25 percent guaranteed by the Afghanistan constitution. Ominously, the Taliban continued its resurgence into 2006 in the southern part of the country. Through her dedication in fighting gender prejudice, Parlika became an inspiration for many other women who risked their lives and boosted the spirit of their communities during hard times. For example, Parlika had led the way in devising a means to cope with harsh realities under Taliban rule and empowered women in the process to develop and strengthen feelings of self-worth and self-confidence. Many men in Afghan society supported Parlika’s efforts as well. She directly raised hopes of rebuilding an Afghan society with greater social justice for all.

For More Information B O O KS

Bernard, Cheryl. Veiled Courage: Inside the Afghan Women’s Resistance. New York: Broadway Books, 2002. Logan, Harriet. Unveiled: Voices of Women in Afghanistan. New York: Regan Books, 2002. Skaine, Rosemarie. The Women of Afghanistan Under the Taliban. Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2002. WEB SIT ES

International Red Cross and Red Crescent Museum. http://www.micr.ch/ (accessed on December 11, 2006). ‘‘Kabul Women’s March Thwarted.’’ BBC News. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/ south_asia/1679337.stm (accessed on December 11, 2006). Povey, Elaheh Rostami. ‘‘Women in Afghanistan: Passive Victims of the Borga or Active Social Participants.’’ In Farzaneh. Vol. 6, No. 11, pp. 7–24. http:// www.farzanehjournal.com/archive/Download/arti2n11.pdf (accessed on December 11, 2006). Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan (RAWA). http:// www.rawa.org/ (accessed on December 11, 2006).

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

183

Alice Paul B OR N: January 11, 1885  Moorestown, New

Jersey D I E D : July 9, 1977  Moorestown, New Jersey

American social activist, lawyer

‘‘I never doubted that equal rights was the right direction. Most reforms, most problems are complicated. But to me there is nothing complicated about ordinary equality.’’

lice Stokes Paul was one of the foremost women’s rights activists of the twentieth century who energized the movement for women’s suffrage (the right to vote) and led the fight for an Equal Rights Amendment. Through aggressive protest strategies she learned while visiting England, Paul was instrumental in getting the Nineteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution ratified in 1920, granting voting rights to women. She came close in obtaining ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) over a half century later in the 1970s. Her tireless work and dedication influenced many governmental policies and was a model for feminists worldwide.

A

Alice Paul. # HU LTO ND EU TSC H CO LL ECT IO N/ C OR BI S.

A Quaker upbringing Paul was born in January 1885 on a family farm near Moorestown, New Jersey, to a Quaker family. (Quakers are members of the Christian group 185

Alice Paul

Society of Friends, which is opposed to war, oathtaking, and rituals.) She was the oldest of four children. Her Quaker upbringing taught her nonviolence and toleration of others. It also taught that everyone should equally enjoy social justice, meaning that all citizens receive fair treatment and an equal opportunity to enjoy the benefits of society. She learned the values of honesty and service to others early in life. Paul’s father, William M. Paul, was a successful businessman. He founded and was president of the Burlington County Trust Company. William had descended from the noted Winthrop family, who were early leaders in the Massachusetts Bay Colony in the early seventeenth century. Her mother, Tacie Parry Paul, was a descendent of William Penn (1644–1718), founder of the Pennsylvania Colony and strong believer of religious tolerance. Tacie was one of the first women to attend prestigious Swarthmore College near Philadelphia. She was active in social causes and even took Alice with her to a suffrage (right to vote) meeting when Alice was just a child. Paul’s father died of pneumonia in 1916 but left the family financially secure.

An eager student Paul was always eager to learn and thrived in an academic environment throughout her life. At sixteen years of age in 1901, she graduated at the top of her class from Moorestown Friends School, a Quaker school. From there she attended Swarthmore, following in her mother’s footsteps. Paul graduated with a degree in biology in 1905 and was elected to the Phi Beta Kappa and Pi Gamma Mu honor societies. During her senior year at Swarthmore, Paul’s interests began to turn more toward political science and economics. A professor helped her obtain a College Settlement Association Fellowship to attend the New York School of Social Work, where she studied about how to best help others. From there she transferred to the University of Pennsylvania, where she earned a master’s degree in sociology. After graduating from the University of Pennsylvania, Paul received a Quaker Fellowship to travel to Woodbridge, England, in the fall of 1907. There she took classes at the University of Birmingham while doing social casework in the community.

An introduction to the fight for suffrage While studying in England, Paul met the daughter of noted British suffragist Emmeline Parkhurst (1858–1929). Inspired by Parkhurst’s dedication to gaining the right to vote for women, Paul became active in the 186

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Alice Paul

British suffrage movement. Paul took part in her first suffrage protest parade in 1908. Parkhurst and others in Britain who formed the Women’s Social and Political Union were more aggressive and confrontational in their protest activities than suffragists back in the United States. The British tactics often led to arrests. Paul was arrested three times for picketing and other means of protest and briefly jailed at the Halloway Prison. Her interest began shifting again from social work to the study of law. During this period, Paul met fellow American Lucy Burns (1879–1966), a graduate of Vassar College, at a London police station.

Back to the United States In 1910, Paul returned to the United States and resumed graduate studies at the University of Pennsylvania. Concentrating on law and women’s rights, she received a doctorate in sociology in 1912. Her key topic of research interest was the legal status of women in society. Paul’s interest in women’s suffrage continued. After completing her doctorate, she moved to Washington, D.C. At twenty-seven, she was ready to devote herself to the struggle for women’s suffrage. She had joined the National American Woman Suffrage Association (NAWSA) upon her return to the United States. NAWSA had been founded in 1890 by activists Elizabeth Cady Stanton (1815–1902) and Susan B. Anthony (1820–1906). Suffragists in the United States were more focused on obtaining the right to vote on a state-by-state basis rather than nationally, as was the case with Parkhurst and her fellow activists in England. The American suffragists were experiencing only modest success, primarily in nine Western states. Wyoming was the first state to grant women the right to vote. Paul sought to introduce the aggressive tactics used in Britain. However, most members resisted such militant measures, and friction within the organization grew. Meanwhile, Paul and Burns assumed leadership of NAWSA’s congressional committee in 1912. They began campaigning for a Constitutional amendment to give women the right to vote nationally.

Seeking suffrage With the election of Woodrow Wilson (1856–1924; served 1913–21) as U.S. president in November 1912, Paul planned her first major protest event. On the day before Wilson’s inauguration (swearing in) in Washington, D.C. on March 3, 1913, Paul led a massive suffrage parade Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

187

Alice Paul

down Pennsylvania Avenue, past the White House. More than eight thousand suffragists participated in the parade, while more than half a million bystanders gathered along the route. It attracted major media coverage for days. A few days later, members of NAWSA’s congressional committee met with the new president to express their needs. However, Wilson and his Democratic Party that now controlled both houses of Congress remained noncommittal. Despite Paul’s success at organizing the Washington parade, friction within NAWSA remained high over her aggressive strategies. In the summer of 1914, Paul and Lucy finally broke from NAWSA and formed the Congressional Union for Woman Suffrage. With her Quaker background, Paul promoted aggressive—but nonviolent—tactics in an effort to make change at the national level through the proposed Constitutional amendment. The weekly publication Suffragist began circulation in November 1914. It covered Congressional Union activities. As in Britain, the American suffragists often faced jail time when arrested for disturbing the peace or unlawful assembly. The colors of the Congressional Union became a common sight around the nation’s capital in signs and banners. In January 1915, the proposed Constitutional amendment finally made it to the House floor, where it was debated for six hours before failing in the resulting vote. In the election year of 1916, Paul merged the Congressional Union with the Woman’s Party to form the National Women’s Party (NWP).

The National Women’s Party Though NWP members were largely white, middle-class women, they had a strong will and willingness to face threats, arrest, and imprisonment. In January 1917, Paul organized picketing (a line of people holding banners or signs in front of a business or organization they are protesting the policies of) of the White House for the suffragist cause. Twelve women, who became known as the Silent Sentinels, held banners demanding the right to vote. It was the first known organized effort to picket the White House. By that time the United States was on the verge of entering World War I (1914–18), which had been raging since 1914 in Europe. Wilson finally declared war on Germany in April 1917. Paul argued that the United States could not morally fight for democracy abroad while denying half of its citizens the right to vote. The picketing at the White House continued for eighteen months. The women activists braved harsh winter conditions. The NWP protesters became a major topic of discussion in the city. 188

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Alice Paul

Many people accused Paul and other suffragists of treason (disloyalty) for protesting during a time of war. Police became more aggressive in confronting the suffragists. In June, they began arresting the suffragists on charges of obstructing traffic. Burns and almost thirty others were the first arrested. Almost half of them were sentenced to sixty days at the Occoquan Workhouse in Virginia. Like other prisons at the time, the workhouse had dismal living conditions. The cells were dark, small, and unsanitary. Mealworms infested the food served to the inmates and guards regularly harassed and mistreated the inmates. These women were also beaten and endured forced feedings. Picketing continued despite the arrests. In August, a scuffle broke out, and for three days picketers were beaten and dragged about by angry crowds. Police did nothing, but stood by and watched. By September 1917, Congress established committees in both houses to consider women’s suffrage. Nonetheless, the protests continued, and Paul was arrested in October. She was sentenced to seven months in the Occoquan. Soon after arriving at the workhouse, Paul began a hunger strike to demand better conditions for what she termed political prisoners held there. In response, authorities moved her to the psychiatric ward and force-fed her by shoving tubes into her nose and down her throat.

Suffrage achieved By later in November the suffragists were released from the workhouse. Finally, President Wilson relented under the constant pressure of Paul and her organization. In January 1918, Wilson announced his support for the suffrage Constitutional amendment. The picketing ceased. However, when the U.S. Senate failed to pass the bill so it could go to the states for ratification, Paul resumed the pickets. When forty-eight picketers were arrested, a public outcry led to their immediate release. Success came the following year, when both houses passed the Constitutional amendment and it went to the states for ratification. Ratification came in 1920 when Paul was just thirty-five years old. The new Nineteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution now guaranteed voting rights for women in the United States. Following the success in achieving suffrage, Paul gave up her leadership position in the NWP. However, she remained a major influence as chair of the international relations committee and served on the executive committee. Paul returned to school once again and earned multiple law degrees, first from Washington College of Law in 1922. She followed that with a doctorate in law from American University in 1928. Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

189

Alice Paul

Alice Paul, second from left, and officers of the National Women’s Party (NWP) in front of NWP headquarters in Washington, D.C., June 1920. A P IM AGE S.

Equal rights Paul’s next goal was to pass another Constitutional amendment guaranteeing equal rights to men and women. Paul wrote the first draft for the amendment, called the Equal Rights Amendment, or ERA. It was first introduced into Congress in 1923. The idea of equal rights for men and women was controversial among feminist leaders at the time. Whereas Paul wanted equal rights with no special favors, other feminists were fighting for special protections for women, such as in the workplace through special labor laws. But Paul stood firm for equal rights, not special accommodations. She also resisted linking her ERA campaign with the abortion rights efforts for fear of losing key support from the public. 190

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Alice Paul

A worldwide campaign When the ERA failed to pass Congress, Paul turned to a worldwide effort. Through the 1920s and 1930s, she lobbied, or petitioned, through the League of Nations, an international organization created in 1919 to resolve disputes among nations and improve global welfare. Paul became active in various organizations. She served on the executive committee of Equal Rights International, an organization that sought an international equal rights treaty among nations. She also became chairperson of the Women’s Research Foundation from 1927 until 1937. In 1938, Paul founded the World Party for Equal Rights for Women, otherwise known as World Women’s Party. It was located in Geneva, Switzerland, at the headquarters of the League of Nations. Through this organization, she promoted increased political power of women worldwide. Paul returned to the United States in 1941. She was elected chairman of the NWP once again where she continued promoting women’s rights and the ERA. As she had earlier with the suffrage amendment, Paul began a long-standing effort to get the ERA passed. However, little progress could be seen for years. With the outbreak of World War II (1939–45), women were needed in factories to replace the men who had gone into military service. Existing protective labor laws were suspended and an interest in equal rights between men and women increased. Both Democrats and Republicans in Congress supported the Equal Rights Amendment and it was debated in Congress. However, it still did not pass. Other successes did come for Paul, as well as many other influential activists, following World War II. She was able to get gender equality included in the preamble (the introduction to a formal document) to the new United Nations (UN) charter. Created in 1946, the United Nations replaced the League of Nations as the key international organization to resolve problems around the world. Following World War II, Paul saw the proposed ERA languish. Women achieved a major victory, however, when sex discrimination and equal rights in employment were added to the landmark 1964 Civil Rights Act. Passage of the act was largely driven by racial discrimination during the years leading up to its passage. The ERA was repeatedly introduced in Congress, but to no avail. In 1972, it finally passed both houses of Congress and was sent to the states for ratification. The bill proceeded through the ratification process with intense lobbying by feminists in each state. In 1974, Paul suffered a stroke that left her disabled. Thirty-five states ratified the ERA by 1977. Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

191

Alice Paul

Equal Rights Amendment Feminist Alice Paul was the driving force behind a prolonged effort that lasted through much of the twentieth century to establish a guarantee of equal rights for everyone under the law, regardless of gender. She pursued this goal through a proposed Constitutional amendment known as the Equal Rights Amendment, or ERA. After 1923, the proposed amendment was introduced into Congress each year for almost a half century until it finally passed Congress in 1972. Every year until then it was blocked in congressional committees. Among opponents of the ERA were labor unions whose members feared competition for their jobs from women, conservatives who feared the ERA would bring a basic change to gender relations and traditional families in America, and even some feminists who favored special protections for women rather than full legal equality for men and women. The 1972 version sent by Congress to the states for ratification was very brief, consisting of only three short sections. The main section, Section 1, stated, ‘‘Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged [reduced] by the United States or by any State on account of sex.’’ According to the U.S. Constitution, the legislatures of three-fourths of the fifty states in the United States must vote approval for a proposed

amendment to become legally ratified and part of the Constitution. Congress gave the states seven years to ratify the ERA. By the deadline in March 1979, thirty-five states had ratified the amendment, just three short of the necessary number. A controversial extension of three years to 1982 failed to bring in further state approvals. Supporters of the ERA began reintroducing the proposed amendment in Congress every year again starting in 1982. However, overall support in Congress had slipped by then even though public polls consistently indicated the majority of the public favored adoption of the ERA. Nonetheless, politicians believed the ERA was no longer needed since court interpretation of many laws and constitutional provisions had greatly expanded the rights of women through the late twentieth century. In addition, many new job opportunities had opened for women in fields usually dominated by men including upper management positions in businesses. Though the U.S. Constitution was never revised with the ERA, twenty states added ERA amendments to their state constitutions since 1879. These prohibited sex discrimination by those state governments.

With only three more states needed to become a Constitutional amendment, Paul died of heart failure on July 9, 1977, in Moorestown. Although she died believing passage of the amendment was close at hand, the ERA was actually defeated (see box). The legacy of Paul’s tireless efforts to erase gender prejudice and gain equal rights for women lived on. For example, in 2004 HBO Films broadcast a movie about Paul and other suffragists titled Iron Jawed Angels. In 2005, Swarthmore College named a newly built dormitory on campus in honor of Paul. 192

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Alice Paul

For More Information B O O KS

Cott, Nancy F. The Grounding of Modern Feminism. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1987. Lunardini, Christine A. From Equal Suffrage to Equal Rights: Alice Paul and the National Woman’s Party, 1910-1928. New York: New York University Press, 1986. Raum, Elizabeth. Alice Paul. Chicago, IL: Heinemann Library, 2004. WEB SIT ES

The Alice Paul Institute. http://www.alicepaul.org/ (accessed on December 11, 2006). Library of Congress. ‘‘Women of Protest.’’ American Memory. http://memory. loc.gov/ammem/collections/suffrage/nwp/ (accessed on December 11, 2006). ‘‘Wilson—A Portrait: Women’s Suffrage.’’ Pbs. org American Experience. http:// www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/wilson/portrait/wp_suffrage.html (accessed on December 11, 2006).

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

193

Jan Smuts B OR N: May 24, 1870  Riebeek West,

Cape Colony, South Africa D I E D : September 11, 1950  Pretoria,

South Africa

South African political leader, humanitarian

‘‘We forget that the human spirit, the spirit of goodness and truth in the world, is still only an infant crying in the night, and that the struggle with darkness is as yet mostly an unequal struggle.’’

an Christian Smuts was one of the most influential statesmen of the twentieth century in addition to an innovative and successful military leader for Britain. While serving as prime minister of South Africa from 1919 to 1924 and from 1939 to 1948, Smuts sought to maintain South Africa’s membership in the British Commonwealth (association made up of the United Kingdom, its dependencies, and many former British colonies) while maintaining as much political independence as possible. He was the only person to be part of the development of both the League of Nations in 1919 and the United Nations in 1946. Both were international organizations established to resolve conflicts between nations driven by such factors as ethnic and religious prejudice (a negative attitude towards others based on a prejudgment about those individuals with no prior knowledge or experience) and nationalism (the belief that a particular nation and its culture, people, and values are superior to those

J

Jan Smuts. # HU LTO ND EU TSC H CO LL ECT IO N/ C OR BI S.

195

Jan Smuts

of other nations). Smuts also led the way to lessening colonial rule in the world that was largely based on racial prejudice. He opposed apartheid (governmental policy of racial separation and discrimination) that nonetheless became a cornerstone of South African society through most of the second half of the twentieth century. Apartheid was the hallmark of racism in the world during that time.

An Afrikaner and Boer Smuts was born in May 1870 on a family farm near Malmesbury in Britishcontrolled Cape Colony in South Africa. He was one of six children. His father, Jacobus Abraham Smuts, was involved in politics and served as a representative for Malmesbury in the Cape House of Assembly. Though British citizens, his family was of Dutch descent and worshipped the strict teachings of the Dutch Reform Church. His Dutch ancestors arrived in South Africa in 1692. Therefore, Smuts was born an Afrikaner and a Boer. Afrikaners are a distinct ethnic group in South Africa composed primarily of descendents of Dutch colonists who began arriving in southern Africa in 1652 as part of the Dutch East Indian Company. Afrikaners also included French Huguenots escaping religious persecution in France in the 1680s and other peoples from around Europe. Forming a common society, they began calling themselves Afrikaners in 1707 and spoke the Afrikaans language. By the 1830s, Britain had gained control of the South African Dutch colonies. Many Afrikaners moved further into remote areas to establish new settlements outside the existing reach of British authority. They began calling themselves Boers to distinguish themselves from Afrikaners, who moved elsewhere or stayed put under British rule. The Boers were pastoralists (people who raise and herd livestock) and maintained racial prejudice against the black Africans they came in contact with. They created the independent states of Transvaal and the Orange Free State. In the meantime, British rule spread, ultimately reaching the Boer states and leading to a series of Boer Wars (1880–81; 1899–1902).

A gifted student In 1876, when Smuts was six years old, his father moved the family to a large farm called Bovenplaats near Riebeek West. Growing up on the farm, Smuts acquired a strong appreciation for nature and excelled at horseback riding and hunting. He did not begin a formal education until he was twelve years of age, in 1882. Smuts’s mother, in the meantime, taught him English. His family sent Smuts to a local boarding school in 196

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Jan Smuts

Riebeek West. His intellectual abilities quickly became evident as he caught up with kids of his own age—even after his late start—and graduated with them. Smuts entered Victoria College in Stellenbosch in 1886 at the age of sixteen. As a young man, Smuts always had a studious and serious outlook. He socialized very little, and many considered him to be shy. At Victoria College, he received a well-rounded education in the sciences and arts, including the classics of literature. In 1891, he graduated with honors, earning degrees in both literature and science. Upon graduation, Smuts received a scholarship to study at Christ’s College at Cambridge in Britain. He studied a diverse range of subjects including science, philosophy, and poetry, but with a focus primarily on law. Smuts graduated in 1894, again with high marks. Though offered a fellowship to further study law, Smuts decided it was time to return home to South Africa.

A break with the British Smuts opened a law practice in Cape Town, but his serious, aloof manner did not help attract clients. Seeing little financial success in law, Smuts became increasingly interested in politics and journalism. He wrote articles for the Cape Times newspaper and promoted a more united South Africa while maintaining a strong cooperative relationship between Britain and the Boers. He joined the Afrikaner Bond, a political party that promoted the interests of Afrikaners. Through his growing connections, Smuts was appointed legal advisor for Cape Colony’s colonial prime minister, Cecil John Rhodes (1853–1902). However, Smuts became very upset with British rule after Rhodes unexpectedly directed a raid, known as the Jamison Raid, against Afrikaners in the Transvaal with the intent of sparking a war between Afrikaners and British forces. Disenchanted, Smuts resigned and moved to Johannesburg in August 1896 to start a new life practicing law again. In late 1897, he married Isie Krige, whom he had met years earlier at Victoria College. They eventually had four daughters and two sons. In 1898, they moved to Pretoria, the capital of the South Africa, after not finding Johannesburg to their liking.

The second Boer War In Pretoria, Smuts renewed his involvement in politics. Smuts was now a strong opponent to the British rule of South Africa and supported Afrikaner Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

197

Jan Smuts

nationalism. Smuts threw his support behind Transvaal president Paul Kruger (1825–1904). Quickly impressed with the twenty-eight-year-old Smuts, Kruger appointed him state attorney for Transvaal in 1898. During this time, the Afrikaners became increasingly hostile to growing British influence, and the second Boer War finally broke out. In October 1899, the two largely independent Boer republics declared war against Great Britain. During the early period of the war, Smuts was assistant to Kruger in communications with various diplomats and generals, including General Louis Botha (1862–1919). However, as Britain began to gain the upper hand militarily, Smuts took an active military command. He reorganized the Afrikaner army into guerrilla units. Smuts then pioneered the strategies of guerilla warfare, such as hit-and-run attacks and harassing the vastly larger British army. As a commando leader, Smuts fought many successful battles, but was unable to win the war. Through a negotiated ceasefire with Britain, the Boers lost their independence in May 1903. Around 27,000 Boer civilians, including children, were killed. The Boers had lost about 15 percent of their population.

Seeking independence from British rule Following the war, Smuts returned to his Pretoria law practice. Returning also to politics, Smuts helped organize a new political party called Het Volk, meaning People’s Party, in 1905. The party’s goal was to promote Afrikaner causes while accepting British rule. Botha was elected the party leader and Smuts was Botha’s deputy. For fifteen years—from 1904 to 1919—Botha and Smuts were a dominant presence in South African life. Renewed movement toward independence from British rule led Botha and Smuts to travel to London to negotiate for increased independence for the Transvaal and the Orange River Colony. Smuts and Botha were able to gain British acceptance for the South African territories to regain greater independence and become self-governing dominions (self-governing nations that are members of a trade alliance or commonwealth). Through 1906, Smuts worked on a new constitution for the Transvaal. By December, public elections were held to establish the new Transvaal parliament. Smuts was among those elected, representing a region near Pretoria. His People’s Party won most of the seats in a landslide victory. With Botha leading the new government, Smuts was appointed to two cabinet posts—Colonial Secretary and Education Secretary. During this period, Smuts implemented policies restricting the rights of the many Asian workers in the region. Young lawyer Mahatma Gandhi (1869–1948; see 198

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Jan Smuts

entry) fought against the South African prejudice. The Transvaal economy boomed under the People’s Party leadership and Smuts’s popularity increased. With the success of Transvaal under independence, the movement to unify South Africa grew again. Smuts was a leading proponent for unification. He proposed a plan with English as the official language, the capital in Pretoria, and actual voting rights for all adults, including women and black Africans. In October 1908, Smuts called a constitutional convention to begin constructing yet another new government. However, opposition to many of Smuts’s proposals by others also favoring unification forced him to compromise on voting rights and other parts of his plan. Finally, a delegate convention agreed on a constitution. It was ratified (formally approved) by the four South African colonies. Botha and Smuts took the new constitution to London for the British government’s acceptance. It was accepted by Parliament and signed into law by the king of England in December 1909. In 1910, the Union of South Africa officially came into existence. Afrikaners of the various provinces united to form the South African Party. Botha, who now became prime minister, appointed Smuts to three important cabinet positions—interior, mines, and defense. Soon, political discontent surfaced as many protested the power of Smuts. This led him to resign from his positions with defense and mines, but he added the treasury cabinet position to his remaining interior position. Labor unrest also rose in South Africa, first with striking miners and then a railway strike that turned into a general labor strike. Many protested Smuts’s successful but forceful reaction to both. A split in the party followed the events.

Promoting a League of Nations World War I (1914–18) broke out in October 1914. Though the South African parliament voted to ally (side) with Britain, many Boers opposed joining Britain and rebelled. Smuts had to put down the internal rebellion before engaging German forces in southern Africa. Smuts formed the South African Defense Force and defeated German forces in German South West Africa. Following success there, Smuts was promoted to British lieutenant general in 1916 and sent with his forces to German East Africa. There he enjoyed further success. Given his growing reputation, Smuts was invited to join the British war cabinet in early 1917 in London. For the remainder of the war, he took part in developing all war strategies, including creation of the Royal Air Force. Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

199

Jan Smuts

Both Smuts and Botha participated in the Paris Peace Conference that lasted from January 1919 to January 1920. The purpose of the conference was to negotiate terms of surrender for the defeated German forces from WWI. Smuts favored lenient treatment of Germany. He also proposed creation of a strong international organization to maintain peace in the world, a group that would be called the League of Nations. While in London during the war, Smuts had written a pamphlet, published in December 1918 and introducing the name and concept he believed was needed to combat prejudices related to rising nationalism and ethnic conflicts in the world. Despite his efforts, the resulting Treaty of Versailles dictated harsh terms for Germany (Germany had to accept full responsibility for causing the war and make reparations to certain Allied countries) and a much weaker League of Nations than he proposed. Smuts guided the implementation of the resulting weaker League nonetheless.

Prime minister Soon after returning to South Africa, Botha died in August 1919. Smuts replaced Botha as South Africa’s prime minister. He served for five years. Smuts emphasized both cooperation with the British and exercising as much independence as possible for South Africa as a dominion. During this time, he influenced the British government to grant dominion status to its colonies around the world and change the name from British Empire to British Commonwealth. Redefining the relationship between Britain and its colonies actually preserved the British rule that brought much criticism from Afrikaner nationalists who wanted total independence. Smuts, unlike many Afrikaners, wanted South Africa to remain a member of the Commonwealth. Smuts also opposed strict racial segregation promoted by the majority of Afrikaners. In 1924, he suffered a defeat to a coalition (an alliance) of the National Party and labor. Smuts was somewhat cold in public, but warm and personal in private. He had a very sophisticated mind and could not tolerate mediocrity, or weakness. Therefore, his popularity was always limited and he was often mistrusted by his supporters due to his impatience with people. While out of political office, Smuts remained leader of the South African Party. He also returned to his academic interests. In 1926, he published the book Holism and Evolution, considered a major science breakthrough. In the book, Smuts developed the concept that all things in nature are interconnected; this is called a holistic theory. This same idea 200

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Jan Smuts

South African prime minister Jan Smuts, seated, signs the United Nations Charter in San Francisco, California, June 26, 1945. NA T FA RB MAN /T IM E LI FE P IC TUR ES /GE TTY IM AGE S.

he had applied to politics in seeking the creation of the Union of South Africa, the League of Nations, and the British Commonwealth of Nations. Smuts also collected plants on botanical expeditions throughout southern Africa in the 1920s and 1930s. As leader of the opposition party, Smuts helped block efforts of the National Party leaders in power to take rights away from black Africans, including the right to vote. He wrote and proposed laws to protect the civil rights of all South Africans including blacks. He also campaigned to strengthen the League of Nations.

Creating the United Nations Smuts reentered public office in 1933 when prime minister Barry Hertzog (1866–1942) appointed him as deputy prime minister to form a coalition against more extreme South African nationalists. They formed a new party called the United Party. World War II started in September 1939 when Germany invaded Poland. Hertzog sought neutrality (not favoring either side in a war) toward Germany, and Smuts proposed an Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

201

Jan Smuts

alliance with Britain as in World War I. Hertzog’s position proved highly unpopular and he resigned from office, a move which made Smuts prime minister of South Africa once again. Smuts then declared war on Germany. Having formed close relations with British prime minister Winston Churchill (1874–1965) during World War I, Smuts—now in his seventies—was once again invited to be a member of the British war cabinet in London. In May 1941, Smuts was named Field Marshal of the British Army and was responsible to prevent Germany and its ally Italy from conquering North Africa. Plans were even made that in the event Churchill should die during the war, Smuts would become prime minister of Britain. Upon the defeat of Germany in May 1945, Smuts traveled to San Francisco in the United States to help draft the charter of the United Nations. Again, Smuts promoted a strong international body to preserve peace and this time the idea was adopted. Smuts signed the Paris Peace Treaty, becoming the only statesman signing the treaties ending both World War I and World War II.

Popularity falls Following the war, Smuts returned to South Africa as prime minister. However, his close relationship to Churchill and the British government decreased his popularity among the growing number of South African nationalists who wished to keep their distance from the British government. In addition, his support of the Fagan Commission (see box) that advocated an end to all racial segregation in South Africa also decreased his popularity. Smuts is thought to be the first person to use the term apartheid when he delivered a speech much earlier in 1917. He wanted a nation free of racial prejudice and discrimination. Smuts opposed the segregationist policies promoted by the National Party led by Daniel Malan (1874–1959). In the May 1948 national elections, Malan narrowly defeated Smuts, ending Smuts’s public career. This election led to forty years of severe racial segregation, known throughout the world as simply apartheid. Smuts retired to his farm near Pretoria. In 1948, he was elected chancellor of Cambridge University. He was the first person living outside Britain to be elected to that position. Smuts suffered a heart attack in May 1950 and died several months later in September at the age of eighty. In 1960, South Africa achieved complete independence from Britain. In 2004, Smuts was named one of the top ten South Africans by voters in the country. 202

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Jan Smuts

Fagan Commission South African prime minister Jan Smuts was opposed to policies proposed by the rival National Party calling for strict racial segregation in the nation. The issue of race relations was becoming more of a divisive issue following the end of World War II in 1945. Black Africans were moving to the cities in large numbers in search of jobs in newly developing industries. In an effort to resolve the issue, the South African government established the Fagan Commission in 1946 to recommend what should be done about race relations. Many segregationists supported rules that restricted entry of blacks into cities and forced them to live in distant rural areas. The Fagan Commission recommended loosening the restrictions on black movement into urban areas. This would help establish a reliable workforce of laborers for the growing businesses. Smuts,

whose popularity was at a low at the time, fully endorsed the commission’s findings. In reaction, the National Party established its own commission, known as the Sauer Commission. This second commission came to an opposite conclusion. It reported that white workers and businessmen feared that black Africans would take away job opportunities by working for lower wages. The commission recommended stricter segregation policies that would reach all aspects of South African society. Blacks would be allowed to enter a whites-only area to work only when issued a permit. The Sauer Commission report set the direction for apartheid that the National Party installed when it defeated Smuts in the 1948 national elections. Apartheid would dominate race relations in South Africa for the next forty years.

For More Information B O O KS

Crafford, F.S. Jan Smuts: A Biography. New York, Greenwood Press, 1968. Hancock, William K. Smuts: The Fields of Force, 1919-1950. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1968. Ingham, Kenneth. Jan Christian Smuts: The Conscience of a South African. New York: St. Martins, 1986. Louw, P. Eric. The Rise, Fall, and Legacy of Apartheid. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers, 2004. WEB SIT ES

Apartheid Museum. http://www.apartheidmuseum.org (accessed on December 11, 2006).

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

203

Gloria Steinem B OR N: March 25, 1934  Toledo, Ohio

American social activist, writer

‘‘We are talking about a society in which there will be no roles other than those chosen or those earned, we are really talking about humanism.’’

loria Steinem is a political activist who became an effective national spokesperson for the women’s rights movement in the United States in the 1970s and 1980s, a movement frequently referred to as the second wave of feminism. Steinem founded several organizations to promote the cause of women’s rights and established the first national women’s magazine actually run by women. She had a special ability to present feminist issues to a wide audience.

G

An unsettled childhood

Gloria Steinem. A P IM AGE S.

Gloria Marie Steinem was born in March 1934 in Toledo, Ohio, at the height of the Great Depression (1929–41), a period of economic downturn in the world that led to high unemployment and much hunger. Her father Jewish American father, Leo Steinem, was a traveling antiques dealer. Her mother, Ruth, was a newspaperwoman. Through much of 205

Gloria Steinem

the year, the Steinems traveled around the United States in their domeroofed house trailer, buying and selling antiques. They spent summers at their small resort in Clear Lake, Michigan. Gloria spent her first ten years living this nomadic (traveling) lifestyle. Her mother tutored her while on the road. As an adult, Steinem was proud of her family’s political activism. Her paternal (on her father’s side) grandmother, Pauline Steinem, had gained notoriety as president of the Ohio Women’s Suffrage Association from 1908 to 1911, and was a representative to the 1908 International Council of Women. However, Steinem did not have much exposure to this aspect of the family in her early life. In the mid-1940s, Gloria’s parents divorced. Leo left for California to find work and Gloria went with her ailing mother, who was suffering from severe mental depression, back to Toledo. In her early teens, Gloria cared for her mother while helping to support the family. For the first time in her life, she began attending school on a regular basis. By the time Gloria was fifteen and a senior in high school, her mother had become incapacitated (unable to care for herself) by depression. Her father agreed to care for her mother for a while so Gloria moved to Washington, D.C., to live with a sister who was ten years older while she finished school.

Beginnings of social activism Upon graduation from high school, Steinem received a scholarship to attend Smith College in Northampton, Massachusetts. Smith is the largest women’s college in the United States. She entered college in 1952, majoring in governmental studies. Steinem was also attracted to political activism. She worked for Democratic nominee Adlai Stevenson’s (1900–1965) presidential campaign in 1952. Steinem graduated with honors from Smith in 1956 as magna cum laude (with high honors). She was also elected to the Phi Beta Kappa honor society. Steinem had become engaged to marry during her senior year at Smith, but broke off the engagement when an opportunity to study political science in India came along. Steinem continued her studies in India for the next two years. There she adopted Indian dress and customs and became interested in India’s political issues. Steinem joined nonviolent protests against governmental policies that were strongly prejudiced against certain elements or castes (strict social classes) of Indian society. She also witnessed caste riots in southern India while visiting there. As a result of her experiences, Steinem developed a deep sympathy for the powerless 206

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Gloria Steinem

populations in the world. Steinem was a freelance (self-employed) writer for Indian newspapers and joined a group known as the Radical Humanists. The Indian experience vastly broadened Steinem’s horizons by showing her the extent of human suffering in parts of the world. Upon her return to the United States in 1958, Steinem looked for work as a journalist. However, she found that gender prejudice was well established in the profession. Editors seemed to want only male journalists. Finally, in 1960, Steinem was hired as assistant editor for the political satire magazine Help! in New York City. Steinem also began writing freelance articles for various popular publications, including Esquire, New York Times, and Show. Steinem kept her professional life separate from her personal interests. Her articles were about fashion, celebrities, and vacation destinations rather than advocating for social justice.

In the national spotlight Steinem burst onto the national scene in 1963 when she wrote an investigative article for Show magazine about the opening of the New York City Playboy Club. She wrote about the working conditions of women who worked for the Playboy Club as waitresses wearing skimpy outfits. To gather her information, Steinem applied and was hired as a Playboy waitress. She worked for three weeks. Her article ‘‘I Was a Playboy Bunny’’ attracted national attention for its portrayal of the gender prejudice—including low wages and discrimination—faced by the women working in the clubs. The article was made into a television movie in 1985 called A Bunny’s Tale. Steinem was now a celebrity and could work full time as a freelance writer. She now received more substantial writing assignments. Throughout the 1960s she published a number of pieces on wellknown political figures. She also did some script writing for the popular television show That Was the Week That Was in 1964 and 1965. Among the interviews she wrote was one with Playboy founder Hugh Heffner (1926–). In the interview, Steinem debated with Heffner about women’s rights and other social issues.

Journalist becomes activist Throughout the 1960s, Steinem became increasingly committed to political causes including women’s rights, racial justice, and world peace. She supported the Civil Rights Movement, antiwar protests against the unpopular Vietnam War (1957–75), and Cesar Chavez’s (1927–1993; see entry) Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

207

Gloria Steinem

Second Wave Feminism Gloria Steinem became recognized as a leading spokesperson for a revitalized feminist movement in the United States often referred to as the second wave of feminism. The second wave grew in the early 1960s and lasted through the 1980s. Whereas the first wave of the late nineteenth century and early twentieth century focused on absolute legal rights such as the right to vote called suffrage, the second wave was concerned with the injustices and inequalities built into society that affected day-to-day life. These included limited job opportunities, political powerlessness, sexual exploitation, and restricted reproductive rights. Women learned how the effects of social mores (well-established customs) reached into every aspect of their personal lives. This awareness of gender prejudice burst into the broader public realm in 1963. The presidential Commission on the Status of Women chaired by former First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt (1884–1962) issued a report emphasizing that gender prejudice reached into every aspect of American life. That same year, author Betty Friedan published The Feminine Mystique, a bestseller on gender prejudice in America. From that beginning of awareness came the following successes in reducing gender prejudice in

America. In 1964, the landmark Civil Rights Act was signed into law, making gender discrimination in employment illegal. In 1972, Congress passed Title IX of the Education Amendments, which greatly expanded educational opportunities for young women. That same year, the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) was sent to the states for ratification (approval and passage). In 1966, the National Organization of Women (NOW) was created to promote women’s issues. In 1973, the landmark Roe v. Wade U.S. Supreme Court decision legalized abortion. In addition, many prestigious universities that had been male-only, such as the Ivy League schools of Harvard and Yale, became coeducational in the 1960s and 1970s. A major disappointment was handed to feminists in 1982 when state ratification of the ERA fell three states short of the thirty-eight states needed. Steinem’s Ms. magazine chronicled these issues for the second wave. The second wave feminists tried to establish a common feminist identity to achieve political solidarity. Their efforts fell short, and the third wave of feminism began in the 1990s, composed of women of color who felt passed by during the second wave.

United Farm Workers labor union of Latino fieldworkers. As her fame intensified, the media treated Steinem as the outspoken leader of the Women’s Liberation Movement. Feminism was reborn in the early 1960s (see box). In her growing public role, she was attracting other public figures to the movement. Steinem also worked on behalf of various political candidates, including the presidential campaign of U.S. senator Robert F. Kennedy (1925–1968), which was cut short by his assassination in June 1968. In 1968, Steinem and Clay Felker (1928–) founded New York magazine. She provided a monthly political column for the magazine called The City Politic while serving as contributing editor. It was also 208

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Gloria Steinem

at this time she attended a meeting of a radical feminist group known as the Redstockings. Though there on a writing assignment, Steinem became even more taken by the gender prejudice issues they discussed. She was deeply moved by their personal stories. Increasingly Steinem was not only writing about women’s issues but accepting speaking engagements on the topic as well. She was becoming an active member of the movement rather than a journalistic observer.

Ms. magazine In July 1971, Steinem helped found the National Women’s Political Caucus with other activists Betty Friedan (1921–2006), Bella Abzug (1920–1998; see entry), and Shirley Chisolm (1924–2005). The Caucus encouraged women’s active participation in the upcoming 1972 presidential election campaign. Also through the Caucus, Steinem found investors to help launch a new magazine that would be dedicated to covering contemporary social issues from the feminist perspective. Steinem had come to realize that only a magazine controlled by women could openly address women’s issues. By late 1971, Steinem had produced the first issue of Ms. magazine. That thirty-page issue appeared in the December 1971 edition of New York magazine. All three hundred thousand copies were sold in just eight days. Ms. magazine was the first national women’s magazine run by women. Within five years, it had a circulation of five hundred thousand. As its editor, Steinem’s reputation as the national feminist leader was firmly set. Through Ms., she became an influential spokesperson for women’s rights issues, including unequal pay and sexual exploitation. However, now she was not just a writer but had the demanding responsibilities of an editor, too.

Involved in national politics In 1972, Steinem attended the Democratic Party National Convention held in Miami, Florida. She fought to add an abortion rights segment to the party platform (a declaration of guiding principles). Steinem also called public attention to the under-representation of women and racial minorities among the convention delegates. Following the convention, Steinem covered Democratic candidate U.S. senator George McGovern’s (1922–) campaign as a journalist. Throughout the remainder of the 1970s, Steinem continued applying her organizational skills to the women’s movement. In 1974, she Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

209

Gloria Steinem

Gloria Steinem (center) was among 5,000 participants in a late-1970s march against pornography. # BE TTM AN N/C OR BI S.

founded the Coalition of Labor Union Women, the only national organization for women who are labor union members. Its goal was to improve the working conditions of women. Through 1975, Steinem helped plan the women’s agenda for the next Democratic Party National Convention in 1976. In doing so, she relentlessly lobbied, or petitioned, liberal politicians on behalf of women’s rights. The Democratic presidential nominee Jimmy Carter (1924–; served 1977–81) won the election. In 1977, Steinem was a participant at the National Conference of Women held in Houston, Texas. It was the first conference of its kind. The conference’s goal was to draw the nation’s attention to women’s issues. It also served to draw attention to the feminist leadership including Steinem.

Life changes Well into the 1980s, Steinem continued writing for Ms. magazine and speaking out on women’s rights. Her life took a major turn when she was 210

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Gloria Steinem

diagnosed with breast cancer in 1986. The following year, Ms. magazine was sold to new owners, who showed far less dedication to its publication. The magazine faded out of production over the next few years until reviving in 1991 when Steinem, who recovered her health, returned as consulting editor. The magazine actually went ad-free in 1989, when it was bought from Australian publisher Fairfax by American Feminists. Liberty Media bought the magazine (and Steinem returned to help run it) from American Fems in 1998 and maintained the ad-free policy. But she was not responsible for implementing it. She had long been critical of the gender prejudice and other prejudices expressed by advertising in general. In 2001, Steinem recruited various women as investors known as the Feminist Majority Foundation to purchase the magazine. Steinem remained on the advisory board into the twenty-first century. Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, Steinem published several books. In 1983, she published a collection of essays in Outrageous Acts and Everyday Rebellions, in which she recounted twenty years of her earlier experiences and described the lives of other influential women. In 1992, she published Revolution from Within: A Book of Self-Esteem that was a self-help book to inspire others. She explained how low self-esteem can influence every aspect of a woman’s life. Two years later, she published Moving Beyond Words in which she shared her views on various social topics. Numerous awards were bestowed upon Steinem. Notably, in 1993 Steinem was elected into the National Women’s Hall of Fame in New York. In 1998, she was inducted into the American Society of Magazine Editors Hall of Fame along with Hugh Hefner of Playboy magazine. During the 1990s Steinem encountered more health problems. In 1994, she contracted trigeminal neuralgia, a disorder that causes very sharp facial pain. Much to the surprise of all her friends, sixty-six-year-old Steinem married South African David Bale (1941–2003), father of actor Christian Bale (1974–), on September 3, 2000. The wedding was at the Oklahoma home of fellow feminist and Cherokee Indian tribal leader Wilma Mankiller (1945–; see entry). Tragically, Bale died only three years later on December 30, 2003, of brain lymphoma (cancer). He was sixty-two years old. Overcoming personal hardships, Steinem’s activism continued into the early twenty-first century. She sought to erase class, race, and sexual prejudice among women and bring several generations of feminists Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

211

Gloria Steinem

together in a common cause. In 2005, she appeared in the documentary film I Had an Abortion. In it, she described an abortion she had years earlier in London while on her way to study in India. She also had become a member of another political party, the Democratic Socialists of America. Steinem also served on the advisory board of Women’s Voices, Women Vote, an organization that seeks to increase the participation of unmarried women in the political process.

For More Information BOOKS

Daffron, Carolyn. Gloria Steinem. New York: Chelsea House, 1988. Heilbrun, Carolyn. The Education of a Woman: The Life of Gloria Steinem. New York: Dial Press, 1995. Lazo, Caroline E. Gloria Steinem: Feminist Extraordinaire. Minneapolis, MN: Lerner Publications, 1998. Steinem, Gloria. Outrageous Acts and Everyday Rebellions. New York: H. Holt, 1995. Steinem, Gloria. Moving Beyond Words. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1994. WEB SIT ES

Women Voices. Women Vote. http://www.wvwv.org/ (accessed on December 11, 2006).

212

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Mother Teresa B OR N: August 26, 1910  Skopje, Republic of

Macedonia D I E D : September 5, 1997  Calcutta, India

Macedonia-born Roman Catholic nun

‘‘We think sometimes that poverty is only being hungry, naked, and homeless. The poverty of being unwanted, unloved, and uncared for is the greatest poverty.’’

other Teresa won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1997 and accepted it on behalf of the ‘‘unwanted, unloved, and uncared for.’’ In 1950, she founded an order of nuns called the Missionaries of Charity in Calcutta, India. She served as its director for nearly fifty years. Teresa founded five additional branches of the Missionaries of Charity that included the Missionary Brothers of Charity, the Contemplative Brothers, the Mission of Charity Fathers, the International Association of Co-Workers, and the Contemplative Sisters. Her order’s work for the poor expanded across the globe and could be found in more than one hundred countries in the early twenty-first century. Born in the Republic of Macedonia, Mother Teresa adopted Calcutta as her home and became an Indian citizen. Her personal mission was to provide for the physical and spiritual needs of the poorest of the poor while living among them. Her efforts earned her the name Saint of

M

Mother Teresa. A P IM AGE S.

213

Mother Teresa

the Gutters. Although she was Roman Catholic, Teresa showed no discrimination (treating some people differently than others or favoring one social group over another based on prejudices) as she worked with Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist, and those having no religious beliefs. Much of her early work focused on giving comfort to the dying, but she soon added orphanages, soup kitchens, and medical clinics as others joined her order. At the time of her death, the Missionaries of Charity included more than three thousand members.

From Macedonia to Calcutta Mother Teresa began life as Agnes Gonxha Bojaxhiu. She was born on August 26, 1910, to devout Roman Catholic parents in Skopje, Macedonia. Agnes was the youngest of three children and was called Gonxha, or flower bud, by her elder sister Aga and brother Lazar. Religion played an important part in the family’s life. Agnes was christened into the church on August 27, a date which later would be confused with her actual birth date. As she grew up, Agnes and her sister took part in many church activities including the choir, religious services, and missionary presentations. Agnes had a passion for music and poetry and had a real gift for communication as well. She threw herself wholeheartedly into every activity she undertook and became a central figure in organizing activities with her parish. Agnes’s parents, Nikola and Dranafile (Drana) Bojaxhiu, were both Albanian (see box) but had been drawn to Skopje because it was a commercial (trade) center. They were prominent (active and important) members in the community and took a keen interest in their children’s education. The family home was a happy place. It was always open to anyone who needed help, especially the poor. Nikola was a successful businessman who spoke five languages and sat on the town council. Agnes was only eight years old when her father died suddenly. Drana was left without financial security and took work as a seamstress to support her family. Despite their circumstances, the family home continued to be a gathering place for those even poorer than themselves. Drana repeatedly instructed her children to ‘‘be only all for God.’’ Agnes received her early education at a convent-run primary school. However, after her father’s death, she attended a state secondary school in neighboring Croatia, which was also largely Roman Catholic. It was there that Agnes first learned about the work of Catholic missionaries in India and was inspired to the mission field herself. The Bojaxhiu family had 214

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Mother Teresa

Novitiate When a woman enters a convent she faces a trial period that lasts a number of years. It is a time spent in prayer and meditation in order to determine if she is prepared to voluntarily leave mainstream society. At the end of the novitiate, she takes her final vows. Convents typically have walls separating the nuns from the outside world. They are usually restricted from leaving their cloister, or religious residence, unless engaged in limited activities such as teaching. There are parlors within the convent to allow nuns to have outside visitors, but those visitors are not allowed to associate freely within the convent itself. A nun who is elected to head her convent is usually referred to as the Mother Superior.

In the Roman Catholic Church, there is a distinction between nuns and religious sisters. They are distinguished by the type of vows they take and the focus of their work. The religious community of a nun is referred to as a religious order and the religious community of a sister is called a congregation. However, both sisters and nuns are addressed as Sister. Women who belong to orders like the Sisters of Charity are religious sisters, not nuns, and they live among the people they serve. Mother Teresa developed a program called Come and See that allowed young women to come and try out their suitability for the Missionaries of Charity.

participated in the annual pilgrimage (spiritual journey) to the chapel of the Madonna of Letnice on the slopes of Skopje’s Black Mountain for many years. Groups of the faithful would make their way up the hillside in what became the highlight of the church year. Because of Agnes’s delicate health as a child the family would go in a horse-drawn carriage and visit the shrine when it was less crowded. When she was twelve years old, Agnes spent time once again praying in the chapel on the annual pilgrimage. She informed her mother that she felt herself called to a religious life. She intended to be a missionary and to give the life of Christ to the people. The pursuit of her dream began with an application to join the Sisters of Loreto, the Irish branch of the Institute of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Agnes chose this community of nuns because she had heard of their work among the poor in Calcutta, India. In 1928, she joined the pilgrimage to Letnice for the last time and left her family behind to join the Loreto Order in Rathfarnham, Ireland (near Dublin). She would never see her mother again. Agnes had inherited her father’s gift for languages and quickly learned English, the language in which her spiritual studies were conducted. Agnes Gonxha Bojaxhiu took the name of Sister Mary Teresa of the Child Jesus after the French Teresa of Lisieux. The French Teresa had been known as the Little Flower because it was said she did no great things, only small things Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

215

Mother Teresa

with great love. On December 1, 1928, Teresa left Ireland and traveled by boat on her long voyage through the Suez Canal, across the Red Sea, the Indian Ocean, and the Bay of Bengal before finally arriving in Calcutta, India, on January 6, 1929. One week later, she boarded a train to the Himalayan station of Darjeeling where she would begin a two-year course of studies. It was there that Teresa was made a Loreto novitiate (see box) and received her nun’s black habit (uniform) and veil. Her preparation for the religious life included the practical task of learning the Hindi and Bengali languages of her new home.

The call within a call Sister Teresa made her first vows, known as temporary vows, on May 24, 1931, and began teaching in the Loreto convent school of Darjeeling. For a brief time, she was able to work helping the nursing staff at a small medical station in Darjeeling as well. Sister Teresa was soon sent to Loreto Entally, one of six schools operated by the Sisters in Calcutta. In the same compound at Loreto Entally was St. Mary’s high school for Bengali girls, where lessons were conducted in Bengali and English was taught as a second language. Teresa taught geography and history in English. The Loreto nuns believed the best way to overcome the problems of poverty in India was through education, and so Teresa also taught at St. Teresa’s primary school outside the compound of Loreto Entally. The slum children she taught at St. Teresa’s lived in poverty-stricken conditions but were eager to learn. They called her Ma, which means Mother. Sister Teresa took her final vows of poverty, chastity (sexual purity), and obedience as a nun on May 24, 1937. She became Mother Teresa in accordance with the tradition of the Loreto nuns. She eventually became the principal of the school at St. Mary’s. Beyond Loreto Entally’s protective walls was the worst slum in Calcutta, Moti Jheel (which means Pearl Lake). Every Sunday, Teresa visited the poor who lived in the slums and the patients in a local hospital of Moti Jheel. She had little material wealth to offer but she shared her faith with Christians, Hindus, and Muslims alike. Millions died and many more sought help during the war years of World War II (1939– 45) and the famine (mass starvation) of 1943 in India. Orphans and ‘‘war babies’’ were left on the doorsteps of Loreto in increasing numbers. Hundreds of children were evacuated to convents outside the city for their safety while Japanese forces occupied nearby Burma during the war. 216

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Mother Teresa

After the war, Teresa returned to the convent with her charges but found a shortage of teachers and food for the children. She continued to teach and daily went outside the convent to beg for food. The year 1946 brought increasing conflict between Hindus and Muslims and eventually ended in the partition and independence of India. However, its immediate effect was bloodshed in the streets of Calcutta where Teresa went to beg. On August 16, 1946, the Muslim League declared Direct Action Day. The city witnessed more than five thousand citizens killed and another fifteen thousand wounded before it was over. Teresa’s health had never significantly improved and she was directed to take a summer retreat for a period of spiritual renewal and a physical break from work. She boarded a dusty train for Darjeeling on September 10, 1946. It was then that she received her ‘‘call within a call.’’ Teresa heard the call of God to leave the convent and help the poorest of the poor while living among them. She took it as an order. To deny the call would have been to break the faith. The date was celebrated later by the Catholic Church as Inspiration Day. Returning to Entally in October, Teresa sought permission from her superiors to leave the convent school and begin a new congregation that would care for the unwanted and abandoned in the slums of Calcutta. She waited patiently for permission to begin her new order. It was granted two years later by Pope Pius XII (1876–1958) on April 12, 1948. Mother Teresa would call her religious order the Missionaries of Charity.

Home for the dying destitute To prepare for her mission, Mother Teresa received training in medicine at Holy Family Hospital northwest of Calcutta. She studied with those who specialized in obstetrics (care of women during pregnancy, childbirth, and the recovery period), emergency medicine, and infectious diseases. Returning to Calcutta, she exchanged her nun’s habit for a simple white cotton sari with a blue border and left the convent to work alone in the slums. Without any funding, Teresa started an openair school for slum children and began to teach them the Bengali alphabet and basic hygiene (cleanliness). The school soon grew in numbers and she was joined by several of her former students. Local people saw her work and donated school supplies, a house to teach in, and financial support. Every day, Teresa saw tragedy in the lives of the dying in Calcutta. Those too weak to move were being eaten by rats in the streets. The bodies of those who died during the night were hauled away in the morning by garbage collectors. Teresa sought help from Indian government officials to Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

217

Mother Teresa

In 1955 Mother Teresa founded her first orphanage for abandoned babies and children. She called it Shishu Bhavan (Sowing Joy). # B ETT MA NN/ CO RBI S.

secure a place for the dying to end their days with dignity. In 1952, she secured a house in an abandoned Hindu temple to Kali, the Goddess of Death. Teresa renamed it Nirmal Hriday (Place of the Pure Heart) and began gathering the deserted and dying that she found on the streets. Those with Hansen’s disease, or leprosy, suffered an especially cruel fate in Indian society. People afflicted with leprosy were shunned by family and strangers alike for fear of contracting the mysterious and dreaded disease. Leprosy is a bacterial disease that attacks the skin and results in the loss of soft tissue and bones such as noses, ears, and lips. Although it is only a slightly contagious disease, the physical deformities it inflicts make it a frightening disorder for both those who suffer from it and those who witness it. For the poor, the rotting flesh that marked a leper resulted in a life of separation and begging. Teresa committed herself to gathering the lepers to Nirmal Hriday. She obtained a mobile medical clinic to reach those too ill to travel to the home. She arranged for the latest anti-leprosy treatments that could contain the disease and ensure it would not be passed on to others. In Calcutta, Teresa 218

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Mother Teresa

became known as the Saint of the Gutters because of her work with the poorest of the poor who were diseased and dying.

Seeking the heart of God Mother Teresa was joined by a number of Sisters and in February 1953, the Missionaries of Charity moved into a building that became known as the Mother House. Everyone began addressing Teresa simply as Mother. In the fall of 1955, Teresa founded her first orphanage for abandoned babies and children. She called it Shishu Bhavan (Sowing Joy). The home also had a soup kitchen, clinic, and shelter for expectant mothers who had been rejected by family and society. In 1965, the Indian government offered Teresa land to start a leper colony that would be entirely self-sufficient. She named it Shanti Nagar (Place of Peace) and used it to teach those who came to stay the practical skills necessary to restore their dignity and confidence. She would eventually give the same human face to those who suffered from AIDS (acquired immunodeficiency syndrome) around the world. Teresa also set up centers around India to provide emergency aid to survivors of natural and human disasters such as floods, epidemics, and riots. Teresa had the ability to gain attention and support for her cause of helping the poor from both ordinary citizens and world leaders. People around the world heard of the work done by the Missionaries of Charity and wanted to help. They offered material supplies and financial donations that eventually allowed Teresa to establish branches around the globe. In 1967, Teresa established the Missionary Brothers of Charity, who supplemented the work done by the Sisters. Teresa eventually founded four more branches of the Missionaries of Charity. They consist of the Contemplative Brothers, the Mission of Charity Fathers, the International Association of Co-Workers, and the Contemplative Sisters. Mother Teresa received numerous awards and honors (see box), including the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979, for her work with the poor and suffering. She experienced declining health but continued her life’s work until her death in 1997. She received a state funeral in India with dignitaries from around the world in attendance. Tens of thousands of Christians, Hindus, and Muslims lined the streets of Calcutta to pay their respects to Mother Teresa as her body passed by. In 2003, Pope John Paul II (1920–2005) beatified Mother Teresa of Calcutta, the initial step toward sainthood in the Catholic Church. Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

219

Mother Teresa

Awards and Honors The following is a partial list of the awards and honors bestowed upon Mother Teresa.



1977: Honorary doctorate, by Cambridge University, England.



1979: Balzan Prize, by the Italian government.



1962: The Padma Sri (Order of the Lotus), by the Indian government.



1962: The Magsaysay Prize, by the Conference of Asiatic States.

1979: The Nobel Peace Prize.







1970: Good Samaritan Prize and the Kennedy Foundation Prize, in the United States.

1985: Presidential Medal of Honor, by the U.S. government.



1971: Pope John XXIII Peace Prize, by the Vatican.

1987: Soviet Peace Committee Gold Medal for promoting peace and friendship among people.



1972: Pandit Nehru Award for International Understanding.

1990: International Leo Tolstoy Medal, by the Soviet government.



1992: Peace Education Prize from UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization).



1996: Made an honorary citizen of the United States, by the U.S. government.







1973: Templeton Prize for Progress in Religion, by the British government.



1975: Albert Schweitzer Award for humanitarian work, in the United States.

For More Information BOOKS

Brantl, George, ed. Catholicism. New York: George Braziller, Inc., 1962. Egan, Eileen. Such a Vision of the Street: Mother Teresa—The Spirit and the Work. New York: Doubleday and Company, Inc., 1985. Mother Teresa. A Simple Path. New York: Ballantine Books, 1995. Schaefer, Linda. Come and See: A Photojournalist’s Journey into the World of Mother Teresa. Sanford, FL: DC Press, 2003. Spink, Kathryn. Mother Teresa: A Complete Authorized Biography. New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 1997. WEB SIT ES

‘‘Mother Teresa—Biography.’’ Nobelprize.org. http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/ peace/laureates/1979/teresa-bio.html (accessed on December 11, 2006). ‘‘Mother Teresa of Calcutta (1910–1997).’’ The Vatican. http://www.vatican.va/ news_services/liturgy/saints/ns_lit_doc_20031019_madre-teresa_en.html (accessed on December 11, 2006).

220

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Leyla Zana B OR N: May 3, 1961  Diyarbakir, Turkey

Turkish human rights activist

‘‘Violence has outlived its time. . . . The language and method of solution of our age is dialogue, compromise and peace. It is not die and kill, but live and let live.’’

eyla Zana is a Turkish citizen of Kurdish ancestry. Leyla grew up in the village of Silvan near Diyarbakir, a city in southeastern Turkey with a large Kurdish population. Kurds descended from Indo-European people who have inhabited the mountainous regions of southeastern Turkey, northern Iran, northeastern Iraq, and northeastern Syria for at least four thousand years. Turkey has long considered recognition of the Kurdish people and their culture a threat to Turkish unity. The Turkish government fears that any form of official recognition that the Kurds are distinct from the Turkish people would encourage the Kurds to push harder to form a new nation out of Turkish territory. Many Kurds living in Turkey wish to unite with Kurds from Iran, Iraq, and Syria and establish their own country, Kurdistan. Kurds that favor separation from Turkey are called separatists.

L

Leyla Zana. A P IM AGE S.

221

Leyla Zana

Supporting separation has long been considered a crime in Turkey and results in harsh consequences, such as imprisonment. For decades, Kurds living in Turkey have been subjected to human rights violations at the hands of the Turkish government. Violations include prejudice (a negative attitude towards others based on a prejudgment about those individuals with no prior knowledge or experience) and discrimination (treating some people differently than others or favoring one social group over another based on prejudices) in employment and education; continued suppression of freedom of expression in personal speech, in writings, and in media broadcasting; and forced displacement when homes belonging to Kurds are purposely destroyed. Worse yet, imprisonment, torture, unexplained disappearances of family members, and even murder are part of the life of Kurds in Turkey. Zana has worked since the early 1980s for human rights and recognition of the Kurdish minority in Turkey. She has been a tireless advocate of a peaceful solution to Kurdish-Turkish conflict, referred to in Turkey as the ‘‘Kurdish problem.’’ In her struggle for Kurdish rights, Zana has served as an elected representative in the Turkish parliament (government), but was also imprisoned in the Ankara Central Prison for nine years. Having experienced prejudice against women within her own family, Zana has also been a strong voice for women’s rights.

Zana’s Kurdish Muslim home Zana was one of six children, five sisters and one brother. As with most Kurds, her family members are Muslims, followers of the Islam religion. In Kurdish Muslim homes, women are treated as servants or mere objects with no rights as human beings. While Zana’s mother worked, her father slept much of the day, then would go out in the evening to talk with his friends. Zana’s mother had no children for her first twelve years of marriage, then four daughters, one after the other. However, the birth of girls was not important in Kurdish society. Zana remembered if one of her sisters cried in the night her father would throw both mother and baby outside, no matter the weather. They would have to sneak back in once the father had fallen back asleep. Zana resisted and rebelled against the position of Kurdish women in Kurdish society from an early age. When only nine years old, she struck out at her uncle while he was beating her aunt. Zana’s father followed traditional Muslim thinking and practice of limiting his daughters’ education, choosing instead to prepare them to be wives and mothers. Even though Zana enjoyed schooling and was a very 222

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Leyla Zana

The Kurdish People In the early 2000s, there are between twenty-five and thirty million Kurdish people worldwide. The majority of Kurds live in the four countries of Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and Syria. They populate approximately 230,000 mountainous square miles of southeastern Turkey, northwestern Iran, northeastern Iraq, and northeastern Syria. The Kurdish people originated from Indo-European tribes that have inhabited this region for as long as four thousand years. Turkey is home to the largest Kurdish population, 13.5 to 15 million. About 6.5 million Kurds live in Iran, 4 to 5 million in Iraq, and about 1 million in Syria. Several million more live in various Asian countries. In the seventh century, Arabs conquered the Kurdish people and required them to become followers of the Islam religion. Islam followers are known as Muslims and belong to one of two factions, Shiite or Sunni. Like all Muslims, Kurds also are either Shiite or Sunni. Most are Sunni. Unlike other Muslims, hatred between Shiite Kurds and Sunni Kurds does not exist. Whether they are Shiite or Sunni, they are first and most importantly Kurds, one people. Kurds are one of the largest ethnic groups without their own country. Most Kurds wish for an independent homeland to be carved from Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and Syria. It would take the

ancient name of Kurdistan, long used to refer to the area. In the 2000s the lack of a Kurdish homeland is known as the Kurdish problem. Periodic revolts of the Kurds in all four countries occurred throughout the twentieth century. The Kurdish revolts are referred to as separatist movements. The separatist movements have been dealt with severely by the governments in all four countries. Suppression of Kurds has led to repression in employment, education, politics, and in speaking the Kurdish language. Kurdish political parties are frequently banned and Kurdish leaders imprisoned and tortured. However, the ultimate discrimination and suppression of Kurds occurred in Iraq. During the 1980s, Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein (1937–2006; see entry) directed genocide against Iraqi Kurds. Genocide is the deliberate destruction, or killing off, of a racial, religious, or cultural group. Entire Kurdish villages were destroyed where Iraqi military were commanded to kill any living thing, human and animal alike. In 1988, lethal chemicals, such as mustard gas and nerve agents that would instantly destroy their lungs by blistering them internally or leaving the person paralyzed, were unleashed on the Kurdish town of Halabja. About twelve thousand people died in three days.

promising student, her father allowed her only one and a half years of formal education. Zana strenuously objected to leaving school, but she could not go against his will. As recalled by Zana in ‘‘About Leyla Zana’’ on the website http:// www.hist.net/kierser/ma11/About_Leyla_Zana.html, she continued to be precocious and rebellious as she grew. As a preteen, she refused to wear the traditional Muslim head scarf. Zana resented strict Muslim rules. At the age of fourteen, Zana’s father demanded she marry her cousin, thirty-fivePrejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

223

Leyla Zana

year-old Mehdi. Zana resisted the prospect of marrying, and tells the story of beating her fists against her father when told she must marry Mehdi. However, Muslim daughters must obey their fathers, and Mehdi and Zana were married in 1975.

Marriage to Mehdi Although Mehdi had little formal education, as a young adult he quickly rose to leadership roles in his community of Silvan and later in nearby Diyarbakir. He joined political groups fighting for the rights of workers. The rebels of that day in Turkey were promoting communism (a political and economic system in which a single political party controls all aspects of citizens’ lives and private ownership of property is banned). There was not yet an organized Kurdish rights movement. By the time Mehdi married Zana, he had already served four years in prison, one in 1967 and three from 1971 to 1974, for his rebellious Communist stands against the Turkish government. Zana’s politically conservative family always supported the Turkish government. When she married Mehdi, he introduced her to new ideas. Mehdi became not only Zana’s husband and father of her children, but within a few years, her teacher and mentor in political activism. Between 1975 and 1980, Zana’s life was controlled by Mehdi though she learned a lot from him during that time. She gave birth to their son Ronay in 1976. In 1977, by an overwhelming majority, Mehdi was elected mayor of Diyarbakir, a city of 225,000 people. In 1980, after a military coup (takeover) and change of government in the Turkish capital of Ankara, a harsh time of discrimination and oppression of Kurds began. Mehdi, along with thousands of men speaking out for Kurdish rights, was arrested and imprisoned. He was sentenced to thirty-five years and spent the next eleven years in prison. His only crime was standing up for the Kurdish people and for speaking the Kurdish language in public. Speaking Kurdish was banned in Turkey until 2002.

Wife of a political prisoner With Mehdi’s sentencing, Zana, pregnant with their daughter Ruken, felt powerless. She had little idea how to support her young family. Ronay was just five years old. Each week of that first year without Mehdi, Zana went to the prison to visit him. Many days when she went to visit Mehdi, she was not allowed to see him. She realized that he and other prisoners were being brutally tortured. 224

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Leyla Zana

At the prison she met a wide array of people—relatives and friends of other prisoners—and learned more and more about the political turmoil building in her region. It was apparent to her that many, like her husband, were political prisoners held because of their activism rather than any wrongdoing. Zana learned more of the prejudice and discrimination against her Kurdish people. She recalled as a child going into Diyarbakir with her mother and being poorly treated because their Kurdish peasant clothing marked them as Kurds. With Mehdi’s encouragement, Zana began to read and study. Reading was difficult because the books she chose were written in the Turkish language and she spoke Kurdish. Zana recalled struggling through many books, but little by little she became proficient in Turkish. One book she read was about the history of the Chinese Communist Party. The Communists were fighting against the traditional Chinese leaders and were often imprisoned. Zana compared the situation of the imprisoned Kurdish leaders to the situations she read about in books. Zana received a secondary school (a school equivalent to high school) diploma in Diyarbakir without ever attending classes.

Political activist By 1984, Zana had become a political activist like her husband. She was confident enough to not only think, but act, on her own. The movement for Kurdish civil rights and, more radically, Kurdish separation from Turkey was growing. Zana participated in demonstrations for Kurdish rights outside the prison where Mehdi was held. For the first time, Zana experienced the feeling of power and self-worth as a person. As Zana grew in her knowledge of Kurdish issues, the Kurdish separatist or liberation movement intensified. Zana championed increased rights for women in the Kurdish community. She organized women’s activist groups that established offices not only in Diyarbakir, but also in Istanbul. She became a spokeswoman for women whose Kurdish husbands were wrongfully imprisoned. Zana worked for human rights groups in Diyarbakir and also became an editor of a Diyarbakir newspaper, Yeni Ulke.

A 1988 arrest In 1988, Zana was arrested and spent fifty-seven days imprisoned. She had come to visit Mehdi on a hot July day. Many other women and mothers with small babies were waiting to visit their husbands. When the women Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

225

Leyla Zana

could hear their husbands being beaten on the other side of the wall, they revolted, shouting and throwing rocks at prison guards. Eighty-three were arrested, including Zana, who was accused of inciting (starting) the riot. As Zana relates in ‘‘Turkey: Leyla Zana, the only Kurdish Woman MP’’ at website http://chris-kutschera.com/A/leyla_zana.htm, during her nearly two months of imprisonment, a period she has continuing nightmares of, she was interrogated and tortured with beatings and electric shock. She was also stripped of her clothes and paraded in front of guards and male prisoners. Zana’s experiences only reinforced her commitment to the struggle for Kurdish rights and the search for peaceful solutions. By 1990, the troubles between the Turkish government and Kurds had turned violent. Upwards of thirty thousand people would be killed by fighting between Turkish forces and Kurds in the early 1990s.

Member of parliament Young and highly intelligent, Zana soon rose to political leadership roles in Diyarbakir. On October 20, 1991, at the age of thirty she was elected to the Turkish parliament; she was one of eight other elected women serving. Receiving 84 percent of the votes in her Diyarbakir district, Zana was the first Kurdish woman representative. The year of Zana’s election, Mehdi was released from prison. In parliament, Zana hoped to encourage Kurdish-Turkish relations and recognition of Kurdish identity. When taking the oath for parliament, Zana spoke in Kurdish and wore the colors representing the Kurdish flag, yellow, green, and red. Her language and clothing outraged members of parliament. Her strong Kurdish presence caused denouncements from other parliamentarians that she was a separatist and statements that she was not welcome in the government legislative body. Some called for her arrest, but members of parliament are immune from arrest for their actions on the parliament floor. Rather than a separatist, Zana was actually a voice for peace and cooperation between Kurds and the Turkish people. She called for an end to Turkish government oppression and violence against Kurds and the end to imprisonment and torture of Kurdish political prisoners. In May 1993, Zana traveled to Washington, D.C., where she spoke at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and briefed U.S. Congress members on the plight of the Kurdish people within Turkey. She explained that Turkish and Kurdish political leaders had been unable 226

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Leyla Zana

to openly and honestly address the so-called Kurdish problem. The Turkish government continued to suppress calls for Kurdish rights by destroying Kurdish villages and throwing Kurdish leaders into prison where they were interrogated and tortured in hopes of breaking their spirit. She urged the United States to side with more moderate Turkish leaders who hoped a peaceful resolution could be negotiated. Parliamentary immunity had protected Zana from arrest for three years since her controversial oath-taking in October 1991. When in 1994 she joined the newly formed Democracy Party, her immunity was revoked. The Turkish government long had a practice of closing down parties that worked on Kurdish rights issues. They banned the Democracy Partly, lifted Zana’s immunity, and arrested her and three other Kurdish parliamentarians.

Fifteen-year sentence In December 1994, State Security Court No. 1 in Ankara, made up of Turkish civil and military judges, convicted Zana and the three other Kurdish parliamentarians on charges of separatism and illegal activities. The court identified Zana’s call for peaceful resolutions between Kurds and the Turkish people as advocating separatism. Her illegal activities included wearing the Kurdish colors of yellow, green, and red in front of parliament in October 1991 and ties to the armed Kudistan Worker’s Party. Known as the PKK for Patiya Karker Kurdistan, the party is a militant group working for Kurdish independence. Zana denied any association with PKK. Turkey, the United States, and the European Union (EU) list the PKK as a terrorist organization. (The EU is a governmental body composed in 2005 of twenty-five member European states including Britain, France, Germany, and The Netherlands.) The court sentenced Zana to fifteen years in prison. The sentence was viewed by human rights groups worldwide as unjust. With her confinement in Ankara Central Prison in 1994, Zana became the symbol of the Kurdish struggle for peace and social justice, for an end to prejudice, discrimination, and oppression of Kurds. Amnesty International (AI), a worldwide organization working for peace and justice, named Zana and her three imprisoned colleagues prisoners of conscience. Prisoners of conscience are people who have been imprisoned because of their race, religion, beliefs, sexual orientation, or color of skin and have not advocated violence. AI considered the imprisonments unjust and merely punishment for involvement, even though nonviolent, in the Kurdish problem. Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

227

Leyla Zana

In October 2004, shortly after her release from jail, Leyla Zana (left) traveled to Brussels, Belgium, to receive the European Parliament’s Sakharov prize, an award she had waited nine years to accept. # T HI ERR Y R OGE /R EU TER S/ COR BI S.

International honors Throughout the second half of the 1990s and while imprisoned, Zana received constant recognition and awards. She was praised as an individual willing to lose her freedom in the struggle for justice for her people. International peace and human rights awards in chronological order include: the Rafto Prize for Human Rights from Norway (1994); the Bruno Kreisky Peace Prize from Austria (1995); the Aix-la-Chapelle International Peace Prize from Germany (1995); the highly prestigious Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought from the European Parliament (1995) (The European Parliament together with the Council of Ministers makes up the legislative branch of the EU representing about 450 million 228

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Leyla Zana

people); the Rose Prize from Denmark (1996); nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize three times between 1995 and 1998; and Woman of the Year Prize from Northern Italy (1998).

Imprisoned but not silenced Although Zana’s imprisonment was widely protested, she remained confined at the Ankara Central Prison. Her voice, though, was not silenced. She wrote continuously and was published in various magazines, newspapers, and organization publications. Zana wrote about Kurdish identity and traditions, and the Kurdish people’s struggle for recognition and civil rights. She completed an entire book, Writings From Prison and had it published in 1999. Zana stated in her book she did not really expect to be released from prison. Her words proved correct when on September 26, 1998, the Ankara State Security Court added to her sentence for her article published in the People’s Democracy Party newsletter about the Kurdish New Year called Nevruz. The court said she violated the law against inciting racial hatred because she wrote about the Kurdish longing for life free of oppression. Zana found yet another cause to speak out about—the harassing treatment of political prisoners, and lack of medical care. Although ailing at times, she refused hospital visits to protest the harsh treatment of political prisoners.

Courts review case In July 2001, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) reviewed Zana’s and the three other parliamentarians’ trial and ruled against the Turkish court’s decision. However, Turkey did not recognize this finding and Zana remained confined. The ECHR hears human rights complaints from the Council of Europe made up of forty-six member states. Although not associated with the EU, the ECHR hands down decisions that are closely monitored by the EU. Turkey, hopeful of becoming a candidate for EU membership, adopted a number of legal reforms. In February 2003, a new Turkish law allowed for new trials of individuals where the ECHR found Turkish court proceedings unjust. In a new trial in April 2004, the convictions and sentences of Zana and her colleagues were reaffirmed by the State Security Court. AI reported the retrial was full of practices that did not measure up to international fair trial practices. AI called for Turkish Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

229

Leyla Zana

authorities to eliminate State Security Courts so as to allow Turkey to better conform to EU standards of justice. In June 2004, the Turkish Supreme Court of Appeals overruled Zana’s verdict on a legal technicality. Zana and the others were at last set free. Zana traveled to Brussels, Belgium, to receive the European Parliament’s Sakharov prize, an award she had waited nine years to accept. In a speech before the EU assembly gathered to honor her, Zana, speaking at times in Turkish and others in Kurdish, called for greater rights for Turkey’s Kurds and for improved communication to work out issues. According to the Internet Web site Qantara: Dialogue with the Islamic World, she told those assembled that ‘‘violence has outlived its time . . . The language and method of solution of our age is dialogue, compromise and peace. It is not die and kill, but live and let live.’’ She received a standing ovation. While in Brussels, Zana was reunited with Medhi and her two children, the first time since her imprisonment. Ruling their rights of free expression had been violated, the ECHR in January 2005 awarded Zana and the other three freed parliamentarians a monetary sum from the Turkish government. Planning to establish a new political party, Zana sought to reenter politics.

For More Information BOOKS

Meiselas, Susan. Kurdistan: In the Shadow of History. New York: Random House, 1997. Zana, Leyla. Writings From Prison. Watertown, MA: Blue Crane Books, 1999. WEB SIT ES

‘‘EU Sakharov Prize: Leyla Zana Waits Nine Years to Accept Award.’’ Qantara.de, Dialogue with the Islamic World. http://www.qantara.de/ webcom/show_article.php/_c-476/_nr-248/_p-1/i.html (accessed on December 11, 2006). Kurdish Human Rights Project. http://www.khrp.org (accessed on December 11, 2006). Kurdish Women’s Action Against Honour Killings. http://www.kwahk.org (accessed on December 11, 2006). ‘‘Special Focus Cases: Leyla Zana, Prisoner of Conscience.’’ Amnesty International USA. http://www.amnestyusa.org/action/special/zana.html (accessed on December 11, 2006).

230

Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies

Prejudice in the Modern World Primary Sources

Prejudice in the Modern World Primary Sources

Sharon M. Hanes Sarah Hermsen, Project Editor

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources Sharon M. Hanes Project Editor Sarah Hermsen

Imaging and Multimedia Dean Dauphinais, Lezlie Light, Mike Logusz

Rights and Acquisitions Margaret Abendroth, Tim Sisler

Product Design Jennifer Wahi

ª 2007 Thomson Gale, a part of The Thomson Corporation. Thomson and Star Logo are trademarks and Gale is a registered trademark used herein under license. For more information, contact: Thomson Gale 27500 Drake Rd. Farmington Hills, MI 48331-3535 Or you can visit our Internet site at http://www.gale.com ALL RIGHTS RESERVED No part of this work covered by the copyright hereon may be reproduced or used in any form or by any means— graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, taping, Web distribution, or information storage retrieval systems—without the written permission of the publisher.

For permission to use material from this product, submit your request via Web at http://www.gale-edit.com/ permissions, or you may download our Permissions Request form and submit your request by fax or mail to: Permissions Department Thomson Gale 27500 Drake Rd. Farmington Hills, MI 48331-3535 Permissions Hotline: 248-699-8006 or 800-877-4253, ext. 8006 Fax: 248-699-8074 or 800-762-4058 Cover photographs reproduced by permission of Mr. Teun Voeten (big photo), AP Images (women praying), and ª Penny Tweedie/Corbis (Aborigines).

Composition Evi Seoud Manufacturing Rita Wimberley

Since this page cannot legibly accommodate all copyright notices, the acknowledgements constitute an extension of the copyright notice. While every effort has been made to ensure the reliability of the information presented in this publication, Thomson Gale does not guarantee the accuracy of the data contained herein. Thomson Gale accepts no payment for listing; and inclusion in the publication of any organization, agency, institution, publication, service, or individual does not imply endorsement by the editors or publisher. Errors brought to the attention of the publisher and verified to the satisfaction of the publisher will be corrected in future editions.

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS CATALOGING-IN-PUBLICATION DATA Prejudice in the modern world. Primary Sources / [compiled by] Sharon M. Hanes; Sarah Hermsen, project editor. p. cm. — (Prejudice in the modern world reference library) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN-13: 978-1-4144-0208-6 (hardcover : alk. paper)— ISBN-10: 1-4144-0208-2 (hardcover : alk. paper)— 1. Toleration—History—Sources—Juvenile literature. 2. Prejudices—History—Sources—Juvenile literature. 3. Intergroup relations—History—Sources—Juvenile literature. 4. Ethnic relations— History—Sources—Juvenile literature. 5. Race relations—History—Sources—Juvenile literature. I. Hanes, Sharon M. II. Hermsen, Sarah. HM1271.P743 2007 303.3’85—dc22 2006036961

ISBN-13:

978-1-4144-0203-1 978-1-4144-0204-8 978-1-4144-0205-5 978-1-4144-0206-2 978-1-4144-0207-9

ISBN-10:

(set) 978-1-4144-0208-6 (Almanac set) (Primary Sources) (Almanac vol.1) 978-1-4144-0209-3 (Almanac vol.2) (Cumulative Index) (Biographies)

1-4144-0203-1 (set) 1-4144-0204-X (Almanac set) 1-4144-0205-8 (Almanac vol.1) 1-4144-0206-6 (Almanac vol.2) 1-4144-0207-4 (Biographies)

1-4144-0208-2 (Primary Sources) 1-4144-0209-0 (Cumulative Index)

This title is also available as an e-book. ISBN-13: 978-1-4144-1057-9; ISBN-10: 1-4144-1057-3 Contact your Thomson Gale sales representative for ordering information. Printed in the United States of America 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

T a b l e o f Co n t e n t s

Reader’s Guide vii Timeline of Events xi Words to Know xxvii Chapter 1: Ethnic Prejudice 1

Excerpt from ‘‘Colonial Legacy Weighs Heavily on France’’ 3 Excerpt from ‘‘Pakistani Areas of New York City, A Lingering Fear’’ 13 Excerpt from Zlata’s Diary: A Child’s Life in Sarajevo 27 Chapter 2: Gender Prejudice 39

Excerpt from ‘‘China Grapples With Legacy if Its ‘Missing Girls’: Disturbing Demographic Imbalance Spurs Drive to Change Age-Old Practices’’ 41 Excerpt from ‘‘The Women of Islam: The Taliban Perfected Subjugation, But Nowhere in the Muslim World Are Women Treated as Equals’’ 51 Chapter 3: Religious Prejudice 61

Excerpt from ‘‘Israel/Occupied Territories’’ 63 Excerpt from ‘‘Sectarian Hatred Pulls Apart Iraq’s Mixed Towns’’ 75 Chapter 4: Racial Prejudice 85

Excerpt from Black Like Me 89 Excerpt from Of Many Colors: Portraits of Multiracial Families 103 v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter 5: Genocide 113

Excerpt from ‘‘Crisis in Sudan’’ 115 Excerpt from ‘‘Early Warning and Urgent Action Procedure, Decision 1 (68): United States of America’’ 127 Chapter 6: World War II Ethnic Strife 137

Excerpt from The Big Lie: A True Story 141 Excerpt from Citizen 13660 155 Excerpt from ‘‘Universal Declaration of Human Rights’’ 169 Chapter 7: Prejudice in Society 181

Excerpt from ‘‘Untouchable’’ 183 Excerpt from ‘‘Dennis Shepard’s Statements to the Court’’ 193 Where to Learn More xxxvii Index xliii

vi

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Reader’s Guide

Of the many kinds of emotions and feelings a person may hold, prejudice is perhaps one of the most common yet complex. Prejudice is a negative attitude, emotion, or behavior towards others based on a prejudgment about those individuals with no prior knowledge or experience. Prejudice can be extremely harmful, oversimplifying diverse aspects of human nature and making broad generalizations about entire races and cultures. These generalizations are frequently based on stereotypes. The use of stereotypes employs negative images of others. Such negative stereotypes may lead to certain forms of behavior including discrimination or even hostile violent acts. This kind of use of generalizations and stereotypes becomes especially critical when people in power, or seeking political power, manipulate through the media the stereotypes of social groups they wish to dominate, or perhaps eliminate. People in these stereotyped groups often become less valued socially. They are frequently made scapegoats, blamed for the problems affecting society in general, even if they have nothing to do with it. Prejudices usually form very early in life; they are shaped by family, schools, and society in general. Prejudice can assume many forms based on the kinds of traits that others are being prejudged by. Racial prejudice focuses on physical biological traits, such as skin color. Religious prejudice considers the beliefs held by others or what religious denomination they are associated with. Ethnic prejudice identifies people who share common backgrounds or social customs. Nationalism is a form of prejudice that focuses on the political systems others live under. Sexism is a gender prejudice against men or women. Sexual orientation prejudices are usually against people who are homosexuals or transgendered. vii

READER’S GUIDE

Some prejudices focus on disabilities of others, ranging from physical handicaps to mental disabilities to mental illnesses. Normally, people—both as a group and individually—are acting out multiple forms of prejudice at any one time. One group of people may hold prejudices and discriminate against another group because of combined religious and ethnic prejudices, racial and social class prejudices, or gender and disability prejudices. Similarly, any multiple combinations of prejudices are possible and may even occur in different combinations in the same individual over time. No matter the complexity of prejudice, one simple fact exists—prejudice has long been one of the greatest barriers and most destructive forces in human history. Prejudice has been a major influence on human relationships throughout the history of humankind. Not only has prejudice existed throughout the history of civilization, it has dominated certain historic periods and historical events, such as the invasion of Christian armies into the Muslimheld Holy Lands beginning at the end of the eleventh century, the sixteenth century religious upheaval of the Reformation in Europe, and the Holocaust in World War II (1939–45) in the mid-twentieth century. Despite this influence of prejudice throughout history, the actual concept of what prejudice is did not develop until the twentieth century, when the study of prejudices gained recognition. Slavery, colonialism, and world empires had largely ended by the early twentieth century. However, racial discrimination, particularly against those groups previously enslaved, ethnic conflicts, and international conflict driven by nationalism remained major influences on the course of modern history. Instances where the consequences of prejudice were most apparent included the racially discriminatory Jim Crow laws of the American South, the extermination of European Jews by Nazi Germany in the Holocaust, ethnic conflicts in former Yugoslavia in Eastern Europe, genocides in the African states of Rwanda and Somalia, and religious conflicts in Northern Ireland and the Middle East. The nature of prejudice-driven discrimination and violence has changed over time. Efforts by national governments, human rights watch groups, and international organizations, such as the United Nations, have made strides in combating prejudice through various educational and humanitarian programs. However, it appeared that prejudice would continue as a major influence and source of conflict in the world into the twenty-first century. viii

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

READER’S GUIDE

Features Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources tells various stories in the words of the people who fought prejudice, acted out prejudices, and those who were the victims of prejudice. Sixteen excerpted documents touch on a wide range of topics on prejudice. Included are excerpts from published diaries, national magazine and news articles, reports produced by the United Nations and human rights watch groups, published interviews, and Web sites dedicated to the elimination of prejudice in everyday life. Each chapter contains a list of additional sources students can go to for more information and sidebar boxes highlighting people and events of special interest. Nearly 50 black-and-white photographs help illustrate the material. The volume begins with a timeline of important events in the history of prejudice and a Words to Know section that introduces students to difficult or unfamiliar terms (terms are also defined within the text). The volume concludes with a general bibliography and a subject index so students can easily find the people, places, and events discussed throughout Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources.

Prejudice in the Modern World Reference Library Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources is only one component of the three-part Prejudice in the Modern World Reference Library. The other two titles in this set are: Prejudice in the Modern World: Almanac offers twenty-two chapters in two volumes. The first eleven chapters explore the many different types of prejudice, their history, what causes these prejudices in people and societies, and their consequences. The types of prejudice described in detail include ethnic, racial, religious, class, gender, sexual orientation, nationalism, and disabilities. Prejudice in the Modern World: Biographies presents the life stories of twenty-five diverse and unique individuals who played key roles in the history of prejudice. Some were prominent national leaders in fighting well-established prejudices while some promoted prejudices in order to pursue their own political and economic gain. Other figures were activists combating the various types of prejudice. Profiles include Paul Kagame, president of Rwanda; Saddam Hussein, president of Iraq; Golda Meir, prime minister of Israel; Wilma Mankiller, chairperson of the Cherokee Nation; social activists Gloria Steinem, Cesar Chavez, Mine Obuko, and Mahatma Gandhi. Other biography subjects range from Nazi German military leader Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

ix

READER’S GUIDE

Heinrich Himmler, the primary instigator of the Holocaust, to the Dalai Lama, the Tibetan spiritual leader who promoted religious tolerance. A cumulative index of all three titles in the Prejudice in the Modern World Reference Library is also available.

Acknowledgements These volumes are dedicated to our new granddaughter Jenna Grace Hanes. May she grow up to enjoy a world far less shaped by the destructive consequences of prejudice.

Comments and Suggestions We welcome your comments on Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources and suggestions for other topics to consider. Please write: Editors, Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources, U
X
L, 27500 Drake Rd. Farmington Hills, Michigan 48331-3535; call toll free: 1-800-877-4253; fax to (248) 699-8097; or send e-mail via http://www.gale.com.

x

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Timeline of Events

1867 Diamonds are discovered in Southern Africa followed by the

discovery of gold in 1886; the newfound wealth draws broad international interest from foreign investors and lays the foundation for future racial segregation policies among the labor force. 1870s European countries rush to divide up Africa under their control,

leading to German colonies in Southwest Africa, French control of Algeria, Italian control of Somaliland in Eastern Africa and later Ethiopia, and British control of Egypt and South Africa; the division of Africa is completed at the Berlin Conference of 1885. 1887 The U.S. government begins a major period of forced cultural

assimilation with passage of the General Allotment Act, known as the Dawes Act, authorizing the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) to divide communal reservation lands into smaller, privately owned parcels. 1890s Jim Crow laws are introduced in the United States to legally

enforce public racial segregation for the next half century. New Zealand becomes the first nation to establish universal suffrage, meaning voting rights for all adults.

1893

The First International Convention for Women meets in Washington, D.C., with representatives arriving from ten nations to plot an international strategy for gaining suffrage.

1902

1905 Black American leaders meet in Niagara Falls, Canada, to develop a

strategy to fight racial prejudice in America; it becomes known as the Niagara Movement. xi

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

1909 The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People

(NAACP) is established to fight lynchings and other racist activities in the United States through legal action, educational programs, and encouraging voter participation. 1910 The National Urban League is founded to help black Americans

adjust to city life as they move to the North seeking jobs in industry; through World War I (1914–18) hundreds of thousands of blacks leave the rural South in what becomes known as the Black Migration. 1910 The Mexican Revolution sends that country spiraling into political,

economic, and social upheaval for a decade, and leads to over 680,000 Mexican citizens immigrating to the United States in search of jobs through the next twenty years. 1912 Hundreds of prominent Africans form the South African Native

National Congress, later renamed the African National Congress (ANC), to protest racial segregation in South Africa. 1916 The Irish Republican Army (IRA) forms to fight a guerrilla war for

Ireland’s independence from England; the Irish Free State is formed five years later. 1918 Since 1889, 2,522 black Americans are lynched—hung, burned

alive, or hacked to death—largely in the American South, as a result of extreme racial prejudice. 1918 Following World War I the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats, and

Slovenes is formed, later adopting the name Yugoslavia; it soon becomes apparent that the various ethnic groups are unwilling to blend together. 1918 Defeat of the Ottoman Empire in World War I leads the victors,

Britain and France, to divide up the Middle East under their control with Britain forming a new country called Iraq and establishing rule over Arab Palestinian territory. 1919 Twenty-five race riots erupt across the United States leaving one

hundred people dead and increasing membership in the Ku Klux Klan (KKK), a white supremacist hate group. 1920 The All India Home Rule League is formed, with Mahatma

Gandhi as its president, to seek independence from British rule. It adopts anti-British measures including a boycott of British imported xii

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

goods, refusing employment by the British, and refusing to pay taxes; these actions lead to the imprisonment of Gandhi. 1920 The United States passes the Nineteenth Amendment to the

Constitution extending the right to vote to women. 1923 Forty states in the United States have institutions housing approx-

imately forty-three thousand mentally defective persons. 1924 Congress passes the U.S. Immigration Act to limit all immigration

to the United States, particularly immigration from Asia and eastern and southern Europe. 1928 The resistance movement for India’s independence creates the

Indian National Congress following a massive protest march that journeys over 250 miles. 1928 The Muslim Brotherhood is created in Egypt to resist European

colonial powers controlling much of the Arab world in northern Africa and the Middle East and promote a return to Islamic states of past centuries. 1929 To improve human genetic qualities, twenty-three states in the

United States legalize sterilization of the mentally defective so they can not produce children. Soviet Union dictator Joseph Stalin allows seven million Ukrainians to starve to death during a harsh winter as a form of ethnic cleansing to provide room for Soviet expansion.

1932

1933 Nazi Germany establishes its first concentration camps within

Germany to hold political prisoners and those considered undesirable. 1933 The Holocaust, the most noted case of genocide in the twentieth

century, lasts until 1945, during which the Nazi German government kills eleven million people including six million European Jews; other victims included Poles, Gypsies, Slavs, homosexuals, and various political opponents. 1934 The U.S. Congress passes the Indian Reorganization Act (IRA)

providing opportunities for Native Americans to receive federal funds to purchase land, start businesses, and receive social services; tribes are to adopt written constitutions establishing democratic forms of government and forming federally chartered corporations. Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

xiii

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

November 9, 1938 Known as the Night of Broken Glass, the German

government carefully orchestrates violence against Jews across Germany and German-controlled Austria for two days as rioters burn or damage over one thousand Jewish synagogues and almost eight thousand Jewish-owned businesses; some thirty thousand Jewish men are arrested and sent to concentration camps, the first mass arrest of Jews by Nazi Germany. 1940 The fourteenth Dalai Lama is installed as the religious leader of

Tibet at the age of seven. 1941 For a four year period until the end of World War II in 1945, over

300,000 Serbs and Jews in Croatia are killed, disappear, or placed in concentration camps under the Croatian government led by Ante Pavelic´. 1942 The United States and Mexico establish the Bracero Program that

allows Mexican day laborers to legally enter the United States for seasonal work on farms and other jobs until 1964 when the program officially ends; almost five million workers journeyed from Mexico though working conditions were often harsh. February 19, 1942 U.S. president Roosevelt signs Executive Order 9066

authorizing the removal of Japanese Americans from their homes in the West Coast to detention camps established by the War Relocation Authority (WRA). July 19, 1942 Heinrich Himmler gives the order to begin deportation of

Jews from the Polish ghettos, leading to the deaths of three million Jews, over 90 percent of the Jewish population in Poland. December 1944 With the end of World War II in sight, the remaining

forty-four thousand Japanese Americans being detained since 1942 are freed, although the last camp does not close until March 1946. Following World War II, the Federal Peoples Republic of Yugoslavia is established as a communist country under the control of the USSR including the six states of Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, Serbia, Slovenia, Montenegro, and Macedonia.

1945

1945 The United Nations forms as an international world body to

resolve international disputes; its membership includes fifty-one nations; among its branches is the Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). xiv

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

1946 Artist Mine Okubo publishes Citizen 13660, the first published

account of the internment of Japanese Americans by the U.S. government during World War II. 1946 Thousands of immigrants begin legally entering France from

Northern Africa and Asia searching for work in rebuilding Europe from the ravages of World War II; by 1974 one million immigrants had entered France and by 1995 legal and illegal foreigners account for 25 percent of France’s population. 1947 The Indian government stops legally enforcing the traditional caste

system, establishes prohibitions against discrimination against members of former castes, and creates an aggressive affirmative action program to help those lower caste members historically discriminated against. August 1947 Pakistan gains independence from India, leading to mas-

sive population displacements as an estimated ten million Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs move from one country to the other. 1948 The Jewish state of Israel is formed within Palestinian Arab

territory forcing thousands of Arabs from their homelands and leading to a long-standing conflict between Arabs and Jews over control of the region. 1948 The South African Nationalist Party, campaigning on its policy of

apartheid, wins an election victory over the Unionist Party and immediately creates laws to impose racial segregation that remain in place for decades. 1948 Sri Lanka gains independence from Britain triggering long-stand-

ing ethnic conflict between the Tamils and Sinhalese. December 1948 The United Nations adopts the ‘‘Universal Declaration

of Human Rights’’ that outlines the international organization’s views on human rights. The United Nations also adopts the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in response to the Holocaust during World War II. April 18, 1949 The Republic of Ireland declares independence from

Britain and pursues efforts to unite Protestant Northern Ireland with the Catholic Republic of Ireland. 1954 The U.S. Supreme Court rules in Brown v. Board of Education that

racially segregated public schools are illegal, marking a major legal victory for black Americans against Jim Crow laws. Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

xv

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

June 1955 The South African Congress of the People, consisting of over

three thousand delegates opposed to apartheid, assemble to draft the Freedom Charter for a future democratic South Africa. October 29, 1956 Through November 6 Egypt nationalizes the Suez

Canal blocking Israeli commercial ships from passing through the critical waterway and leading to a brief war in which Israel wins. 1958 Racial violence breaks out in the Notting Hill district of London

leading to calls for increased restrictions on immigration. 1959 Tibetan resistance to Chinese control and discrimination escalates

into violence in Tibet’s capital city of Lhasa, causing the Dalai Lama and tens of thousands of Tibetans to seek exile in India while the Chinese systematically destroy Tibetan monasteries. 1961 Author John Howard Griffin publishes the award winning book

Black Like Me that explores the intense racial prejudices in the American South in the 1950s. Newly elected U.S. president John F. Kennedy forms the President’s Commission on the Status of Women, chaired by former First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt; the resulting 1963 report identifies numerous national gender prejudice issues affecting women including discrimination at the workplace and unequal pay.

1961

1962 The British Parliament passes the racially-prejudiced Commonwealth

Immigrants Act increasing restrictions on immigration of blacks from Commonwealth nations to Britain. July 1, 1962 The African state of Rwanda gains independence from

Belgian rule. 1963 The U.S. Congress passes the Equal Pay Act addressing gender

prejudice affecting equal pay for equal work. August 28, 1963 Black leaders including Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.,

Philip Randolph, Roy Wilkins, James Farmer, and Whitney M. Young, Jr., lead a massive protest march on Washington, D.C., attracting over two hundred thousand people, both blacks and whites. 1964 Violence erupts in Northern Ireland as Catholics rebel against

Protestant oppression leading to a bloody terrorist campaign by the Irish Republican Army (IRA) leaving thousands dead. xvi

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

1964 The U.S. Congress passes the landmark Civil Rights Act prohibit-

ing discrimination based on race and gender in public places and calling for equal opportunity in education and employment. 1965 A gay rights march held outside Independence Hall in Philadelphia

marks the beginning of the modern gay rights movement and formation of such groups as the Gay Liberation Front and Gay Activists Alliance. 1965 U.S. president Lyndon Johnson signs a presidential order establish-

ing affirmative action programs to correct for past governmental injustices and end Jim Crow discriminatory social customs. March 20, 1965 Martin Luther King Jr. leads a massive four-day march

of thirty thousand protesters from Selma to the state capitol building in Montgomery protesting restrictions on voting rights of racial minorities, such as poll taxes. August 6, 1965 The U.S. Congress passes the Voting Rights Act banning

poll taxes as a voting requirement and placing close federal oversight over Southern voting practices such as voter registration. 1966 Two Mexican American farmworker unions merge to form the

United Farm Workers and choose a Mexican Aztec eagle as its symbol; they begin nonviolent strikes against California grape growers to gain better working conditions. June 1966 The National Organization for Women (NOW) is formed at

the Third National Conference of the Commission on the Status of Women. June 5, 1967 Israel goes to war against Syria, Egypt, and Jordan, referred

to as the Six Day War because it ends on June 10 with another Israel victory. 1968 As part of the growth of Native American activism in the 1960s, the

American Indian Movement (AIM) is created on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation, an Indian community long known for its poverty and isolation. December 1968 Eunice Kennedy Shriver founds the Special Olympics

dedicated to empowering persons with mental retardation through sports training and competition; the Special Olympics eventually spreads throughout the United States and over 150 countries. Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

xvii

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

1970 The Khmer Rouge, led by Cambodian communist leader Pol Pot,

murder some two million Cambodians either by execution, starvation, or exhaustion resulting from forced hard labor. 1972 The French Front National (FN) political party organizes to

promote anti-immigrant government policies and gains considerable popularity. 1972 Ed Roberts, a quadriplegic, forms the Center for Independent

Living (CIL) to advocate for an end to discrimination against persons with disabilities and to instill pride and empowerment within the disabled community; numerous CIL branches open across the nation during the following years. 1972 The U.S. Congress passes Title IX as part of a national education

bill that calls for equality in sports opportunities for women and men at most universities in America. March 1972 The U.S. Congress passes the Equal Rights Amendment

(ERA) legislation that guarantees equal rights under the law regardless of sex and gives the state legislatures a seven-year deadline to ratify the amendment; by March 1979 thirty-five states have ratified the amendment, three short of the required number. 1973 The U.S. Congress passes the Rehabilitation Act, the first of three

core laws created to give persons with disabilities legal access to life activities that are available to nondisabled Americans; the other two later acts are the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1974, that in 1990 is renamed the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990. January 22, 1973 The U.S. Supreme Court issues the landmark decision

on abortion rights in Roe v. Wade ruling that most laws prohibiting abortion, including many existing state laws, violate the constitutional right to privacy of women. October 6, 1973 War again breaks out between Israelis and Arabs

referred to as the Yom Kippur War after an important Jewish holiday on which the war begins. 1975 In response to Mexican American strikes against California grape

growers, the U.S. Congress passes the Agricultural Labor Relations Act that allows for collective bargaining by agricultural workers. xviii

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

1975 In support of tribal sovereignty and economic self-sufficiency, the

U.S. Congress passes the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act giving the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and other federal agencies authority to transfer responsibility for administering certain tribal programs to the tribes. 1976 After monitoring racial discrimination in South Africa since 1946,

the United Nations establishes apartheid as an international crime, imposes an oil and arms embargo against South Africa, and creates the International Criminal Court to discourage any other nation from adopting similar practices of racial domination and oppression as practiced in South Africa. 1979 Iranian Islamic fundamentalists led by Muslim cleric (religious

leader) Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini overthrows the secular government of Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, a close ally of the United States and Western Europe. 1979 The Rwandese Refugee Welfare Foundation (RRWF) is estab-

lished to aid Rwandan refugees in exile; after several name changes the organization becomes the Rwandese Patriotic Front (RPF) in December 1987. 1980 A Miami, Florida, court acquits four police officers in the beating

death of a black businessman leading to an eruption of violence as blacks attack whites on the streets, sometimes dragging them from cars, leading to the deaths of eighteen people and hundreds of millions of dollars of property damage. 1981 Members of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, a violent wing of the

Muslim Brotherhood, assassinate Egyptian President Mohamed Anwar Sadat for introducing Western ideas into Islamic societies. 1981 A wave of violence spreads through several major cities of Britain

with minority youth, including blacks and Asians, clashing with police in reaction to charges of racial harassment by police authorities; over three thousand youth are arrested. 1983 Janjaweed militias with support of the Sudanese government begin

systematically killing black Africans in the Darfur region of western Sudan leading to the murder of some two million people and displacement of another four million. Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

xix

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

1984 For three years violence in Punjab orchestrated by Sikh separatists

desiring independence from India leads to thousands of deaths with the majority of victims being innocent Sikh civilians due to military rule established in 1987 by the Indian government to stop the violence; the Sikhs claim extensive human rights violations. 1985 Violence erupts again in the major cities of Britain largely between

black youth and police leading to the death of one police officer and injury to some 220 police. 1986 The U.S. Congress passes the Immigration Reform and Control

Act, establishing crimes for American companies that hire illegal immigrants. 1988 Islamist rebels heavily funded by the United States successfully

drive the armed forces of the Soviet Union out of Afghanistan after eight years of war. 1988 The U.S. Congress passes the Civil Liberties Act, symbolically

named House Resolution 442 in honor of the U.S. Nisei battalion 442 of World War II, that awards each Japanese American who was interned during the war an apology and $20,000. March 1988 Ali Hasan al-Majid, who becomes known as Chemical Ali,

unleashes chemical weapons against the Kurdish populations of northern Iraq including residents of Halabja, a town of over forty thousand people. 1989 Newly elected South African president F.W. de Klerk announces he

will seek to overturn all racial discriminatory laws, release political prisoners of apartheid including Nelson Mandela, and lift the ban on anti-Apartheid organizations such as the ANC. 1990s Accusations of discriminatory racial profiling escalate in various

Western countries leading to the black community’s frustration with alleged police harassment. 1991 Following the demise of the communist governments of Eastern

Europe, a wave of nationalistic movements and their related prejudices sweeps the region leading to the formation of the Baltic States of Lithuania, Estonia, and Latvia and the breakup of Yugoslavia; the ethnic struggles among the Serbs, Bosnian Muslims, and Croats of Serbia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, and Croatia leads to two hundred xx

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

thousand Bosnian Muslims, Croats, and Serbs being killed and over one million being displaced from their homes. Croatia and Slovenia declare independence from the Yugoslav federation followed by Bosnia-Herzegovina on April 6, 1992.

June 25, 1991

1992 The fight against prejudices leads the U.S. Congress to create a new

type of crime category, the hate crime, described as acts committed against a person only because that person is considered to be a member of some social group that is devalued by society in general. 1992 Author Isabella Leitner publishes the book The Big Lie: A True

Story describing the Holocaust in Nazi Germany in World War II. April 1992 A Los Angeles jury acquits police officers charged with

assaulting Rodney King, triggering riots in Los Angeles and an outpouring of anger and loss of faith in the U.S. criminal justice system by blacks; the riots result in forty-four deaths, two thousand injured, and eleven hundred arrests. 1993 The UN Security Council establishes an international tribunal,

known as the International Court Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), at The Hague, Netherlands, to prosecute war crimes allegedly committed during the conflict in Bosnia-Herzegovina since 1991. 1994 With the ANC winning all but two provinces, black African

Nelson Mandela becomes the new president of South Africa. 1994 The UN Security Council establishes the International Criminal

Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) to bring to trial those accused of genocide; by 2005 sixty-three individuals accused of being genocide leaders come under the ICTR process. 1994 During a one-hundred-day period the Hutus of Rwanda kill

almost one million Tutsis and politically moderate Hutus. 1994 Sarajevo resident Zlata Filipovic publishes her diary titled Zlata’s

Diary: A Child’s Life in Sarajevo describing her experiences in the capital city of Bosnia and Herzegovina in the early 1990s while under siege by Serbian forces. 1994 Author Peggy Gilliespie publishes interviews with children of

multiracial parents in Of Many Colors: Portraits of Multiracial Families that explore the racial prejudices they face. Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

xxi

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

November 8, 1994 California voters pass Proposition 187, the first of

several propositions that directly discriminates against illegal immigrants. July 1995 The Muslim community of Srebrenica in eastern Bosnia-

Herzegovina falls to ethnic Serbs who perpetrate horrible crimes against the people of that town, including the murder of eight thousand men and boys. December 14, 1995 The Dayton Peace Accords are signed, ending ethnic

conflict in Bosnia but not before two hundred thousand Bosnian Muslims, Croats, and Serbs are killed and hundreds of thousands had fled their homes. 1996 The U.S. Congress passes the Defense of Marriage Act that denies

same-sex couples federal benefits including Social Security pensions; survivor benefits for federal employees; Medicaid coverage; next-ofkin status for emergency medical situations; domestic violence protection orders; inheritance of property; and joint adoption and foster care benefits. 1996 The Taliban, an Islamist fundamentalist organization, gains power

in Afghanistan. 1998 The FRY begins an ethnic cleansing of Albanians remaining in

Kosovo, causing over 300,000 Albanians to flee Kosovo for Macedonia. April 10, 1998 Violence in Northern Ireland finally ends as voters in

Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland approve the Good Friday Agreement, or Belfast Agreement, by a large margin that provides for power sharing between Northern Ireland’s Catholic and Protestant populations in an elected Northern Ireland Assembly and directs that the political status of Northern Ireland can only change with the approval of a majority of Northern Ireland voters. March 18, 1999 Albanian, American, and British delegations sign the

Rambouillet Accords calling for NATO to administer Kosovo as an autonomous province of Serbia. March 24, 1999 Following the Rambouillet conference, the FRY inten-

sifies a genocide campaign in Kosovo that lasts until June 20, 1999, with the murder of thousands of Albanians; NATO begins air strikes in Kosovo in late March. xxii

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

The Matthew Shepard Foundation publishes ‘‘Dennis Shepard’s Statements to the Court’’, said by the father of homicide victim Matthew Shepard, murdered due to his sexual orientation.

November 4, 1999

2000 Studies estimate that domestic abuse affects 10 percent of the U.S.

population, roughly thirty-two million Americans. 2001 The U.S. Supreme Court rules that the Boy Scouts of America

organization is not required to follow state anti-discrimination laws regarding sexual orientation and can exclude gays from membership. September 11, 2001 Attention of the world is dramatically focused on

the Islamic fundamentalist movement when Islamic extremists slam two fully fueled jetliners into the World Trade Center Towers in New York City and the Pentagon in Washington, D.C., killing some three thousand civilians and starting a strong wave of nationalistic fervor in the United States. December 3, 2001 With the Western world awakened to the social

customs of Muslim societies following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on New York City and Washington, D.C., Time Magazine publishes a series of articles describing the gender prejudice in Muslim nations including the article ‘‘Women of Islam: Nowhere in the Muslim World Are Women Treated as Equals.’’ Journalists Marjorie Valbrun and Ann Davis describe the prejudices faced by people of Pakistani descent living in New York City in the Wall Street Journal article ‘‘Pakistani Areas of New York City, A Lingering Fear’’ following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the city.

November 13, 2002

2003 U.S. forces invade Iraq and drive Saddam Hussein from power;

religious hatred between Shiı´tes and Sunni surfaces after decades of oppression under Hussein causing a deep divide in Iraq society. 2003 The Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA) bill that would ban

same-sex marriages is introduced for the first time in U.S. Congress but fails to pass. June 2003 Author Tom O’Neill publishes the article ‘‘Untouchable’’ in

National Geographic magazine that describes the prejudice against the lowest caste members of Indian society. Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

xxiii

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

2004 The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) reports that over 15

percent of hate crimes committed in the United States are based upon the perceived sexual orientation of the victims. September 14, 2004 Journalist Eric Baculinao describes gender prejudices

behind the traditional Chinese practice of infanticide in ‘‘China Grapples With Legacy of Its ‘Missing Girls’: Disturbing Demographic Imbalance Spurs Drive to Change Age-Old Practices.’’ 2005 The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, established

in December 1950, reports the existence of over nine million known refugees in the world not including four million Palestinian Arabs permanently displaced with creation of the state of Israel in 1948. 2005 In Egyptian parliamentary elections, members of the Muslim

Brotherhood win 20 percent of the parliament seats even though the organization is still officially banned. Amnesty International’s Human Rights Concerns produces a report titled ‘‘Crisis in Sudan’’ that describes the genocide victims in the Darfur region of western Sudan.

2005

Amnesty International’s Human Rights Concerns produces a report titled ‘‘Israel/Occupied Territories’’ that describes the plight of Palestinian Arab refugees facing Israeli military occupation of their territories.

2005

July 28, 2005 The IRA declares an end to its military campaign for

independence for Northern Ireland and removes its store of weapons from service. November 12, 2005 Journalist Joji Sakurai reports on the race riots in

France in the article ‘‘Colonial Legacy Weighs Heavily on France’’ distributed by The Associated Press. November 20, 2005 Journalist Sabrina Tavernise publishes a news article

in The New York Times titled ‘‘Sectarian Hatred Pulls Apart Iraq’s Mixed Towns’’ that describes the religious prejudice and resulting violence between Sunni and Shiı´te Muslims triggered by the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq. January 2006 The radical Palestinian group Hamas wins the majority of

seats in Palestine’s parliamentary elections, gaining a political victory over the PLO, the controlling political party in Palestine since 1967. xxiv

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

February 2006 The South Dakota legislature passes a bill making the

performance of all abortions a felony crime. March 10, 2006 The United Nations issues a report, called ‘‘Early

Warning and Urgent Action Procedure, Decision 1 (68)’’ describing the legal battles of the Western Shoshone Indians against the U.S. government over control of public land and resources in Nevada. Summer 2006 Israel launches a major offensive against Lebanon after

Hezbollah militia kidnaps two Israeli soldiers and kills another.

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

xxv

Prejudice in the Modern World Primary Sources

1

Ethnic Prejudice

o hold negative opinions, beliefs, or attitudes about people because they belong to a specific ethnic group is ethnic prejudice. Ethnicity can be marked by certain cultural traits, a national origin, an ancestral history, or by certain physical characteristics. A group may have all these markers or only one. Cultural traits include language, religion, marrying someone with a similar ancestry, traditional food, music, dance, literature, games, and occupations. Ethnic group members frequently have a common national origin or ancestral history. Physical characteristics that play a part in ethnic identification are often misleading. For example, persons with black skin belong to widely varying ethnic groups, as do people with white skin. Every ethnic group is ethnocentric, meaning members consider their own group superior to all others, their lifestyle as the (only) right way to live. As part of ethnocentrism, all ethnic groups to some extent engage in stereotyping and scapegoating. Stereotyping defines certain characteristics that are assigned to every member of an ethnic group. Stereotyping can be positive, but most often it assigns negative characteristics to the targeted group. Scapegoating places the blame for all the problems of one’s own group on other ethnic groups. Ethnocentric beliefs, stereotyping, and scapegoating result in prejudice (a negative attitude towards others based on a prejudgment about those individuals with no prior knowledge or experience). Prejudice can be acted out by denying members of other ethnic group employment, living accommodations, or education. Religious practices may be prohibited. All of these acts are examples of ethnic discrimination. The first excerpt in this chapter, ‘‘Colonial Legacy Weighs Heavily on France,’’ is an example of a majority ethnic group—the French— discriminating against minority groups, Arab Muslims from Northern Africa and black Africans. The second excerpt is ‘‘Pakistani Areas of New York City, A Lingering Fear.’’ This excerpt is an example not only of

T

French Racism 3 New York Pakistanis 13 Zlata Filipovic 27

1

Ethnic Prejudice

majority ethnic groups discriminating against a minority group, but of ethnic discrimination in the policies of a government: the U.S. government against American Pakistanis. The third excerpt, Zlata’s Diary: A Child’s Life in Sarajevo, illustrates the most extreme form of prejudice: genocide, or ethnic cleansing. Genocide and ethnic cleansing are two terms that mean the same thing: the planned extermination of an entire ethnic group. In this excerpt, a young girl shares insight on life in wartorn Bosnia-Herzegovina when ethnic Serbs went on the offensive. Serbians attempted to eliminate all Bosnian Muslims and Croats in Bosnia-Herzegovina.

2

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

French Racism Excerpt from ‘‘Colonial Legacy Weighs Heavily on France’’

Written by Joji Sakurai Published by The Associated Press, November 12, 2005

‘‘The future is not ours.’’

ollowing World War II (1939–45), laborers from Northern Africa journeyed to Western Europe looking for jobs in construction, rebuilding the war-damaged cities. Between 1946 and 1974, approximately one million immigrants (people who leave one country and settle in another) legally entered France. France prided itself on its immigration policy based on the promise of liberty, equality, and social acceptance. However, in return for such promises, the French expected immigrants to assimilate, which means to conform to the French way of life, its values and culture. While some adopted the French lifestyle, most immigrants were followers of the Islamic faith and resisted assimilation. Followers of Islam are called Muslims. The foreigners, as they were routinely called by the French, built mosques, Muslim places of worship. They established their own market places, ate traditional food, and wore traditional clothing, including head coverings for women. By 1974, France was experiencing difficult economic times. To reduce the competition over jobs, the government moved to limit the number of foreign workers coming into the country. However, since Northern Africa was only a short trip across the Mediterranean Sea, workers, both Arab Muslims and black Africans, continued to pour illegally across France’s unguarded southern coastline. Continuing into the 1990s, French unemployment rates soared. The immigrant population became scapegoats for the angry and frustrated French. Violent attacks on the Arab Muslims and black immigrants

F

3

French Racism

The wreckage of two burned cars in the marketplace of Clichy-sous-Bois, France, is a reminder of the riots that took place there in October 2005. AP I MA GES .

4

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

French Racism

became commonplace. The problem as a whole became known as ‘‘the foreigner issue.’’ Young men and women of legal immigrant families felt betrayed and exploited by a nation that used their fathers and grandfathers to rebuild war-ravaged France and then denied them respect and employment when French economic fortunes turned bad. In addition to the legal foreigners, by the late twentieth century at least five million illegal foreigners, mostly from Algeria, Tunisia, and Morocco, lived in France. Legal and illegal foreigners together accounted for an estimated 25 percent of France’s fifty-eight million residents in 1995. The majority of immigrants and their families lived isolated (cut off) in slums on the outskirts of major cities, including Paris. They lived in housing projects of concrete-block apartments, with plywood covering broken windows, graffiti on walls, and garbage strewn about. By the early 2000s, unemployment was close to 40 percent in the projects, even though France’s economy had improved with overall unemployment at 10 percent. In late 2005, the hopelessness and anger of the projects’ young people exploded into rioting. Stores and buildings were set ablaze as were cars the young people knew they could never afford. The following excerpt from ‘‘Colonial Legacy Weighs Heavily on France’’ explores the foreigner issue. Residents from Clichy-sous-Bois, a slum near Paris where some of the worst rioting took place, speak out about their lives and expectations.

Things to remember while reading excerpts from ‘‘Colonial Legacy Weighs Heavily on France’’: 

French society was rapidly becoming multicultural. However, prejudice and discrimination accompanied increased diversification. Young, second-generation Arab and North African Muslims were unable to find work and assimilate into French society.



The frustrated rioters, rather than targeting government buildings, instead self-destructed by burning local stores and their neighbors’ property. They desperately wanted to be heard by government authorities and society in general.



The riots exposed what many call the two faces of France: one welcoming and the other conceited and prejudiced against ethnic minorities.

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

5

French Racism

Excerpt from ‘‘Colonial Legacy Weighs Heavily on France’’ In a cafe with no name, where flies swirl around chipped coffee cups and the wall tiles look nicotine-stained, Bilaire Hamdi jabs his finger at an old man in a fur cap. ‘‘It’s men like him who rebuilt France!’’ Hamdi, 30, said of the Algerian man staring blankly at a soccer match on Arabic satellite TV. While immigrants from former colonies helped rebuild post-World War II France, many of their children and grandchildren are setting fire to its buildings and cars in what appears to be a blind explosion of rage against the schools that failed them, the cars they can’t afford to own, the government offices they say treat them like foreigners. The legacy of France’s African colonies weighs heavily over the riots that first exploded in this decaying, largely immigrant suburb of Paris two weeks ago. Secular: Nonreligious.

Hamdi, a secular Muslim of Algerian parentage, said youths from immigrant families feel betrayed by a nation that plundered their homelands, used their forefathers’ muscle for post-World War II reconstruction_then turned its back once the labor market dried up in the late 1970s. French unemployment is just under 10 percent. Among young people in the housing projects it’s as high as 40 percent. Hamdi flashed his identity card. ‘‘I have it, m’sieur, I’m French,’’ he said. ‘‘Why can’t I work in a government ministry? . . . They think we’re dirt.’’

Antagonized: Angered.

Colonialization: One nation gaining control of another, usually less developed, nation. Decolonialization: One nation withdrawing control and, usually, a major means of income from another country. Republican: a form of government governed by the consent of the people for the benefit of the people through elected representatives. Fraternity: Brotherly love and acceptance.

6

The government has announced speeded-up spending to improve housing, education and employment, but it has also antagonized many immigrants by declaring a state of emergency and curfew powers, reviving a law enacted in 1955 to quash rebellion during Algeria’s war of independence from France. The riots were triggered by the accidental electrocution of two African youths who hid from police in a power substation and drug-dealing gangs also appear to have incited violence in the early stages. But it was soon fed by anger over shoddy [substandard] housing, lack of employment, poor education, and for some Muslims a feeling that France tramples on their religious traditions. ‘‘The grandchildren are the heirs of a history made of colonialization, decolonialization, of over-exploitation in factories and of disappointed hopes,’’ said Michel Wieviorka, a sociologist at the School for Advanced Studies in Social Sciences. Unlike former colonial powers such as Britain and the Netherlands, France prided itself on an immigration policy based on republican ideals_a promise of liberty, equality and fraternity in exchange for adopting the nation’s values and cultural norms. Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

French Racism

The 2005 riots in Clichy-sous-Bois, France, were triggered by the accidental electrocution of two African teenagers who hid from police in a power substation. Here, residents gather to pay their respects to the two youths. A P IM AGE S.

Muslims from North Africa have had more difficulty than poor European newcomers in complying with France’s demand that they adapt to the host culture. Many expressed outrage at last year’s ban on Islamic head scarves and other religious symbols in schools. A common sentiment here is that having largely ditched their cultural heritage, the white French mainstream nonetheless pushed them into housing projects, out of sight and often out of mind. Paris ‘‘effectively expelled the poor to the suburbs,’’ says Simon Mundy, director of the Centre for Cultural Environment at King’s College London. . . . ‘‘France has two faces,’’ said Hanuachi Mokded, a youth counselor of Pakistani origin who runs a community center in Clichy-sous-Bois. ‘‘It has the face of welcome and asylum which it presents to the world, and it has a haughty and contemptuous [disapproving] face with respect to people of foreign ancestry.’’ Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Expelled: Forced out.

Asylum: Safety. Haughty: Conceited, unwelcoming.

7

French Racism

Interviews with people of different generations and backgrounds in this suburb shared a common thread: Deprivation has bred not only anger but helplessness. ‘‘They are destroying what’s rotting, it’s their only way of expressing themselves,’’ said Sabrina, a 16-year-old girl of Algerian origin who looked like any other French teen in her eyeliner and brown turtleneck sweater. ‘‘Do you see the squalor that we live in?’’ Like most people here, she wouldn’t give her full name for fear of trouble with authorities or neighborhood gangs. Indeed, the decay of places like Clichy-sous-Bois, just a 30-minute drive from the Eiffel Tower, provides the grimmest of contrasts to the glorious poetry of the capital’s streets, hitherto untouched by riots. Myriad: Many.

Here, the dreary regularity of concrete apartment blocks is broken only by the myriad ways in which things can fall apart: smashed windows covered with wooden planks or cinderblocks, crumbling walls smeared with obscene graffiti, overgrown grass littered with coke cans and plastic bottles. A gutted Volkswagen two-seater, set ablaze two weeks ago, now serves as a trash bin, because the municipal one is overflowing with garbage.

Encapsulating: Illustrating.

As though encapsulating how unready France was for the rioters’ rocks and firebombs, a sign on the door of the Romain Rolland middle school warns: ‘‘IT IS STRICTLY FORBIDDEN TO THROW ACORNS.’’ The ambitions of youths here are modest: construction work, electrical maintenance, truck driving. At the nameless cafe, bartender Hassan, 40, said he expects his 10-yearold son to become an electrician but ‘‘my son says he’s going to become a doctor when he grows up.’’ Then, with a shake of the head and a sad smile, he mutters in Arabic: ‘‘Inshallah’’—Allah willing. As he heads home from school, 14-year-old Kamel Alfaoui is more blunt about his generation’s prospects: ‘‘The future is not ours.’’

Stigmatizing: Condemning.

People in Clichy-sous-Bois accuse the government of lumping them all together and stigmatizing them as thugs. But the housing projects also reveal images of diversity. On the walls of Le Norway bar hang posters of Al Pacino [American actor], Che Guevara [Latin American political revolutionary], Bruce Lee [Asian actor] and Turkish actor Yilmaz Gouney. Three young friends—Ibrahim, a Gambian; Bizmout, a Turk; and Farid, an Algerian—tell a reporter about growing up together on the project and not experiencing any ethnic conflicts. ‘‘Why is France strong?’’ says Farid. ‘‘It’s because we have a lot of cultures. Without these cultures we’d be nothing.’’

8

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

French Racism

Residents of Toulouse, France, gather for a peace march two weeks after the rioting in Clichy-sous-Bois took place. The sign in the forefront reads, ‘‘No to all discrimination.’’ A P IM AG ES.

But Bizmout vents his resentment. ‘‘You go on the construction site, there aren’t any French who are working there,’’ he said. ‘‘Then they come in suits and tell you—this is no good, that’s no good.’’

What happened next . . . The riots ended in mid-November when French prime minister Dominique de Villepin (1953–) established strict curfews. Villepin promised better education and job opportunities for immigrants. Acts of ethnic discrimination in schools or the workplace were to be punished by hefty monetary fines. Firms were to make job application processes nondiscriminatory. Villepin ordered trade unions (an organized group of workers with similar skills joined together for a common purpose, such as negotiating Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

9

French Racism

with management for better working conditions or higher wages) and the government to increase diversity in membership and hiring policies. Villepin promised more support for children having difficulty in school and more parental involvement in their children’s schooling. The entry age for apprenticeships (on-the-job training) was lowered from sixteen to fourteen. Villepin assured immigrants he had heard their pleas and would find solutions.

Did you know . . . 

Clichy-sous-Bois, which saw some of the worst riots, is only a 30minute drive from the landmark symbol of France, the Eiffel Tower.



Muslims were outraged when in 2004 France banned Muslim head scarves and other religious symbols in schools.



Ethnic conflict was expected to grow in Western Europe as Muslim immigration continued. Muslims from North Africa, the Middle East, Eastern Europe, and Asian countries were not easily fitting into Western European culture.



At the beginning of the twenty-first century, in addition to France, the countries of Britain, the Netherlands, Austria, Belgium, and Sweden reported ethnic issues of widespread prejudice and discrimination against foreign workers.

Consider the following . . . 

Do you think the French public heard the message of desperation from the rioters? Do riots work—always, sometimes, never?



Predict what might happen if immigrants saw little progress from Prime Minister Villepin’s proposals.



Is the American Muslim experience similar to the Muslim situation in France? If so, how is it the same? If not, why is it different?

For More Information BOOKS

Horowitz, Donald L. Ethnic Groups in Conflict. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985. Rudolph, Joseph R., Jr., ed. Encyclopedia of Modern Ethnic Conflicts. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2003. 10

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

French Racism

Silverstein, Paul A., and Michael Herzfeld. Algeria in France: Transpolitics, Race, and Nation. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2004. PE RIODIC AL S

Sakurai, Joji. ‘‘Colonial Legacy Weighs Heavily on France.’’ The Associated Press, November 12, 2005.

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

11

New York Pakistanis Excerpt from ‘‘Pakistani Areas of New York City, A Lingering Fear’’

Written by Marjorie Valbrun and Ann Davis Published in Wall Street Journal, November 13, 2002

‘‘Before, it was like freedom, no worries . . . I used to go out at night with my cousins [in Florida] as late as midnight. After Sept. 11, we never went out.’’

ate crimes emerge from fear, anger, the human need to blame others for troubles or to retaliate, and from misunderstanding. Hate crimes are violent attacks against a person or group because of their race, ethnicity, religion, or gender. Following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on New York City and Washington, D.C., anti-Arab and antiMuslim prejudice in America ran at an extremely heightened state. Followers of the Islamic religion are called Muslims. Mosques (Muslim places of worship), Islamic centers, and Arab American organization offices were vandalized, bombed, and set on fire. Several Arab-looking Americans were gunned down and killed. Arab American children, although born in the United States and therefore, U.S. citizens, were harassed by classmates.

H

The stereotype that all Arabs or Muslims were terrorists started in America long before September 11, 2001. A broad public hostility of Americans toward Arab Americans developed in 1973 with the ArabIsraeli war, known as the Yom Kippur War (1973–74). The resulting Arab oil embargo (a government order preventing commercial ships from leaving ports with certain goods) imposed against the United States because of U.S. support for Israel caused gasoline prices to skyrocket in the United States throughout 1974. Long lines of angry people formed at any gas station open and pumping. The gas pumping would seemingly end arbitrarily (without logic or reason) at different stations, leaving the 13

New York Pakistanis

The Iran Hostage Crisis of 1979–81, in which sixty-six Americans were taken as hostages, fed the growing antiArab sentiment in the United States. # LE IF S KO OGF OR S/ C OR BI S.

next in line who had often waited an hour or more furious. Although Arab Americans had nothing to do with and no responsibility for the situation, Americans turned their anger towards them. At the end of the decade in 1979, Shiite (one branch of Islam) Muslims led by Ruhollah Khomeini (1900–1989) overthrew the U.S.friendly Shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi (1919–1980), and 14

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

New York Pakistanis

took control of Iran. The American embassy in Iran was stormed on November 4, 1979, and sixty-six Americans were taken as hostages. The hostage situation dragged on for 444 days, ending on January 20, 1981, the day newly elected U.S. president Ronald Reagan (1911–2004; served 1981–89) was sworn into office. On television, Americans watched nightly the faces of Iranians as they marched in Tehran’s (capital of Iran) streets with fists raised, endlessly shouting hate-filled words against America. Violent hate crimes against Arabs and Muslims in the United States dramatically increased. The exact reason for the release of hostages on that date has never been precisely determined though it may be related to the fact that U.S. president Jimmy Carter (1924–; served 1977–81) against whom the Iranians had developed much hate for his support of the Shah in exile was now out of office. It could also be that they were unsure what Reagan might do in response to the hostage crisis, perhaps attempt to use more force than Carter had. When the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City was bombed on April 19, 1995, killing 168 people, most Americans assumed Arab terrorists were at work. It was two days before U.S. officials announced foreign terrorists were not at fault. Further inflaming American sentiment were two airline hijackings (forcible takeovers). TWA flight 847 was hijacked by Shiite militants on June 14, 1985. The Italian cruise liner Achille Lauro was seized on October 7 by Palestinian Arabs, a crime that resulted in the death of an elderly American who used a wheelchair. The Persian Gulf War in 1991 between Iraq and a broad alliance of nations led by the United States led to another round of hate crimes against Arab and Muslim Americans. By this time, Americans lashed out at any persons appearing to be Arab. For example, Lebanese, Jordanians, Iranians, Americans, and persons from India were all victimized. A Polynesian Jew was attacked as he sat in his car in Baltimore, Maryland. State governors and President George H. W. Bush (1924–; served 1989–93) appealed to the American public for an end to violence against Arab Americans. Prejudicial hate acts had been recorded by Arab American civil rights organizations such as the American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) for years. The U.S. Congress passed legislation in 1990 for the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to begin keeping statistics on hate crimes, including all hate crimes against any ethnic or racial group. Until the 1990s, most Americans paid little attention to the occurrence of hate crimes against Arab Americans. They had even less concern Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

15

New York Pakistanis

A manager of the Pakistani restaurant Al Hamra in San Francisco, California, denounces hate crimes against Arab and Muslim-owned businesses, two days after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. AP I MA GE S.

about the effects of such crimes on Arabs and Muslims. Although rarely acknowledged by Americans, the actions were followed closely by Arab and Muslim nations and organizations and negatively affected U.S. international relations. On September 11, 2001, Arab Americans and Muslim Americans joined all Americans before their television screens, horrified as they watched 16

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

New York Pakistanis

the destruction of the World Trade Center towers in New York and three thousand lives. Apprehensive that they would be the target of backlash violence, messages were posted on Muslim, Arab, and Sikh (followers of the Sikh religion of India who wear turbans and grow beards) email groups, warning each other to beware of a likely serious backlash of prejudicial acts against anyone who appeared to be Arab. Muslims knew their faith communities had been tied to the worse terrorist attack in U.S. history. While many Americans showed tolerance and kindness toward the Muslim community as U.S. leaders urged, others turned to intolerance and even violence. For example, in the suburbs of Dallas, Texas, mosques were vandalized and a Pakistani grocer was shot and killed. In Mesa, Arizona, a Sikh gas station owner was gunned down. Sikhs’ turbans and beards gave a similar appearance to Osama bin Laden (1957–), presumed mastermind behind the September 11 attacks. Such hate crimes occurred across the nation from California to New York. Many Arab Americans reported losing their jobs, which left their families without income. Arab American children were targets of harassment at schools. They were hit, bullied, or called ugly names. School officials immediately had to speak at school assemblies to condemn harassment of any student. They organized groups for discussion and teaching about Islam and the Arab world, and for conversations on prejudice and tolerance. The hysteria that followed September 11 affected lawmakers in the U.S. Congress. Congress agreed to demands by President George W. Bush’s (1946–; served 2001–;) administration to pass the USA Patriot Act in October 2001 that sacrificed civil rights in the name of fighting terrorists and preventing future terrorist acts. Arabs and Muslims were immediately subjected to questioning and searches by officials. The U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service and the FBI detained and questioned hundreds of men and boys. They were frequently held for days on minor visa (official authorization on a passport) violations. The following excerpt from ‘‘Pakistani Areas of New York City, A Lingering Fear’’ illustrates the prejudice experienced by Pakistani Arab Americans following September 11.

Things to remember while reading excerpts from ‘‘Pakistani Areas of New York City, A Lingering Fear’’: 

Muslims can be found in all nations and in many ethnicities, including white Americans. On the other hand, not all Arab-appearing persons

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

17

New York Pakistanis

are Muslims. Some are Christians. However, since September 11, 2001, Americans equate Muslims and anyone appearing Arab with terrorism. Americans have constructed this new stereotype which they fear and respond to with violence.

18



Approximately three million Muslims lived in the United States at the beginning of the twenty-first century.



Civil rights advocates protested the aggressive action of U.S. federal officials in questioning and detaining Arab Americans, but without success. American sentiment was clearly supportive of government officials doing everything possible to prevent another catastrophic attack.

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

New York Pakistanis

In the months following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, many Arab American families were afraid they might be targeted by authorities looking for terrorists or feared their children would be harassed at school. # E D KA SH I/ COR BI S.

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

19

New York Pakistanis

20

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

New York Pakistanis

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

21

New York Pakistanis

What happened next . . . As the years passed after the September 11, 2001, attack, violence against Arab and Muslim Americans gave way to more subtle forms of discrimination, such as harassment at work or school or difficulty in finding housing. There was less fear of the physical danger they had experienced in late 2001 and 2002. Although pockets of suspicion and intolerance existed, Arab and Muslim community leaders had stronger ties with local law enforcement agencies. All realized that another terrorist attack would 22

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

New York Pakistanis

‘‘Ethnically motivated’’ hate crimes in the United States rose dramatically after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Here, an Arab American teenager recovers from surgery after being beaten by a mob that allegedly shouted white supremacist slogans. A P IM AG ES.

again unleash ethnic violence and the communities must be protected. Organizations, such as CAIR, thanked U.S. authorities for vigorous prosecution of reported hate crimes. Before the September 11 attacks, such prosecution often was lacking. Interfaith organizations were established around the country. The organizations made up of people of all faiths became forums for education and understanding. Many Americans, adults and children alike, became much more knowledgeable about Islam and Muslims. Before September 11, 2001, most Americans knew very little about Islam. Despite these gains in tolerance and understanding, an ABC News poll in March 2006 indicated almost six in ten Americans still thought Islamic followers tended toward violent extremism. Almost half of those polled thought Islam did not teach respect and tolerance for religions other than Islam. These results showed American opinion of Islam had worsened considerably since a similar poll in 2002. Other political polls of Americans conducted at the end of 2004 by Cornell University indicated 44 percent favored some form of restriction Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

23

New York Pakistanis

on the civil liberties of Muslim Americans. Forty-eight percent said there should be no such restrictions. Twenty-seven percent of Americans thought all Muslim Americans should be required to register with the federal government where they lived. Twenty-nine percent believed undercover agents should be placed in Muslim civil and volunteer organizations to monitor fundraising and other activities.

Did you know . . . 

The FBI reported that immediately after September 11, 2001, terrorist attack the hate crime categories of ‘‘ethnically motivated’’ and motivated by ‘‘national bias’’ (prejudice against persons believed to be of a certain nationality) accounted for the majority of total hate crimes committed in the United States. This predominance of ethnic violence in the United States did not exist in the previous eleven years of recordkeeping. Records kept by the CAIR concurred.



Immediately after September 11, 2001, Arab Americans feared they would be rounded up and sent away to internment (holding) camps just as Japanese Americans had been by the U.S. government after the Japanese attack on U.S. military facilities at Pearl Harbor in Hawaii on December 7, 1941. In preparation, some gave copies of their most important documents to friends for safekeeping.



Many Arab Americans and their families who experienced hate crimes had been U.S. citizens for years.



In March 2002, the FBI, looking for ties to terrorist groups, raided the homes and offices of Muslim scholars associated with wellrespected, established institutions of Islamic thought in America. The groups included the Graduate School of Islamic and Social Sciences (GSISS) and the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT). Both were known for their sensible, fair voices and had maintained good relations with U.S. governmental agencies. The shocked Muslim American community guessed that the only reason could be to scare Muslim scholars into believing they no longer could enjoy freedom of speech.

Consider the following . . . 

24

List five good ways to combat ethnic prejudice in schools and in local communities. Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

New York Pakistanis



Interview an Arab American student and perhaps his family about their personal experiences after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attack.



Read a book about a student’s experiences in the United States from a Muslim country and report on it to the class.

For More Information B O O KS

Combs, Cindy C. Terrorism in the Twenty-First Century. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2006. Outman, James I., and Elisabeth M. Outman. Terrorism Almanac. Detroit, MI: Thomson/Gale, 2003. Pillar, Paul R. Terrorism and U.S. Foreign Policy. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press, 2003. White, Jonathan R. Terrorism and Homeland Security. Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth, 2006. PE RIODIC AL S

Valbrun, Marjorie, and Ann Davis. ‘‘Pakistani Areas of New York City, A Lingering Fear.’’ Wall Street Journal, November 13, 2002. WEB SIT ES

‘‘Counterterrorism.’’ Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). http://www.fbi.gov/ terrorinfo/counterrorism/waronterrorhome.htm (accessed on December 12, 2006). ‘‘Responding to Hate Crimes: A Police Officer’s Guide to Investigation and Prevention.’’ International Association of Chiefs of Police. http://www.theiacp.org/ documents/index.cfm?fuseaction=document&document_id=141 (accessed on December 12, 2006).

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

25

Zlata Filipovic Excerpt from Zlata’s Diary: A Child’s Life in Sarajevo

Written by Zlata Filipovic Published in 1994

‘‘Yesterday the people in front of the parliament tried peacefully to cross the Vrbanja bridge. But they were shot at. Who? How? Why? A girl, a medical student from Dubrovnik, was KILLED. Her blood spilled onto the bridge.’’

he country of Bosnia-Herzegovina is located on the Balkan Peninsula, encompassing land that was the west-central part of the former nation of Yugoslavia before its political breakup in 1990-91. Yugoslavia, formed in 1918 following World War I (1914–18), was home to three ethnic groups—the Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes. At the end of World War II (1939–45), Marshal Josip Tito (1892–1980) assumed control of Yugoslavia, aligning it as a republic with six states: (1) Serbia, its majority population being Serbs; (2) Slovenia, 91 percent Slovene; (3) Croatia, 78 percent Croat; (4) Bosnia-Herzegovina, 38 percent Muslim Slovenes, who later became known as Bosnian Muslims, 22 percent Croat; (5) Montenegro, 68 percent Montenegrins; and (6) Macedonia, 67 percent Macedonians. Although each state had its own government, Serbs dominated the central government and military. The nation’s capital was Belgrade, located in the Serbian state. Ultimate political control was provided by Communist Party (system of government in which the state controls the economy and a single party holds power) officials in Moscow, capital of the Soviet Union. Tito, a forceful leader, maintained a certain amount of independence from Moscow. At his death in 1980, the country’s diverse ethnic groups clung together for a while, united in their fear of increased Soviet

T

27

Zlata Filipovic

dominance. However, out from under Tito’s rigid control, each ethnic group in Yugoslavia began asserting its own pride and feelings of nationalism (belief that a particular nation and its culture, people, and values are superior to those of other nations). A strong Serbian nationalist, Slobodan Milosevic (1941–2006), took control of Yugoslavia in 1989. At that time, the Soviet Union and its Soviet bloc of countries in Eastern Europ—including Yugoslavia—began to break apart and declare independence from Moscow dominance. In turn, the Yugoslavian states of Croatia and Slovenia declared independence from Yugoslavia. In January 1992, Bosnian Muslims and Croats in Bosnia-Herzegovina voted for Bosnia-Herzegovina independence. Serbs living in Bosnia-Herzegovina were strongly opposed to independence and vowed to keep BosniaHerzegovina part of Serbia. With support from Serbia, an ethnic war erupted, the bloodiest in Europe since World War II. Before independence and war, Bosnia-Herzegovina’s population was multi-ethnic. The three main ethnic groups were Bosnian Muslims (44 percent), Serbs (31 percent), and Croats (17 percent). These three ethnic groups differed primarily in regard to language and religion. All three spoke Serbo-Croatian, but with their own dialects, or languages. Religion was the most visible marker. Bosnian Muslims practiced a form of the Islamic religion that is found in Eastern European countries such as Turkey. Islam in Bosnia-Herzegovina is less strict than Islam in the Middle East. Bosnian Muslims supported a secular (nonreligious) government and religious freedom. Bosnian Muslims could marry a non-Muslim if they desired. Serbs and Croats are Christian followers of Jesus Christ, unlike Muslims who follow the prophet Muhammad (570–632). Serbs are Eastern Orthodox (follower of church teachings), which split from traditional Roman Catholicism centuries earlier. Croats are Roman Catholics. Bosnian Serbs differ little from Serbs in Serbia. Serbs lived in southern, eastern, and northern Bosnia. Serbs and Croats traditionally were rural farmers, whereas Bosnian Muslims were professionals living in cities. By the late twentieth century, many individuals from each group lived in cities and mixed freely. Ethnic differences were not particularly disruptive until Bosnian Muslims and Croats joined together and declared independence. Bosnia-Herzegovina’s Serbian population backed by Serbian Serbs, Milosevic, and the well-armed and organized Serbian army went to war with Bosnia-Herzegovina’s Bosnian Muslims and Croats. Serbs operated under a policy of ethnic cleansing. Ethnic cleansing, like genocide, is a planned systematic attempt to eliminate an entire targeted group of 28

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Zlata Filipovic

people by exterminating all members of that group. Serbs tortured, raped, and murdered Bosnian Muslims and Croats. The Serbian offensive bombed major Bosnia-Herzegovina cities including the capital Sarajevo. Cultural symbols, such as churches and museums, were destroyed. Bombs also fell on schools, public buildings, parks, and even cemeteries. Millions of Bosnian Muslims and Croats fled from Sarajevo. Zlata Filipovic was eleven years old when the war reached her home city of Sarajevo in April 1992. Zlata began her diary in September 1991, only a few months before the war. She called the diary Mimmy, named after a deceased pet goldfish. Zlata’s family, a Croat family, was wealthy. Her father was a lawyer and her mother was a chemist. Yet by spring of 1992, Zlata, her family, and neighbors huddled many hours in the cellar as artillery fire rained down on Sarajevo; money and material wealth did not give people safety. Schools were closed, electricity cut off, and food scarce. Gone were Zlata’s happy childhood days. A good friend Nina, also eleven years old, died in a neighborhood park that was shelled. Zlata carefully and painfully recorded the terror, suffering, and death that was all about her.

Things to remember while reading excerpts from Zlata’s Diary: A Child’s Life in Sarajevo: 

The ethnic prejudice and hatred by Serbs for Bosnian Muslims and Croats and a strong desire on the part of the Serbs to remain part of Serbia led to the war.



Before the violence engulfed her city, Zlata’s life had been normal and carefree. She enjoyed school, her friends and family, skiing, and playing the piano, and was a fan of American pop singer Madonna (1958–). As the war began, Zlata watched her normal life disappear, replaced with the terror of war.

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

29

Zlata Filipovic

Bosnian children playing war games in the streets of Sarajevo. # PA TR IC K CH AUV EL /SY GM A/ COR BI S.

30

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Zlata Filipovic

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

31

Zlata Filipovic

A Bosnian woman inspects the destroyed building where she used to live in wartorn Sarajevo. # DA NI LO K RS TA NOV IC /R EUT ER S/ C OR BI S.

32

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Zlata Filipovic

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

33

Zlata Filipovic

34

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Zlata Filipovic

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

35

Zlata Filipovic

What happened next . . . The war finally halted in 1995 after deployment of United Nations (UN; an international organization founded in 1945 composed of most of the countries in the world) peacekeeping forces and the bombing of Serbian strongholds by North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) forces including air attacks by the U.S. military. NATO is an international military organization of North American and European nations. On November 21, 1995, the presidents of Bosnia, Croatia, and Serbia met in the United States at Dayton, Ohio, and reached an agreement to end the war. Under the Dayton Accord, Bosnia-Herzegovina was established as a single nation but with Bosnian Muslim, Croat, and Serb territories. Government leadership was shared among the three. In the early twentyfirst century, peace remained tenuous. Serbs wished to unite with Serbia, and Croats wanted to unite with Croatia. The population of Bosnia-Herzegovina had been 4.6 million in 1991, but after the war, it was down to 2.6 million. Over 100,000 persons had been killed. As for Zlata, she showed her diary to a teacher who managed to get it published in Sarajevo. Zlata became a celebrity, visited by journalists from many countries. During the Christmas season of 1993, as shelling and shooting continued in Sarajevo, Zlata and her family were whisked away in two armored French vehicles. Managing to get through a checkpoint, they reached the airport. The family flew to Paris and safety aboard a UN plane. Zlata began school at the International School in Paris. She and her parents traveled on a world tour, promoting peace and describing how ethnic hatred tore apart their city and country. Zlata’s story appeared in newspapers worldwide, and she was interviewed for many television appearances. 36

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Zlata Filipovic

Zlata Filipovic, pictured in 1994 holding her book, and her family used proceeds from the sale of the book to start a charity to help victims of the Bosnian War. # L ES S TON E/ SYG MA / CO RB IS .

Zlata’s diary, originally published in Croat, was translated into more than twenty languages. Zlata and her family used proceeds from the book to start a charity to help victims of the Bosnian War. Many of those victims were children.

Did you know . . . 

Zlata’s diary is often compared to the diary of Anne Frank, a Jewish girl living in Germany who died in the Holocaust (mass killing of European Jews and others by the Nazis) during World War II. At the beginning of the twenty-first century, students studying ethnic prejudice frequently studied both diaries for firsthand accounts.



Before it was almost destroyed by the war, Sarajevo was a beautiful city. It was the site of the 1984 Winter Olympic Games. Television coverage of the games frequently took audiences to

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

37

Zlata Filipovic

Sarajevo’s night spots where people of the city, unquestionably of many ethnicities, were shown enjoying life together.

Consider the following . . . 

Research in depth Sarajevo, Bosnia-Herzegovina, and the former Yugoslavia to more fully understand the history and ethnicities of their peoples.



Compare a thirteen-year-old’s day in the United States with a day in the life of Zlata in the early 1990s.



Explore what psychiatrists see as effects of war on children. Research post-traumatic stress syndrome. List reasons why Zlata was able to come through the experience psychologically whole.

For More Information BOOKS

Cigar, Norman. Genocide in Bosnia: The Policy of ‘‘Ethnic Cleansing.’’ College Station, TX: Texas A&M University Press, 1995. Filipovic, Zlata. Zlata’s Diary: A Child’s Life in Sarajevo. New York: Viking, 1994. Judah, Timothy. Serbs: History, Myth and the Destruction of Yugoslavia. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2000. Neuffer, Elizabeth. The Key to My Neighbor’s House: Seeking Justice in Bosnia and Rwanda. New York: Picador, 2001. Tanner, Marcus. Croatia: A Nation Forged in War. 2nd ed. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2001.

38

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

2

Gender Prejudice

very society in the world views the roles of males and females as different. In some societies, male and female behavior may be somewhat similar with only a few differences. In other societies, the expectations of how males and females behave are vastly different. Often males are the dominant and prevailing gender in a society. The manner in which they view the female role as subservient, a lower status, is known as gender prejudice (negative attitude towards others based on a prejudgment about those individuals with no prior knowledge or experience). Gender determines access to jobs and education.

E

China’s Children 41 Muslim Women 51

Gender is the most common way for societies to divide the labor, or chores. Throughout time in many societies around the world, women have commonly been seen as responsible for household chores, childrearing, and food preparation. Men are responsible for family income and/or hunting or gathering food. Generally, these different social roles are considered to be based on real physical biological differences, such as the superior strength of men and women being childbearers. Children learn these roles early in life from family and friends. In some societies, religious beliefs may be the dominant factor in determining gender role differences. For example, the Islamic holy book of the Koran provides daughters only half the inheritance given to sons when the father dies. It also is interpreted as stating that a woman’s testimony in court is worth only half that of a man’s. Under Muslim law, family compensation for the murder of a woman is only half that for men. Social rules are established for males and females to follow. Women are expected to behave in certain ways in society. In some societies, these rules are strictly enforced, and there are consequences for those who break them. In Muslim societies, the Koran is interpreted by fundamentalists as justifying wife beating for women who stray away from gender roles of subordination to the husband and other males, or even for seeking a formal education. In some societies, the rules of behavior change through 39

Gender Prejudice

time, usually when successfully changed by activists seeking reform. Such change occurred in Western societies of the United States and Western Europe in the 1960s and 1970s. Women found greater freedom in choosing careers, starting families, and fulfilling personal relationships without fear of pregnancies, known as the sexual revolution. The trend in Western societies was for men and women to pursue similar occupations and social responsibilities instead of occupations being associated with one gender or the other. Even with improvements to women’s status in the West, in families with two parents females are still expected to perform most of the housework and take responsibility for food preparation and child rearing. In addition, the substantial increase in the occurrence of single-parent, mother-only homes has continued to draw the anger of traditional social conservatives who fear changes in society’s gender roles. The extreme form of gender prejudice occurs in a society where newborn females are killed. This practice is called infanticide. In these cases, males are more valued by these societies for the roles they will play later in life, usually as the primary wage earner for an extended family. Females are seen in these societies as contributing less to the family and society in general, perhaps even providing more mouths to feed in a situation of poverty where food is scarce. The third excerpt, ‘‘China Grapples With Legacy of Its ‘Missing Girls’,’’ highlights this cultural practice and its social implications. In some societies, changes are slow in coming regarding gender roles, and the same rules exist at the beginning of the twenty-first century as did long ago. In the Muslim world where Islam is the predominant religion, women’s roles do not allow such freedom and individualism as in the West. Women may not be allowed to vote or take part in politics, to mix socially with others, or to wear the clothes they choose. The second excerpt, ‘‘The Women of Islam,’’ provides a look at parts of the world where gender prejudice remains strongly entrenched in society.

40

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

China’s Children Excerpt from ‘‘China Grapples With Legacy of Its ‘Missing Girls’: Disturbing Demographic Imbalance Spurs Drive to Change Age-Old Practices’’

Written by Eric Baculinao Published by MSNBC News http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5953508#story

‘‘For centuries, Chinese families without sons feared poverty and neglect. The male offspring represented continuity . . . and protection in old age.’’

y the early twenty-first century, China was experiencing a critical shortage of females in its population. According to census reports (an official count of each state’s population taken every ten years) for 2000, there were 116.9 males for every 100 females. In the ‘‘four years of age and less’’ category, the number was 120 males to 100 females. Because of historical preferences for sons, for centuries China’s ratio of males to females has been abnormal when compared to ratios of male to female populations in the developed world. Confucius (551–479 BCE ) was a famous Chinese teacher and philosopher in ancient times. His ideas have been followed for centuries by Asian societies. The Confucian value system praised men over women. Only males could participate in important religious and family rituals. Further, it was believed family continuity could be sustained only through male family members. Girls were considered property of their fathers. In their late teens, they were married in arrangements planned and forced upon them by their parents. At the time of marriage, the girl became the property of her husband and was required to care only for the husband’s relatives. Therefore, a girl was viewed as being an expense—rather than of value—for her birth family. As a result, it was common practice to kill some baby girls at birth, a practice called infanticide. If not killed at birth, some daughters were abandoned or neglected when babies or toddlers and died.

B

41

China’s Children

A poster advertises China’s ‘‘one-child family’’ policy, to encourage small families and stop overpopulation. # OW EN F RAN KE N/C OR BI S.

During the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s, the Chinese government strongly encouraged population growth and frowned upon infanticide and neglect of girls. Those decades brought the male-female population ratio more into balance than it had ever been before. However, believing the way to economic prosperity and modernization was a slower population growth rate, the government in the 1980s enacted a formal family planning policy and ordered a limit of only one child for each family. The Chinese government offered married couples a monetary incentive not to 42

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

China’s Children

have children. The practice of female infanticide, abandonment, and neglect increased as families were desperate for their one child to be a son. Modern technology played an important role in prenatal sex selection. Portable ultrasound scanners (machines that produce images of a developing fetus) were commonly used. The scanners produced an image of the baby being carried within the mother. As early as three months into pregnancy, the sex of the baby could be determined. If the baby was a girl, the parents could decide whether or not to end the pregnancy. Many chose to abort (to apply a medical procedure to expel the fetus from the mother’s womb) the female baby in hopes their next pregnancy would result in a boy. This most severe form of discrimination against the female gender led to the worst shortage of girls in China’s history. The following excerpt is from ‘‘China Grapples With Legacy of Its ‘Missing Girls.’’’ The excerpt examines China’s gender crisis—the imbalance in males to females in the population—that was brought about by discrimination against girls.

Things to remember while reading excerpts from ‘‘China Grapples With Legacy of Its ‘Missing Girls’’’: 

For centuries in China and other South and East Asian cultures, preference for sons has caused a shortage of females.



The severe shortage of Chinese girls at the start of the twenty-first century had been influenced by continued son preferences, required family planning, and the one-child-only policy that dominated the 1980s and 1990s, and by life-extinguishing discrimination against girls through sex-selected abortions.



The large imbalance between numbers of males and females resulted in the disruption of social and family structure causing many Chinese males to be unable to marry.

Excerpt from ‘‘China Grapples With Legacy of Its ‘Missing Girls’’’ BEIJING—China is asking where all the girls have gone. And the sobering answer is that this vast nation, now the world’s fastest-growing economy, is confronting a self-perpetuated demographic disaster that some experts describe as ‘‘gendercide’’—the phenomenon Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Sobering: Thoughtful and serious. Self-perpetuated: Practice continuing on its own momentum.

43

China’s Children Infanticide: Killing of infants.

caused by millions of families resorting to abortion and infanticide to make sure their one child was a boy.

Draconian: Severe.

The age-old bias for boys, combined with China’s draconian one-child policy imposed since 1980, has produced what Gu Baochang, a leading Chinese expert on family planning, described as ‘‘the largest, the highest, and the longest’’ gender imbalance in the world.

Ancient practice Lineage: Descent in a family from generation to generation.

For centuries, Chinese families without sons feared poverty and neglect. The male offspring represented continuity of lineage and protection in old age. The traditional thinking is best described in the ancient ‘‘Book of Songs’’ (1000–700 BCE ): ‘‘When a son is born, Let him sleep on the bed, Clothe him with fine clothes, And give him jade to play . . . When a daughter is born, Let her sleep on the ground, Wrap her in common wrappings, And give broken tiles to play . . . ’’ After the Communists took power in 1949, Mao Zedong rejected traditional . . . arguments that population growth would eventually outrun food supply, and firmly regarded China’s huge population as an asset, then with an annual birth rate of 3.7 percent. Without a state-mandated birth control program, China’s sex ratio in the 60’s and 70’s remained normal. Then in the early ’80s, China began enforcing an ambitious demographic engineering policy to limit families to one-child, as part of its strategy to fasttrack economic modernization. The policy resulted in a slashed annual birth rate of 1.29 percent by 2002, or the prevention of some 300 million births, and the current population of close to 1.3 billion.

‘Missing girls’ United Nations: International organization founded in 1945 composed of most of the countries in the world. Degradation: Harmful practices. Prenatal: Before birth. Sex-selective abortions: Termination of pregnancy as soon as the baby’s sex can be determined by ultrasound scanning.

44

From a relatively normal ratio of 108.5 boys to 100 girls in the early 80s, the male surplus progressively rose to 111 in 1990, 116 in 2000, and is now is close to 120 boys for each 100 girls at the present time, according to a Chinese think-tank report. The shortage of women is creating a ‘‘huge societal issue,’’ warned U.N. resident coordinator Khalid Malik earlier this year. Along with HIV/AIDS and environmental degradation, he said it was one of the three biggest challenges facing China. ‘‘In eight to 10 years, we will have something like 40 to 60 million missing women,’’ he said. . . . China’s own population experts have been warning for years about the looming gender crisis. ‘‘The loss of female births due to illegal prenatal sex determination and sex-selective abortions and female infanticide will affect the true sex ratio at Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

China’s Children

birth and at young ages, creating an unbalanced population sex structure in the future and resulting in potentially serious social problems,’’ argued Peking University’s chief demographer back in 1993.

Prenatal sex selection The abortion of female fetuses and infanticide was aided by the spread of cheap and portable ultra-sound scanners in the 1980’s. Illegal mobile scanning and backstreet hospitals can provide a sex scan for as little as $50, according to one report.

Fetuses: Babies still in the mother’s womb.

‘‘Prenatal sex selection was probably the primary cause, if not the sole cause, for the continuous rise of the sex ratio at birth,’’ said population expert Prof. Chu Junhong. A slew of reports have confirmed the disturbing demographic trend. 

In a 2002 survey conducted in a central China village, more than 300 of the 820 women had abortions and more than a third of them admitted they were trying to select their baby’s sex.



According to a report by the International Planned Parenthood Federation, the vast majority of aborted fetuses, more than 70 percent, were female, citing the abortion of up to 750,000 female fetuses in China in 1999.



A report by Zhang Qing, population researcher of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, said the gender imbalance is ‘‘statistically related to the high death rate of female babies, with female death rate at age zero in the city or rural areas consistently higher than male baby death rate.’’ Only seven of China’s 29 provinces are within the world’s average sex ratio. Zhang Qing’s report cited eight ‘‘disaster provinces’’ from North to South China, where there were 26 to 38 percent more boys than girls.



In the last census in 2000, there were nearly 19 million more boys than girls in the 0-15 age group. ‘‘We have to act now or the problem will become very serious,’’ said Peking University sociologist Prof. Xia Xueluan. He cited the need to strengthen social welfare system in the countryside to weaken the traditional preference for boys.

Gravity of imbalance beginning to be felt The hint of ‘‘serious’’ problems ahead can be seen in the increasing cases of human trafficking as bachelors try to ‘‘purchase’’ their wives. China’s police have freed more than 42,000 kidnapped women and children from 2001 to 2003. Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

45

China’s Children

Disproportionately male areas: Regions with significantly more males than females.

Transient: Continuously moving from place to place.

The vast army of surplus males could pose a threat to China’s stability, argued two Western scholars. Valerie M. Hudson and Andrea M. Den Boer, who recently wrote a book on the Security Implications of Asia’s Surplus Male Population, cited two rebellions in disproportionately male areas in Manchu Dynasty China. According to their analysis, low-status young adult men with little chance of forming families of their own are much more prone to attempt to improve their situation through violent and criminal behavior . . . The growing crime rate in China which is being linked to China’s massive ‘‘floating’’ or transient population, some 80 million of which are low-status males, seems to add weight to their observation.

Girl Care Project The imbalance has spurred some official efforts to shift public opinion. The ‘‘Girl Care Project’’ is described as a multi-pronged approach to encourage the birth of girls, although some experts complain that it’s being framed in terms of the future needs of men. ‘‘That’s too male-oriented and discriminatory of women,’’ said Dr. Gu, the population control expert. According to one estimate, over the next decade, some 40 million Chinese men will be unable to find wives due to the ‘‘scarcity’’ of females, thus the growing number of so-called ‘‘bachelors’ villages’’ in various parts of China. ‘‘This project ought to be seen as a way to foster more respect and concern for women and girls,’’ Gu said. The program aims to end pre-birth sex selection, as well as ‘‘attacking the criminal activities of drowning and abandoning baby girls [while] rewarding and assisting families that plan to give birth to baby girls,’’ reported The People’s Daily, China’s leading paper and the flagship of the Communist Party.

Benefits for girls The pilot program is being launched in more than a dozen of China’s poorest provinces, with funding split between the national and local government. Leading the way is Fujian province where some $24 million has been allocated for distribution among nearly half a million households, with some 100,000 girls to be exempt from school fees. Under the program, couples who limit themselves to two girls would receive a combined annual pension of about $150 for the rest of their lives. Preferential treatment in health care, housing and employment would also be provided. 46

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

China’s Children

This billboard, while meant to promote the practice of having only one child, shows a baby girl, which encourages Chinese parents to keep and nurture their female children. # OW EN FR AN KE N/C OR BIS .

A recent glowing report in the The People’s Daily cited a village where new houses for beneficiaries worth more than $2,300 each were built along a ‘‘Family Planning Basic Policy Street.’’ China’s birth control policy is now ‘‘a diversified mechanism,’’ according to Population Vice-Minister Zhao Baige, which allows for one-child in the Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

47

China’s Children

cities, two in the rural areas, and three in ethnic regions, with no limit in Tibet. ‘‘To normalize the sex ratio, illegal sex determination and sex-selective abortions must be strictly banned,’’ Zhao declared recently. An American demographer, who has been closely following China’s population program and who spoke on condition of anonymity, lauded China’s ‘‘coming to grips’’ with the problem. ‘‘Still, they are in a deep dilemma—emotional and policy dilemma— because the solution to the problem will conflict with other parts of their population strategy to reduce birth rate or some of the measures could perhaps make the problem even worse,’’ warned the demographer. ‘‘We still have a lot of work to do,’’ said Dr. Gu. ‘‘There’s no road map yet on how to achieve the goal of normal sex ratio.’’

What happened next . . . At the beginning of the twenty-first century, government policies in China demonstrated a movement toward solving the problem of the male-female imbalance. Such policies must overcome the centuries-old anti-female traditions. Population Vice-Minister Zhao Baige in 2006 described China’s birth control policy as diversified since it allows for city-dwelling families to have one child, two children in rural areas, three in ethnic regions, and an unlimited number in the region of Tibet. Programs were put into place that ranged from encouraging Chinese to allow the births of all females to supporting families having girls with school fee exemptions, provisions for healthcare and housing, and favored treatment for jobs. Still, with the shortage of females in the early twentyfirst century, it was estimated at least forty million males will be unable to find wives and establish families.

Did you know . . .

48



A few countries in the twentieth century experienced a severe shortage of males. Russia, North Korea, and Vietnam experienced a significant male shortage due to warfare in the last half of the twentieth century. Many women in the countries remained unmarried, and widows had to raise their children alone.



The only nations in South and East Asia that do not have a serious shortage of girls are Japan, North Korea, and Mongolia. Although women in these societies experience discrimination in everyday Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

China’s Children

China’s birth control policy allows for rural families to have two children, three in ethnic regions, and an unlimited number in the region of Tibet. Here, a mother of the Jinuo ethnic minority cares for her three children. AP I MA GES .

life, employment, and politics, the life-threatening practices, such as sex-selective abortion and neglect of female infants and toddlers, are not embraced socially or legally.

Consider the following . . . 

Discuss the numerous problems that could result in societies that have significantly more men than women.



What explanations could be given for the importance of females not increasing in countries with severe imbalance of male-female population?

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

49

China’s Children



What reactions could be expected from Americans as they learn how extensive female infanticide and neglect is in South and East Asian countries?

For More Information BOOKS

Cohen, Myron L. Kinship, Contract, Community, and State: Anthropological Perspectives on China. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2005. Evans, Karin. The Lost Daughters of China: Abandoned Girls, Their Journey to America and the Search for a Missing Past. New York: J. P. Tarcher/Putnam, 2000. Kruger, Rayne. All Under Heaven: A Complete History of China. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2003. WEB SIT ES

Baculinao, Eric. ‘‘China Grapples With Legacy of Its ‘Missing Girls’: Disturbing Demographic Imbalance Spurs Drive to Change Age-Old Practices.’’ MSNBC News. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5953508#story (accessed on December 12, 2006).

50

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Muslim Women Excerpt from ‘‘The Women of Islam: The Taliban Perfected Subjugation, But Nowhere in the Muslim World Are Women Treated as Equals’’

Published by Time Magazine, December 3, 2001

‘‘Saudi women are not allowed to drive. They are effectively forbidden education in fields such as engineering and law. They can teach and provide medical care to other women but are denied almost all other governmental jobs.’’

omen living under the religion of Islam at the start of the twentyfirst century are subjected to different levels of discrimination and oppression, depending on which country they reside in and who is in power. Nowhere are they treated as equals to men. Women of Afghanistan under Taliban rule between 1996 and 2001 became virtual prisoners in their homes, unable to hold jobs, go to school, or walk outside their homes without a male relative as an escort, or companion. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Pakistan continue to severely restrict women’s rights. Egypt and Jordan are more moderate, or fair, and allow more freedoms for women, such as holding professional jobs and attending universities. Women in Indonesia, Malaysia, and Turkey have the greatest degree of equality.

W

In the 2000s, the struggle over women’s rights is a struggle between conservative, or traditional, Muslims (followers of Islam) and more moderate Muslims. Iraq provides one example. When Saddam Hussein (1937–) was in power from 1979 until overthrown by the United States military in 2003, Iraqi women held jobs and attended universities with far fewer restrictions than in other Muslim countries. They enjoyed more civil rights such as the freedom to vote, choose their own husbands, inherit property equally with their brothers, and retain custody of children if divorced. Hussein came under increasing pressure in the 1990s 51

Muslim Women

from Islamic religious clerics (leaders) to restrict women’s rights. In concession, Hussein banned women from traveling without a male relative escort. When the United States removed Hussein from power, Shiite Muslim clerics moved to assert their power over women. About 60 percent of Iraqis are Shiite Muslims, one branch of the Islam faith. The Shiite clerics decreed that women must wear an abaya, headto-toe black loose clothing, in public. They also moved to push many women out of their professional jobs. Such oppression is deeply rooted in Islam.

Women living under the religion of Islam at the start of the twenty-first century are subjected to different levels of discrimination and oppression, depending on which country they reside in and who is in power. # F AY AZ K ABL I/ CO RBI S.

In pre-Islamic times, women were treated as inferior beings. During his life, Muhammad (570–632), the founder of Islam who lived in the seventh century, was concerned with the treatment of women. He halted the practice of female infanticide, the murdering of unwanted, newborn girls. He allowed women to attend the mosque, an Islamic place of worship, and pray. Muhammad gave women the right to inherit property, although only half as much as their brothers. It was a step forward for women. Concerned about the number of widows left helpless when husbands were killed in warfare, Muhammad allowed men to take four wives as long as he treated them equally. Muhammad required his wives to veil themselves when they went out in public. Muslims were to speak to the prophet’s wives only if a screen or curtain separated them. That screen was the veil. During Muhammad’s time, other Muslim women did not wear the veil. Shortly after the death of Muhammad, conditions of women deteriorated rapidly under Umar (581–644), Muhammad’s successor. Umar restricted women to praying at home and excluded them from major religious rituals. He required all women to be veiled and prohibited them from speaking to men. This exclusion and seclusion severely restricted women’s freedom. Any rights women had were eliminated. Further, as Islam grew and its principles were established, limitations of women were declared as divine law from Allah, the Islam god. Fourteen centuries later, a majority of women living in Islamic countries still believe restrictions on women are Allah’s law. The

52

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Muslim Women

following excerpt ‘‘The Women of Islam’’ describes conditions women live under in a number of Islamic countries.

Things to remember while reading excerpts from ‘‘The Women of Islam’’: 

Nowhere in the Muslim world are women treated as equals to men.



Policies of exclusion and seclusion under Sharif (Muslim law) severely limit women in Muslim society and entrench inequality in marriage, employment, education, and participation in politics.



Limitations on the rights of women vary between different Muslim countries.

Excerpt from ‘‘The Women of Islam’’ The Prophet Muhammad . . . improved the status of women in 7th century Arabia. In local pagan society, it was the custom to bury alive unwanted female newborns; Islam prohibited the practice. Women had been treated as possessions of their husbands; Islamic law made the education of girls sacred duty and gave women the right to inherit property. . . . Of course, ancient advances do not mean that much to women 14 centuries later if reform is, rather than a process, a historical blip subject to reversal. While it is impossible, given their diversity, to paint one picture of women living under Islam today, it is clear that the religion has been used in most Muslim countries not to liberate but to entrench inequality. The Taliban, with its fanatical subjugation of the female sex, occupies an extreme, but it nevertheless belongs on a continuum that includes, not so far down the line, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Pakistan and the relatively moderate states of Egypt and Jordan. Where Muslims have afforded women the greatest degree of equality—in Turkey—they have done so by overthrowing Islamic precepts in favor of secular rule . . . ‘‘The way Islam has been practiced in most Muslim societies for centuries has left millions of Muslim women with battered bodies, minds and souls.’’ Part of the problem dates to Muhammad. Even as he proclaimed new rights for women, he enshrined their inequality in immutable law, passed down as God’s commandments and eventually recorded in scripture. The Koran allots daughters half the inheritance of sons. It decrees that a woman’s testimony in court, at least in financial matters, is worth half that of a man’s. Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Pagan: Someone who is not a Christian, Muslim, or Jew and practices earth- or nature-centered religion.

Entrench: Solidly establish. Fanatical subjugation: Obsessively enthusiastic governmental control. Continuum: Scale of gradual differences. Precepts: Beliefs. Secular: Nonreligious. Immutable: Undisputable.

53

Muslim Women

Under Shari’a, or Muslim law, compensation for the murder of a woman is half the going rate for men. In many Muslim countries, these directives are incorporated into contemporary law. . . . In Islam, women can have only one spouse, while men are permitted four. The legal age for girls to marry tends to be very young. . . . Pedophiles: Adults whose primary sexual interest is in children. Parliament: The legislature.

Alimony: Payments for support from one former spouse to another after divorce.

Philandering: Sexually unfaithful. Opium addict: Person addicted to a narcotic drug. Guardianship: Control and care. Koran sura 4:34: Location of religious passage, equivalent to chapter and verse in Christian bibles. Pre-eminence: Superiority. Subordinate: Lesser valued. Admonish: Warn.

Leniency: Lesser penalties.

54

In Iran the legal age for marriage is nine for girls, 14 for boys. The law has occasionally been exploited by pedophiles, who marry poor young girls from provinces, use and then abandon them. In 2000 the Iranian Parliament voted to raise the minimum age for girls to 14, but this year, a legislative oversight body dominated by traditional clerics vetoed the move. An attempt by conservatives to abolish Yemen’s legal minimum age of 15 for girls failed, but local experts say it is rarely enforced anyway. . . . Wives in Islamic societies face great difficulty in suing for divorce, but husbands can be released from their vows virtually on demand, in some places merely by saying ‘‘I divorce you’’ three times. Though in most Muslim states, divorce´s are entitled to alimony, in Pakistan it lasts only three months, long enough to ensure that the woman isn’t pregnant. The same three-month rule applies even to the Muslim minority in India. There, a national law provides for long-term alimony, but to appease Islamic conservatives, authorities exempted Muslims. Fear of poverty keeps many Muslim women locked in bad marriages, as does the prospect of losing their children. . . . Maryam, an Iranian woman, says she has stayed married for 20 years to a philandering opium addict she does not love because she fears losing guardianship of her teenage daughter. ‘‘Islam supposedly gives me the right to divorce,’’ she says. ‘‘But what about my rights afterwards?’’ Women’s rights are compromised further by a section in the Koran, sura 4:34, that has been interpreted to say that men have ‘pre-eminence’ over women or that they are ‘overseers’ of women. The verse goes on to say that the husband of a subordinate wife should first admonish her to sleep alone and finally beat her. Wife beating is so prevalent in the Muslim world that social workers who assist battered women in Egypt, for example, spend much of their time trying to convince victims that their husbands’ violent acts are unacceptable. Each year hundreds of Muslim women die in ‘‘honor killings’’—murders by husbands or male relatives of women suspected of disobedience, usually a sexual indiscretion or marriage against the family’s wishes. Typically, the killers are punished lightly, if at all. . . . The Jordanian royal family has made the rare move of condemning honor killings, but the government, fearful of offending conservatives, has not put its weight behind a proposal to repeal laws that grant leniency for killers. . . . Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Muslim Women

Pakistani women holding a protest rally to condemn a 2003 honor killing. Honor killings are murders by husbands or male relatives of women suspected of disobedience. AP I MA GES .

The Koran instructs women to ‘guard their modesty.’ . . . Saudi women don a billowy black cloak called an abaya, along with a black scarf and veil over the face; morality police enforce the dress code by striking errant women with sticks. The women of Iran and Sudan can expose the face but must cover the hair and the neck. Recently a Muslim fundamentalist group in the Indian province of Kashmir demanded that women start wearing the veil: when the call was ignored, men threw acid in the faces of uncovered women. Limits placed on the movement of Muslim women, the jobs they can hold and their interactions with men are all rooted in fears of unchaste behavior. The Taliban took these controls to an extreme, but the Saudis are also harsh, imposing on women some of the tightest restrictions on personal and civil freedoms anywhere. . . .

Unchaste: Unwanted sexual.

Saudi women are not allowed to drive. They are effectively forbidden education in fields such as engineering and law. They can teach and provide Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

55

Muslim Women

Segregated: Separated or isolated from.

Implementation: Being carried out. Segregate: Keep apart. Fundamentalists: Those who strictly interpret religious guidance.

Coattails: Established influence.

medical care to other women but are denied almost all other governmental jobs. Thousands have entered private business, but they must work segregated from men. . . . Iranian women drive cars, buy and sell property, run their own businesses, vote and hold public office. In most Muslim countries tradition keeps ordinary women at home and off the street, but Iran’s avenues are crowded with women. They are 25% of the work force, a third of all government employees and 54% of college students. Still, Iranian women are—like women in much of the Arab world—forbidden to travel overseas without the permission of their husband or father though the rule is rarely enforced in Iran. Gender reforms are slow and hard fought. In 1999 the Emir of Kuwait, Sheik Jaber al-Ahmed al-Sabah, issued a decree giving women the right to vote in and stand for election to the Kuwait parliament . . . Conservatives in parliament, however, blocked its implementation. In addition, the legislature has voted to segregate the sexes at Kuwait University. Morocco’s government has proposed giving women more marriage and property rights and a primary rule in developmental efforts, but fundamentalists are resisting the measures. Muslim women are starting to score political victories, including election to office. In Syria 26 of the 250 members of parliament are female. In Iraq the numbers are 19 out of 250. Four Muslim countries have been or are currently led by women. In Pakistan, Bangladesh and Indonesia, they rose to prominence on the coattails of deceased fathers or husbands. In Turkey Tansu Ciller, Prime Minister from 1993 to 1995, won entirely on her own. Turkey is an exception to many rules. Women in Turkey are the most liberated in the Muslim world, though Malaysia and Indonesia come close, having relatively progressive cultures before Islam came to Southeast Asia in the 9th century. In Turkish professional life women enjoy a level of importance that is impressive. . . .

Unilateral: On his own.

Turkey’s liberalism is a legacy of the republic’s founder, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, an aggressive secularist who gave women rights unprecedented in the Muslim world. Last week the Turkish parliament went further by reforming family law. Previously, a man was head of the household able to make unilateral decisions concerning children. The new law establishes community property in marriages and raises marriage age of girls from 15 to 18. . . . Iran’s parliament recently compromised with conservative clerics to allow a single young woman to study abroad, with her father’s permission. Bangladesh passed legislation increasing the punishments for crimes against women, including rape, kidnapping and acid attacks. Egypt has . . . made it easier for women to sue for divorce. In Qatar women have the right to participate in

56

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Muslim Women

Women in Turkey are the most liberated in the Muslim world. Here, two Turkish women in Istanbul are about to exercise their right to vote in a national election. # K ER IM O KT EN/ CO RBI S.

municipal elections and are promised rights in first-ever parliamentary balloting scheduled to take place by 2003. . . . Saudi Arabia, the chief holdout, has at least pledged to start issuing ID [identification] cards to women. Today the only legal evidence of a Saudi woman’s existence is the appearance of her name on her husband’s card. If she gets divorced, her name goes on . . . the card of her closest male relative, even if she scarcely knows him.

What happened next . . . At the beginning of the twenty-first century, discussion on the status of women in Islamic countries increased. Communications increased in the West and Islamic countries. Muslims took advantage of television and the Internet for information sources. On one hand, many thought Islamic culture did not practically keep up with the modern world. On Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

57

Muslim Women

the other hand, conservative Muslims viewed Western culture as evil and something to protect Islam from. As for women’s rights, two movements, at odds with each other, were gaining strength. Governments continued making laws restricting women’s freedoms in the name of Shari‘a, the Muslim law. In reaction, new women’s movements generally led by well-educated Muslim women from wealthy families resisted and protested against such laws. The most hopeful sign for women was that they were gaining a small but significant presence in politics. Demonstrations in the streets of a number of countries against gender discrimination had taken place. In 2001, a number of women joined together and revealed their faces. When men assaulted women protesters in Egypt, hundreds more women protested in the streets. Iranian women had also marched in protest against discrimination of women. Women’s movements were in their infancy at the beginning of the twenty-first century in Islamic nations, but appeared to have a growing basis of support.

Did you know . . . 

Throughout the world, Muslim women cover their head, neck, and throat as a symbol of modesty. To the West, this practice represents female oppression. Some Muslim women agree but others do not. Many say covering is an identifier of their religion and that they must instead concentrate on oppressive restrictions blocking women from education and jobs.



A verse in the Koran, sura 4:34, condones punishment of wives including beating for insubordination. The more liberal interpretation maintains the beatings should be only light taps and only for religious infractions, or violations. Nevertheless, wife beating and abuse remained common in Muslim marriages.



Muslim women in Turkey enjoy human rights under law that are unheard of in other Islamic nations. For example communal property (that which is jointly owned by both husband and wife) in marriages is law. Turkey has accomplished this liberalization because its government is run by politicians and is not in the hands of religious leaders.

Consider the following . . . 

58

Muslim schoolgirls in the United States often wear head scarves. There have been several instances of reported harassment in Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Muslim Women

middle and high schools. How would your fellow students react to the wearing of the head scarves in your school? 

What victories, however small, have Muslim women seen around the world?



How do the rights of women in Islamic countries vary, such as between Saudi Arabia and Egypt?

For More Information B O O KS

Afzal-Khan, Fawzia, ed. Shattering the Stereotypes: Muslim Women Speak Out. Northampton, MA: Olive Branch Press, 2005. Armstrong, Karen. Inside Islam: The Faith, the Peoples and the Conflicts of the World’s Fastest Growing Religion. New York: Marlowe and Company, 2002. Bowen, Donna Lee, and Evelyn A. Early, eds. Everyday Life in the Muslim Middle East. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2002. Nomani, Asra Q. Standing Alone in Mecca: An American Woman’s Struggle for the Soul of Islam. San Francisco: Harper, 2005. Peters, Francis E. Muhammad and the Origins of Islam. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1994. PE RIODIC AL S

Beyer, Lisa. ‘‘The Women of Islam: Nowhere in the Muslim World Are Women Treated as Equals.’’ Time Magazine, December 3, 2001. WEB SIT ES

Women Living Under Muslim Laws. http://www.wluml.org/english/index.shtml (accessed on December 12, 2006).

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

59

3

Religious Prejudice

eligious prejudice means negative attitudes or behavior between people of different religions. Different religions have different beliefs, practices, and leadership structure. In many regions of the world, the defining characteristic of a people is their religion. People tend to elevate their religion as the one and only true belief system, the one superior to all others. Religious prejudice (a negative attitude towards others based on a prejudgment about those individuals with no prior knowledge or experience) and discrimination (treating some people differently than others or favoring one social group over another based on prejudices) occur when followers of one religion become opponents of people who practice a different religion. Opponents label each other as heathens or infidels, both meaning unbelievers. Violent conflicts over differing religious beliefs have occurred for thousands of years. World history is full of holy wars fought in the name of one’s own religion and one’s God that resulted in death and destruction. The world’s largest religion, with over two billion followers, is Christianity. It includes two major branches, Catholicism and Protestantism. Christians believe Jesus Christ was God’s son. The second largest religion, with over one billion adherents, is Islam. Followers of Islam are called Muslims and believe that Muhammad was God’s prophet. The third largest religion is Hinduism and the fourth is Buddhism. Both originated in India and involve the worship of more than one god. Another major religion is Judaism, the religion of the Jewish people. Worldwide, the Jewish population is about fifteen million. Like Christians and Muslims, Jews believe there is only one God that cannot be divided into other expressions. Therefore, Jews do not believe Jesus Christ was the son of God, nor do they believe Muhammad is God’s direct prophet. Religious prejudice resulting in discrimination and conflict was widespread in the twentieth century. Religious prejudice and discrimination

R

Palestinians 63 Iraq 75

61

Religious Prejudice

leads to oppression of religious practices, discrimination in employment, limiting educational opportunities, and restricting social interaction. At its worst, religious prejudice leads to armed conflicts resulting in destruction of homes, religious sites, and the death of large numbers of people. The most horrific example of religious prejudice in the twentieth century, which also included racial prejudice, occurred in Europe in the 1930s and 1940s. Out of millions of victims of the Holocaust overall, six million European Jews were murdered by Germany’s Nazi (a racist political party in Germany more formally known as the National Socialist Germany Workers’ Party) government simply because they were Jews or looked Jewish. The excerpts in this chapter concern two long-standing conflicts driven by religious differences. The first excerpt is the 2005 annual report on ‘‘Israel/Occupied Territories’’ by Amnesty International, a worldwide organization dedicated to the protection of human rights. This excerpt describes violence and human rights violations resulting from prejudice and hatred between Israel’s Jewish population and its Palestinian Arab Muslim population. The second excerpt is from an article, ‘‘Sectarian Hatred Pulls Apart Iraq’s Mixed Towns,’’ published in the November 20, 2005, edition of The New York Times. Sectarian refers to religious sects or groups. At the beginning of the twenty-first century, long-standing hatred between the two branches of Islam, Sunni and Shi´ıte, continued.

62

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Palestinians Excerpt from ‘‘Israel/Occupied Territories’’

Written by Amnesty International Provided on Amnesty International’s Human Rights Concerns Web site http://www.amnestyusa.org/countries/ israel_and_occupied_territories/document.do?id=ar&yr=2005

‘‘Palestinians had to obtain special permits from the Israeli army to move . . . within the West Bank and were barred from . . . roads which were freely used by Israeli settlers living in illegal settlements in the Occupied Territories.’’

small piece of land located along the eastern shore of the Mediterranean Sea is the center of a long-standing conflict between Arabs and Jews. Rooted in thousands of years of history, the controversy focuses on which group can rightfully claim the territory as its homeland. Depending on which people had control of the land at a particular time, it has been called various names such as Palestine, Israel, and Judea. At the start of the twenty-first century, the land was known as Israel and was controlled by the Jewish people. Israel also gained control of nearby territories following its 1967 war with Egypt, Jordan, and Syria. The control was regarded by many as unlawful occupation by the Israelis. Israel and its occupied territories are, in total, about the size of the state of Maryland, or 10,000 square miles. The occupied territories included the Gaza Strip, West Bank, and Golan Heights. Gaza Strip is located on Israel’s southwestern coast. West Bank is located to the west of the Jordan River, hence its identification as the West Bank. The West Bank territory is located within east-central Israel and includes the Old City of Jerusalem, sometimes called East Jerusalem. Golan Heights is territory in the far northeastern corner of Israel adjacent to the Syrian

A

63

Palestinians

Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch Both Amnesty International (AI) and Human Rights Watch (HRW) are organizations dedicated to the protection and promotion of human rights of people around the world. Supporting the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights written in 1948, both groups focus on preventing and halting physical and mental abuse, call for freedom of expression, and an end to prejudice and discrimination. Established in the mid-twentieth century, AI had over 1.8 million members representing over 150 countries and territories by the beginning of the twenty-first century. AI is independent of any government or economic interest, and promotes no political agenda or religion. Its sole concern is protection of the rights of the world’s people. To this end, it publishes a widely distributed annual report on the condition of human rights in countries of the world.

Human Rights Watch, based in the United States but with offices worldwide, investigates human rights abuses wherever they occur and then publishes their findings in widely read reports. Several watch groups united in 1988 to form the present-day organization. HRW, a nongovernmental organization, challenges governments and leaders to end human rights abuses and adhere to the Universal Declaration. HRW reports on their Web site (http://www.hrw.org) that they ‘‘have exposed abuses by government and rebels; by Hutu and Tutsi [in Rwanda]; by Serb, Croat, Bosniak Muslim, and Kosovar Albanian [in the former Yugoslavia]; by Israelis and Palestinians; by Christians and Muslims in the islands of Indonesia and sands of the Sudan.’’ HRW also reports on human rights abuses carried out by the United States both within and outside the country.

border. Between 1948 when the state of Israel was established and the 1967 Six Day War when Israel gained the territories, Gaza was administered by Egypt, the West Bank was united with Jordan, and the Golan Heights was administered by Syria. Extremely complex, the Arab-Israeli conflict is based in religion and the desire to have a secure homeland. Arabs who live in Israel and its territories are called Palestinian Arabs. Palestinian Arabs are followers of Islam, therefore they are Muslims. Those called Israelis are Jews. Because Palestinian Arabs and Israelis feel that they are entitled to a nation on the same land, each group demonstrates its hatred and distrust for the other. Their attitudes are expressions of prejudice so deeply held that Palestinian Arabs and Israelis often participate in horrific acts of violence against each other. Between September 2000, the beginning of an intifada (uprising against each other) and a ceasefire called in 2005, Human Rights Watch, an international organization dedicated to protecting people’s rights, 64

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Palestinians

Palestinian boys chase an Israeli tank and throw stones during a clash in the West Bank town of Nablus in 2002. AP I MA GES .

reported Israel had killed three thousand Palestinian Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza, including at least six hundred children. Palestinian fighters had killed more than nine hundred Israelis. Most killed on both sides were civilians. The following is an excerpt from the 2005 annual report on Israel’s occupied territories by Amnesty International, another international human rights organization.

Things to remember while reading excerpts from ‘‘Israel/Occupied Territories’’: 

During the first half of the twentieth century, the land so violently contested in the early twenty-first century was known as Palestine and inhabited largely by Arabs. As a result of the Holocaust (mass killing of European Jews and others by the Nazis) carried out during World War II (1939–45) when Nazi Germany murdered six million European Jews, the United Nations (UN—an international organization created to resolve international disputes) passed

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

65

Palestinians

Resolution 187 in 1947. Resolution 187 divided Palestine into two new states, one for a secure Jewish homeland and one for Arabs. 

The Jewish people declared an independent state of Israel in 1948, igniting a war against its Arab neighbors. Defeating the combined armies of Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq by 1949, Israel established its borders, displacing approximately seven hundred thousand Palestinian Arabs from their home. Israel has been in conflict with the Arab world ever since.



While the Arab-Israeli conflict is a struggle over a small piece of land with few natural resources, it has ignited hatred of Israel throughout the Middle East and countries where Islam is the predominant religion. The struggle between Palestinian Arabs and Israelis has at times caused the world’s most powerful nations to choose sides against each other, threatening a global conflict.

Excerpt from ‘‘Israel/Occupied Territories’’ Amnesty International (AI) 2005 Annual Report: Israel/Occupied Territories.

Killings and attacks by the Israeli army

Extrajudicial: Not approved by courts.

66

The Israeli army killed around 700 Palestinians, including some 150 children, in the Occupied Territories, most of them unlawfully. Many were killed in deliberate as well as reckless shooting, shelling and bombardment of densely populated residential areas or as a result of excessive use of force. Some 120 Palestinians were killed in extrajudicial executions, including more than 30 bystanders, of whom four were children. Others were killed in armed clashes with Israeli soldiers. Thousands of others were injured. 

Four Palestinian schoolgirls were shot dead by the Israeli army in their classrooms or walking to school in the Gaza Strip in September and October. Raghda Adnan al-Assar and Ghadeer Jaber Mukhaymar, aged 10 and nine, were shot dead by Israeli soldiers while sitting at their desks in UN schools in Khan Yunis refugee camp. Eight-year-old Rania Iyad Aram was shot dead by Israeli soldiers as she was walking to school. On 5 October Israeli soldiers shot dead 13-year-old Iman al-Hams near her school in Rafah. . . .



Ten-year-old Walid Naji Abu Qamar, 11-year-old Mubarak Salim alHashash, 13-year-old Mahmoud Tariq Mansour and five others were killed on 19 May in Rafah in the Gaza Strip when the Israeli army Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Palestinians

Israeli soldiers wait behind a Palestinian resident as he is made to enter a building before them, using him as a human shield. # P AVE L WO LB ERG /E PA/ CO RB IS.

opened fire with tank shells and a helicopter-launched missile on a non-violent demonstration. Dozens of other unarmed demonstrators were also wounded in the attack.

‘‘Human shields’’ Israeli soldiers continued to use Palestinians as ‘‘human shields’’ during military operations, forcing them to carry out tasks that endangered their lives, despite an injunction by the Israeli High Court banning the practice. A petition against the use of ‘‘human shields’’ submitted by Israeli and Palestinian human rights organizations to the Supreme Court in May 2002 was still pending at the end of 2004. 

Injunction: Court order. Petition: Written request signed by a number of people.

In April, Israeli soldiers used 13-year-old Muhammed Badwan as a ‘‘human shield’’ during a demonstration in the West Bank village of Biddu. The soldiers placed the boy on the hood of their jeep and tied him to the front windscreen to discourage Palestinian demonstrators from throwing stones in their direction.

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

67

Palestinians

Killings and attacks by Palestinian armed groups Sixty-seven Israeli civilians, including eight children, were killed by Palestinian armed groups in Israel and in the Occupied Territories. Forty-seven of the victims were killed in suicide bombings, the others were killed in shooting or mortar attacks. Most of the attacks were claimed by the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, an offshoot of Fatah, and by the armed wing of Hamas. Forty-two Israeli soldiers were also killed by Palestinian armed groups, most of them in the Occupied Territories. 

Chana Anya Bunders, Natalia Gamril, Dana Itach, Rose Bona and Anat Darom and six other Israelis were killed on 29 January when a Palestinian man blew himself up on a bus in Jerusalem. More than 50 other people were wounded in the attack. The suicide bombing was claimed by both the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades and the armed wing of Hamas.



Tali Hatuel, who was eight months pregnant, and her four young daughters, Hila, Hadar, Roni and Meirav, aged between two and 11, were shot dead in the Gaza Strip while travelling by car near the Gush Katif settlement block where they lived. They were shot at close range by Palestinian gunmen who had opened fire on their car and caused it to careen off the road. . . .

Attacks by Israeli settlers in the Occupied Territories Israeli settlers stepped up attacks against Palestinians and their property throughout the West Bank and also increased attacks on international human rights activists. They destroyed and damaged trees owned by Palestinians and frequently prevented Palestinian farmers from harvesting their crops.

Bail: Payment guaranteeing the person will show up when requested.

With impunity: Without punishment.

68

On 27 September, an Israeli settler shot dead Sayel Jabara, a Palestinian taxi driver, as he was driving his passengers between Nablus and Salem. The settler claimed that he shot Sayel Jabara because he thought that he might attack him, even though Sayel Jabara was not armed. The settler was released on bail less than 24 hours after the killing. In September and October Israeli settlers, wearing hoods and armed with stones, wooden clubs and metal chains, assaulted two US citizens, members of the Christian Peacemaker Teams (CPT), and AI delegates as they escorted Palestinian primary school children to school near Tuwani village in the Hebron area. CPT members Kim Lamberty sustained a broken arm and knee as well as bruising, and her colleague Chris Brown sustained a punctured lung and multiple bruises. The attackers came from the Israeli settlement of Havat Ma´on and returned there after the attacks. Israeli settlers from Havat Ma´on continued to attack Palestinian children on their way to school with impunity. Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Palestinians

Impunity Most members of the Israeli army and security forces continued to enjoy impunity. Investigations, prosecutions and convictions for human rights violations were rare. In the overwhelming majority of the thousands of cases of unlawful killings and other grave human rights violations committed by Israeli soldiers in the previous four years, no investigations were known to have been carried out. Israeli settlers also enjoyed impunity for attacks on Palestinians and their property and international human rights workers. The Israeli army and police consistently failed to take steps to stop and prevent such attacks and routinely increased restrictions on the local Palestinian population in response to attacks by Israeli settlers.

Destruction of Palestinian property in the Occupied Territories The Israeli army carried out large-scale destruction of Palestinian houses and property in the Occupied Territories, far exceeding the destruction of previous years. It demolished several hundred homes, mostly in the Gaza Strip, making thousands of Palestinians homeless, and destroyed large areas of agricultural land, roads and water, electricity and communications infrastructure. Such destruction was often a form of collective punishment on the local population in retaliation for attacks by Palestinian armed groups. The army usually gave no warning of the impending destruction and inhabitants were forced to flee their homes without being able to salvage their possessions. UN agencies and humanitarian organizations were unable to respond to the needs of tens of thousands of Palestinians whose homes had been destroyed by the Israeli army over the previous four years. 

Infrastructure: Public developments such as roads, airports, and bridges.

In May the Israeli army destroyed some 300 homes and damaged some 270 other buildings in Rafah refugee camp in the Gaza Strip, making nearly 4,000 people homeless in the space of a few days. Several people were trapped in their homes when Israeli army bulldozers began to tear down the houses and had to drill holes in the back walls to escape. Thousands of other residents also fled their homes, fearing imminent destruction. UN schools had to be used as temporary shelters for the homeless. The mass destruction came in the wake of an attack by Palestinian gunmen in which five Israeli soldiers were killed. . . .

Collective punishment, closures and violations of economic and social rights The Israeli army continued to impose stringent restrictions on the movements of Palestinians in the Occupied Territories. Military checkpoints and blockades around Palestinian towns and villages hindered or prevented Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

69

Palestinians

Israeli soldiers prevent a group of Palestinians from passing into the West Bank town of Tulkarem by building blockades. # R EU TER S/ COR BI S.

access to work, education and medical facilities and other crucial services. Restrictions on the movement of Palestinians remained the key cause of high rates of unemployment and poverty. More than half of the Palestinian population lived below the poverty line, with increasing numbers suffering from malnutrition and other health problems.

Reprisal: Retaliation against an enemy.

PalestinianshadtoobtainspecialpermitsfromtheIsraeliarmytomovebetween towns and villages withintheWestBankandwerebarred frommainroads and many secondaryroadswhichwerefreelyusedbyIsraelisettlerslivinginillegalsettlementsin the Occupied Territories. Movement restrictions for Palestinians were routinely increased in reprisal for attacks by Palestinian armed groups and during Jewish holidays. Further restrictions were also imposed on the movement of international human rights and humanitarian workers throughout the Occupied Territories. The Israeli army routinely used excessive and unwarranted force to enforce blockades and movement restrictions. Soldiers frequently fired recklessly towards unarmed Palestinians, ill-treated, humiliated and arbitrarily detained Palestinian men, women and children, and confiscated or damaged

70

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Palestinians

vehicles. Sick people needing to reach medical facilities were often delayed or denied passage at checkpoints. Continued construction by Israel of a fence/wall through the West Bank left an increasing number of Palestinians cut off from health, education and other essential services in nearby towns and villages and from their farm land—a main source of subsistence for Palestinians in this region. Large areas of Palestinian land were encircled by the fence/wall and Palestinians living or owning land in these areas had to obtain special permits from the Israeli army to move in and out of their homes and land. . . .

Detainees and releases Thousands of Palestinians were detained by the Israeli army. Most were released without charge. More than 3,000 were charged with security offences. Trials before military courts often did not meet international standards of fairness, and allegations of torture and ill-treatment of Palestinian detainees were not adequately investigated. Some 1,500 Palestinians were detained administratively without charge or trial during the year. . . .

Violence against women The UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women visited the Occupied Territories in June to gather information on the impact of the occupation and conflict on women. She concluded that the conflict had disproportionately affected Palestinian women in the Occupied Territories, in both the public and private spheres of life. In addition to the women killed or injured by Israeli forces, Palestinian women were particularly negatively affected by the demolition of their homes and restrictions on movement, which hampered their access to health services and education, and by the sharp increase in poverty. The dramatic increase in violence as a result of the conflict also led to an increase in domestic and societal violence, while at the same time there were increased demands on women as carers [caretakers] and providers.

Rapporteur: Investigator.

Disproportionately: Unjustly severe.

Discrimination In August the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination called for the revocation of the Citizenship and Entry into Israel Law, passed the previous year and extended for six months in July. The law institutionalized racial discrimination. It barred Israeli Arab citizens married to Palestinians from the Occupied Territories from living with their spouses in Israel, and forced families to either live apart or leave the country altogether. Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Revocation: Cancellation. Institutionalized: Formalized.

71

Palestinians

AI visits AI delegations visited Israel and the Occupied Territories in May, September and October.

What happened next . . . Following the death of Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat (1929–2004) in November 2004, Mahamoud Abbas was elected Palestinian president and participated in talks with Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon (1928–) in 2005. By late 2005, in an unprecedented and encouraging move, Sharon ordered eight thousand Israeli settlers to move out of the Gaza Strip and four small communities in the West Bank near Jenin. On January 4, 2006, Sharon suffered a massive stroke and fell into a prolonged coma. Ehud Olmert served as acting prime minister in his place. Also in January 2006, Palestinian parliamentary elections were held. Palestinian Arabs elected members of the Hamas Party to a majority of the parliamentary seats. Hamas, considered a terrorist group by many countries, still retained the view that justice and peace could be established in the Middle East only by destroying the state of Israel. The chance for peace seemed greatly reduced unless Hamas moderated its stance and recognized Israel’s right to exist. In late 2006 Hamas had not altered its position against Israel. Countries that had previously sent money to the Palestinian government to support the Palestinian Arabs had halted payment until Hamas moderated its position. The economy of the area was greatly suffering.

Did you know . . .

72



Referring to the Gaza Strip, West Bank, and Golan Heights as ‘‘occupied territories’’ is highly controversial. Palestinian Arabs refer to these territories as unlawfully occupied by Israelis. They characterize Israel as a foreign occupier. Israel on the other hand views the territories as land taken in self-defense during the 1967 war. Israelis believe they have the right to settle the territories.



Much of the world’s oil reserves are found within the borders of Arab countries such as Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq, and the Muslim country of Iran (Iranians are Persian, not Arab, but support the Arab cause because they share the Muslim religion.) These countries support the Palestinian Arab cause. Since many Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Palestinians

Western countries such as the United States, Great Britain, and France depend on Middle East oil for their energy needs, they are forced to give attention to difficulties faced by the Palestinian Arabs even though they overwhelmingly support Israel’s claim of a right to a secure existence. 

Israeli officials frequently place restrictions on movement in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, such as road closures and setting up checkpoints. These restrictions impede Palestinian Arabs access to employment, healthcare, education, and other services. Restrictions contribute to severe poverty, unemployment, and hunger among Palestinian Arabs.

Consider the following . . . 

A conclusion as to whether Arabs or Israelis have a stronger set of claims to the area known as Israel depends in part on one’s own view of the area’s history going back several thousand years. Divide into groups, review historic claims, and debate this most complex topic.



The two basic peace initiatives at the start of the twenty-first century were the Geneva Accord of November 2003 written by representatives of Palestinian Arabs and Israelis and the Road Map to Peace of 2002 initiated by the United States. Research each and comment how each is faring.



In April 2002, Israel began construction of a security barrier, a high wall, to keep Palestinian Arabs intent on causing harm to Israelis from crossing into Israel from the West Bank. Do you think this will provide more security to Israelis? How might this affect Palestinian Arabs who must cross the area for jobs or school?

For More Information B O O KS

Cattan, Henry. The Palestine Question. New York: Croom Helm, 1988. Gelvin, James L. The Israel-Palestine Conflict: One Hundred Years of War. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005. Lesch, Ann M. and Dan Tschirgi. Origins and Development of the Arab-Israeli Conflict. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1998. Wasserstein, Bernard. Israelis and Palestinians: Why do they fight? Can they stop? New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2003. Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

73

Palestinians WEB SIT ES

‘‘Israel/Occupied Territories.’’ Amnesty International’s Human Rights Concerns. http://www.amnestyusa.org/countries/israel_and_occupied_territories/ document.do?id=ar&yr=2005 (accessed on December 12, 2006).

74

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Iraq Excerpt from ‘‘Sectarian Hatred Pulls Apart Iraq’s Mixed Towns’’

Written by Sabrina Tavernise Published in The New York Times, section 1, p. 1, November 20, 2005

‘‘As the hatred between Sunni Arabs and Shi´ıtes hardens and the relentless toll of bombings and assassinations grows, families are leaving their mixed towns and cities for safer areas. . . . ’’

he second largest and fastest growing religion of the world is Islam. Followers of Islam, called Muslims, recognize and submit their lives to the one and only God known as Allah. Muslims believe the angel Gabriel directly relayed the words of God to the prophet Muhammad (570–632), who was thought to have lived a perfect sinless life. There are two main branches of Islam: Sunni and Shia´. Shia´ followers are called Shi´ıtes. Sunnis and Shi´ıtes originally split over who should rightfully succeed Muhammad at his death in 632. Sunni followed Abu Bakr who was Muhammad’s companion, a member of Muhammad’s tribe, but not a family member. Others believed Muhammad had chosen his son-in-law and cousin Ali to succeed him. Ali’s followers became the Party of Ali, called Shia´t Ali.

T

A few decades later in 680, Husayn, one of Ali’s sons and a leader of the Shi´ıtes, was ambushed and killed by Sunnis at Karbala. The roots of prejudice and hatred were firmly sown. This seventh-century separation left an ongoing legacy of prejudice, hatred, and violence between Shi´ıte and Sunni Muslims. Modern Iraq history began at Iraq’s formation in 1920. Britain, which controlled the area after World War I (1914–18), combined three provinces: Basra, the Shi´ıte-dominated land in the southern region of the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers; Baghdad, the Sunni area in the center; and, Mosul to the north, inhabited by the Kurdish people descended from ancient European tribes rather than Arabs. Calling the newly created country Iraq, Britain 75

Iraq

When United States troops invaded Iraq in spring 2003, they drove Sunni leader Saddam Hussein from power. Pictured, a statue of Hussein in Baghdad is destroyed. M IR ROR PI X/ GE TTY I MA GE S.

installed a Sunni king that led to eight decades of Sunni rule. Sunni Saddam Hussein (1937–2006) took over leadership in 1979. Murdering tens of thousands, Saddam brutally discriminated against the majority Shi´ıtes who still lived mostly in south central and southeastern Iraq. Sunnis lived predominantly in and around Baghdad. Saddam gave land to fellow Sunnis to hold their loyalty and protect against Shi´ıtes. Shi´ıtes in search of work came to work for the Sunni landholders. Sometimes these Shi´ıtes managed to acquire land of their own, but most Shi´ıtes lived in poverty, working the land and living in constant fear of Saddam’s security forces. Communities around Baghdad became a mix of Sunni, the most prosperous inhabitants, and poor Shi´ıtes. When United States troops invaded Iraq in spring 2003 as an antiterrorism measure, they drove Hussein from power. Religious hatred between Shi´ıtes and Sunni began to surface. By 2005, Shi´ıtes and Sunni living in integrated towns and neighborhoods feared for their safety. 76

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Iraq

Despite urging of some Shi´ıte and Sunni leaders for restraint, Shi´ıtes were striking against Sunni neighbors and Sunni against Shi´ıte families. Expressions of prejudice were scribbled on walls and distributed in leaflets spread around towns. By late 2005, Shi´ıte and Sunni families were on the move. Between twenty and forty towns around Baghdad were segregating, or separating, into Sunni-only and Shi´ıte-only communities. Likewise, Baghdad neighborhoods were becoming Sunni-only or Shi´ıte-only. The following excerpt, ‘‘Sectarian Hatred Pulls Apart Iraq’s Mixed Towns,’’ published in the November 20, 2005, The New York Times, described the religious prejudice and resulting violence.

Things to remember while reading excerpts from ‘‘Sectarian Hatred Pulls Apart Iraq’s Mixed Towns’’: 

Shi´ıtes, the majority of Muslims in Iraq, had been brutally suppressed by Sunni leadership for eight decades.



While Saddam’s forces had held the Shi´ıte population in tight control, U.S. forces underestimated the deep divide caused by the oppression and did not have a sufficient number of troops to quell the uprising of Shi´ıte against Sunni and Sunni against Shi´ıte.



Although the U.S. military had been training a new Iraqi army and police force, it appeared the new battalions were not mixed. They were largely segregated into either Shi´ıte or Sunni. According to news sources, some young Shi´ıte men openly declared they joined a battalion to make their revenge-taking against Sunni appear lawful.

Excerpt from ‘‘Sectarian Hatred Pulls Apart Iraq’s Mixed Towns’’ BAGHDAD, Iraq, Nov. 19—Abu Noor’s town had become so hostile to Shi´ıtes that his wife had not left the house in a month, his family could no longer go to the medical clinic and mortar shells had been lobbed at the houses of two of his religious leaders. ‘‘I couldn’t open the door and stand in my yard,’’ he said. So when Abu Noor, a Shi´ıte from Tarmiya, a heavily Sunni Arab town north of here, ran into an old friend, a Sunni who faced his own problems in a Shi´ıte district in Baghdad, the two decided to switch houses. They even shared a moving van. Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

77

Iraq

Sectarian: Religious.

Two and a half years after the American invasion, deep divides that have long split Iraqi society have violently burst into full view. As the hatred between Sunni Arabs and Shi´ıtes hardens and the relentless toll of bombings and assassinations grows, families are leaving their mixed towns and cities for safer areas where they will not automatically be targets. In doing so, they are creating increasingly polarized enclaves and redrawing the sectarian map of Iraq, especially in Baghdad and the belt of cities around it. . . .

Sheiks: Respected older men.

In a rough count, about 20 cities and towns around Baghdad are segregating, according to accounts by local sheiks, Iraqi nongovernmental organizations and military officials, and the families themselves.

Polarized enclaves: Divided groups.

Those areas are among the most mixed and the most violent in Iraq— according to the American military, 85 percent of attacks in the country are in four provinces including Baghdad, and two others to its north and west. The volatile sectarian mix is a holdover from the rule of Saddam Hussein, who gave favors to Sunni Arab landowners in the lush farmland around Baghdad to reinforce loyalties and to protect against Shi´ıtes in the south. . . . ‘‘The most violent places are the towns and cities around Baghdad,’’ said Sheik Jalal al-Dien al-Sagheer, a member of Parliament from a religious Shi´ıte party. . . . Carnage: Bloody deaths and injuries.

One result has been carnage on a serious scale. In Tarmiya, a close Shi´ıte friend of Abu Noor who helped pack his furniture and drove it to Baghdad received a letter warning him to leave the town or be killed. Nineteen days later he was shot to death in his carpentry shop in front of his father and brother. In all, at least eight of Abu Noor’s friends and close relatives, including a brother, have been killed since the beginning of 2004. The motives for the attacks are often complicated. The complex webs of tribal affiliations and social status that rule everyday life in Iraq do not always line up as simply as Shi´ıte against Sunni. But increasingly, despite the urging of some Shi´ıte religious leaders and Sunni politicians, the attacks have been. A mostly Sunni Arab fringe is carrying out vicious attacks against civilians, often Shi´ıtes, while Shi´ıte death squads are openly stalking Sunnis for revenge, and the Shi´ıte-dominated government makes regular arrests in Sunni Arab neighborhoods. Expressions of prejudice have been making their way onto walls and into leaflets, too. In Tarmiya, writing was scrawled on the walls of the city’s main streets: ‘‘Get out of here, Badr followers! Traitors! Spies!’’ it said, using a reference to an armed wing of a religious Shi´ıte party. In Madaen, a mixed city south of Baghdad, a list of names appeared on the walls of several municipal buildings in a warning to leave. Many did.

78

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Iraq

Waving tribal flags, a group of Shi´ıtes gathers to protest Sunni attacks against Shi´ıtes that took place in January 2006 in the Sadr City area of Baghdad, Iraq. AP I MA GE S.

In Samarra last fall, leaflets appeared warning in clumsy childish script that Samarra is a Sunni city. ‘‘We thought at first that they were written by kids and that someone would discipline them,’’ said Sheik Hadi al-Gharawi, an imam who left Samarra, north of Baghdad, a few months ago and now lives in Baghdad. ‘‘But later we found they were adults and they were serious.’’ Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

79

Iraq

His nephew, Ahmed Samir al-Gharawi, 15, who moved separately with his family in September, was one of two Shi´ıtes in his high school class in Samarra. In January, classmates were probing to see whether his family had voted in a national election. ‘‘They were joking to find the truth,’’ he said. ‘‘I didn’t tell them.’’

Imams: Prayer leader.

Samarra is a holy place in Shi´ıte Islam with two sacred shrines, and Shi´ıtes have lived there for hundreds of years. Even so, in a pattern similar to that in Tarmiya, Shi´ıte imams were attacked and businesses became targets, Sheik Gharawi said, and Shi´ıtes began to leave. Emad Fadhel, a Shi´ıte business owner who settled there 38 years ago, estimated that 200 to 260 Shi´ıte families lived in the city before 2003, a figure he said he learned while delivering medicine to poor families. Of those, fewer than 20 remain, said Mr. Fadhel, who moved with his family last August, shortly after a hand grenade was thrown at his father.

Feigning: Pretending.

The terror hit Ali Nasir Jabr, a 12-year-old with sad eyes, on Aug. 20, when four men with guns entered his family’s house in Samarra and began remarking about the family’s Shi´ıte identity. Ali, who was feigning sleep on a mat on the floor, said he heard his mother answer that the family had been living in the city for more than 18 years. Then the men shot to death his mother and father, two brothers and a sister. Ali ran to a neighbor’s house to call for help, and he then returned alone to wait for rescue workers.

Mosque: Islamic place of worship.

‘‘I checked them, I kissed them, one by one,’’ Ali said, sitting in a mosque in central Baghdad, his pants cinched tight with a small belt. ‘‘Maybe somebody was still alive.’’ . . . Some Iraqis, despite years of mass killings of Kurds and Shi´ıtes during Mr. Hussein’s rule, still argue that sectarian divides did not exist in Iraq before the American invasion. But scratching just beneath the surface turns up hurt in most Shi´ıte homes. Abu Noor recalls asking a high school teacher in Tarmiya the meaning of the word shroogi, a derogatory term for Shi´ıte. Shi´ıtes tried to hide their last names. . . . These days, sectarian profiling on the part of the government, which is Shi´ıte, runs in reverse, with some people buying fake national identity cards to hide last names that are obviously Sunni Arab. For the people who have stayed in their mixed neighborhoods, life has become circumscribed. In Ur, a neighborhood in Baghdad that is 80 percent Shi´ıte, Wasan Foad, 32, a Sunni Arab, grew finely tuned to the timing of suicide bombings. Mr. Foad recalled feeling people’s eyes on him and hearing whispering in the market against Sunnis after a big bombing in Hilla this winter.

80

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Iraq

An Iraqi girl stands in front of her family’s tent at a refugee camp in Diwaniyah, Iraq, in April 2006. Violence between Shi´ıtes and Sunnis forced thousands of families across Iraq to flee their homes. A P IM AG ES .

‘‘We were like prisoners in our home,’’ said Mr. Foad, who moved this summer with his wife and their three young sons to the majority Sunni neighborhood of Khudra. Migration patterns are different for Sunni Arabs. Threats to them have come less often from anonymous letters than from large-scale arrests by the police and the Iraqi Army, largely Shi´ıte, criticized by Sunnis as arbitrary and unfairly focused on Sunni neighborhoods. Sheik Hussein Ali Mansour alKharaouli, who is associated with the Iraqi Islamic Party, said Sunni families have been moving from Jibelah, Muhawail, Iskandariya and Haswa, all south of Baghdad, to escape arrests. . . .

Anonymous: Unidentified writer of.

The families breathe easier in their new lives. A whole community of Shi´ıtes from Samarra, Tarmiya and other largely Sunni cities is living comfortably in modest houses along the narrow shop-lined streets of Huriya. But there is bitterness. A former officers’ club that Abu Noor helped turn into a makeshift mosque for Shi´ıte prayer services in 2003 has been turned Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

81

Iraq

into a playground, he said. He struggles to keep hard feelings out of his relationship with his Sunni friend. . . . Last week, Abu Noor applied for a job in the new Iraqi Army. It is the way he can legally take revenge, he said. . . .

What happened next . . . By late 2005 and early 2006, U.S. military officials estimated 85 percent of the ongoing violence in Iraq occurred in a region surrounding around Baghdad that included the city and towns to the north, west, and south of Baghdad. Seeking safety, most Shi´ıte families who lived in predominately Sunni towns of Samarra, Tarmiya, Falluja, and Abu Ghraib were moving to Shi´ıte neighborhoods in Baghdad or south to the towns of Madaen, Hilla, and Hut. Sunni families living in Shi´ıte areas were moving to Sunni neighborhoods of Baghdad or to towns north of Baghdad such as Samarra and Tamiya. In early 2006, Iraqis freely elected a permanent government that reflected Iraqi population. Shi´ıtes won a clear majority but about 20 percent of the representatives were Sunni. A constitution was written and approved by the people, but it remained uncertain if it would actually work. When a Shi´ıte shrine was bombed in Samarra in February 2006, major violence between Shi´ıte and Sunni erupted. Even though a U.S. force of 150,000 remained, violence continued with daily killing of Iraqi civilians, soldiers, and U.S. soldiers. Violence and counter-violence made old hatreds more bitter and lessened the likelihood of a united Iraq.

Did you know . . .

82



Following the 1991 Persian Gulf War when a U.S.–led force made up of many nations routed Saddam’s Iraqi forces from oil-rich Kuwait, then U.S. president George H. W. Bush (1924–; served 1989–93) encouraged Iraqi Shi´ıtes to overthrow Saddam. Shi´ıte uprisings occurred in fourteen of Iraq’s eighteen provinces but the United States failed to lend support. Saddam’s Sunni-dominated forces bombed Shi´ıte shrines, houses, and bazaars, and slaughtered tens of thousands of Shi´ıtes.



After the 2003 U.S. invasion and toppling of Saddam, Shi´ıtes enthusiastically embraced their new freedom. They renamed streets, bridges, and public gathering places after Shi´ıte heroes. Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Iraq

They again performed public religious rituals banned by Saddam. For example, Shi´ıte men paraded through streets beating their backs with chains, a ritual symbolizing the prophet Ali’s suffering. The Shi´ıtes again publicly commemorated their holiest day of the year, Ashoura. They crowded into Najaf and Karbala, the Shi´ıtes’ most holy cities. 

Although Shi´ıte Muslims are in the majority in Iraq and neighboring Iran, worldwide the overwhelming majority are Sunni, between 85 and 90 percent.

Consider the following . . . 

In the excerpt, fifteen year-old high school student Ahmed Samir al-Gharawi, a Shi´ıte, was approached about his family voting or not voting in a recent election. Why do you think classmates tried to find out voting information? Why did he respond as he did?



Consider the situation described in the excerpt of twelve year-old Ali Nasir Jabr. Consider different scenarios of how the murders of his family in his presence might affect him in the future.

For More Information B O O KS

Esposito, John L. Oxford History of Islam. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999. Lapidus, Ira M. A History of Islamic Societies. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2002. Peters, Francis E. Muhammad and the Origins of Islam. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1994. PE RIODIC AL S

Tavernise, Sabrina. ‘‘Sectarian Hatred Pulls Apart Iraq’s Mixed Towns.’’ New York Times, Section 1, page 1, November 20, 2005. WEB SIT ES

Human Rights Watch. http://www.hrw.org/ (accessed on December 12, 2006). ‘‘Iraq.’’ CIA World Factbook. https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/ geos/iz.html (accessed on December 12, 2006).

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

83

4

Racial Prejudice

very society organizes around a set of beliefs, values, and behaviors. Prejudices play a major part in shaping these beliefs and the resulting behavior that leads to unequal treatment among various groups within the society. Prejudices are negative perceptions of and attitudes toward certain individuals or groups. Social inequalities are driven primarily by the prejudices of a society, not by actual differences in the natural abilities of the people. Through time, these beliefs shaped by prejudices become deeply rooted and widely shared.

E

John Howard Griffin 89 Multiracial 103

However, prejudices are at times based on certain natural or physical qualities such as skin color, gender, or age. These physical qualities are then used to distinguish ‘‘different’’ groups. Eventually, through generations, prejudicial beliefs maintaining that one social group distinguished by certain physical traits is biologically or mentally better than another group become widely accepted and go unquestioned. These deeply ingrained beliefs make differences among people seem natural and shape day-to-day life experiences. In the United States, skin color is a key natural or biological trait used to shape social beliefs and create different social groups. Prejudices based on skin color greatly influence social relationships between these groups that are called races. Racial prejudices based on skin color have a long history in North America. Europeans already had an existing prejudice against dark skin color prior to their colonization of North America in the seventeenth century. They associated dark skin with filth, evil, and uncivilized behavior based on their experiences around slaves brought from Africa early in history. By the late seventeenth century, dark-skinned people were brought to America as part of the slave trade. At that time, European colonists began shipping black Africans to North America. Slaves provided a cheap supply of much-needed labor to work the untamed land, transforming forests into agricultural fields and tending the resulting crops. A forced immigration (leaving one country and settling in another) 85

Racial Prejudice

of black Africans lasted into the early nineteenth century. In 1808, the relatively new U.S. government banned importation of slaves, but not the use of them on plantations. Laws based on racial prejudice were created as soon as blacks arrived in America. For example, colonial laws commonly prohibited intermarriage between whites and blacks. Slaves were considered property, not free human beings, and were thus not allowed to vote or own land. Throughout the eighteenth century, arguments concerning the inferiority of blacks increased as slavery persisted. The Founding Fathers (those people who took an active role in the creation and early development of the United States, including the signing of the 1776 Declaration of Independence and drafting of the U.S. Constitution at the 1787 Constitutional Convention), in writing the U.S. Constitution in the summer of 1787, adopted a formula for census taking, or counting the number of people in each state. This issue was important because the census determined the amount of representation each state would have in the new U.S. House of Representatives. A black slave would be counted as three-fifths of a person. Even Thomas Jefferson (1743–1826), who wrote in the Declaration of Independence eleven years earlier that ‘‘all men are created equal,’’ owned 150 slaves on his Virginia plantation and believed in the biological inferiority of blacks. These historical patterns of race relations greatly influenced how people in America through time perceived others and interacted with them. These patterns of behavior became entrenched, creating social standards people were expected to live by. Blacks were stereotyped as weaker, less able, and less valuable than whites. The American Civil War (1861–65) brought an end to slavery. However, in the American South, leaders immediately replaced slavery with Black Codes (laws restricting certain activities by blacks). Black Codes were replaced with Jim Crow laws (laws separating blacks from whites, a concept called segregation). By the twentieth century, racial prejudices shaped every aspect of U.S. society. As in colonial times, these prejudices were institutionalized—captured in laws enforcing such practices as racial segregation. These institutionalized prejudices lasted through the 1950s until outlawed by courts and Congress. Through these prejudicial measures such as segregation, whites in society maintained the privileges and elevated social status they long enjoyed by blocking opportunities for blacks. The more serious barriers created by racial prejudice involved economic opportunity and healthcare. Black Americans traditionally 86

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Racial Prejudice

suffered from limited opportunity to find well-paying jobs, decent housing, and opportunities for economic advancement and education. Even bank loans for businesses or homes were harder for blacks to obtain. As a result, blacks as a group following World War II continued to have one of the highest rates of poverty among racial or ethnic groups in America. Black Americans also had less access to healthcare. As a result, they suffered from poorer health and higher rates of preventable deaths. Poverty leading to homelessness and overcrowded housing contributed greatly to these health issues. The first excerpt in this chapter is from an award-winning book about race relations in America in 1959. Black Like Me, written by John Howard Griffin, is considered an ‘‘autobiographical memoir’’ since it describes the author’s real experiences and opinions. Griffin dramatizes the importance of race in establishing a person’s identity in U.S. society—skin color determines a person’s place in society and opportunities for educational, financial, and social improvement. The second excerpt, from Of Many Colors: Portraits of Multiracial Families, focuses on persons who are offspring of one black parent and one white parent. Throughout the twentieth century, biracial people— known as mulattos—seemed caught in an identity crisis because they felt they fit in with neither blacks nor whites. By the twenty-first century, mulatto young people were speaking out about their biracial heritage and helping to bridge black/white uncertainties.

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

87

John Howard Griffin Excerpt from Black Like Me

Published in 1961

‘‘All the courtesies in the world do not cover up the one vital and massive discourtesy—that the Negro is treated not even as a second-class citizen, but as a tenth-class one.’’

n the book Black Like Me, white author John Howard Griffin dramatically describes the crushing effects of racism on people’s lives in the United States. Griffin temporarily transformed himself into a black man for almost two months. Through this exceptional experiment, his true story highlights just how separate the two worlds of whites and blacks actually were in 1959—living in different parts of towns, held to different rules of behavior, and enjoying different educational and job opportunities. Though fully expecting differences, Griffin found the extent of differences shocking. Despite being well-dressed and articulate, Griffin fails to find a job during his journey as a black man through the American South.

I

Griffin was born in Dallas, Texas, and raised in a region where local laws, referred to as Jim Crow Laws, enforced separation of whites and people of color in almost all aspects of life. For a short time during his youth, Griffin lived and attended school in France. He learned that the French did not have the same racial attitudes as Americans. The gross unfairness of such prejudiced attitudes toward black Americans led Griffin to dedicate his life to combating racial prejudice. By 1959, Griffin was increasingly dismayed with the slow progress in ending racial discrimination (treating groups of people differently) in the nation, particularly in the South. At the age of thirty-nine, he decided to attempt a radical experiment aimed toward exploring the world of black 89

John Howard Griffin

Americans. To better understand what life was like for blacks, his plan was to undergo medical treatment to temporarily change his skin color and pose as a black man. Griffin began his dermatological (skin) treatments on October 28, 1959, in New Orleans. The treatment involved exposure to ultraviolet light, oral medications, and skin dyes while staying at a friend’s home. As he began treatments, he ate at a fancy outdoor restaurant and wondered how he would be treated with different skin color. Griffin then shaved his head and used a stain to further darken his skin. Despite changing skin color, Griffin decided to not change his identity otherwise. He kept the same name and occupation as a writer. In final preparation for his experience, Griffin met a man named Sterling Williams, a shoe shiner, to serve as his guide into the black community of New Orleans.

John Howard Griffin. # BE TTM AN N/C OR BI S.

As he ventured out into the world as a black man, Griffin described the difficulties in finding food and shelter, finding public restrooms and drinking fountains, riding a bus, sitting on a park bench, and cashing a check. He found these experiences terribly humiliating. Beyond that, he was subjected to the unhealthy conditions of ghetto (an impoverished, crowded neighborhood) life and constant threat of violence from whites. As a black person, he also suffered from the constant silent hateful stares, and always being called ‘‘boy.’’ He had to ride toward the rear of buses and trolleys, could no longer order drinks at the soda fountain of drugstores, and had to stay in hotel rooms that were small and filthy. Though already well aware of racial prejudice in America, Griffin was still stunned by its severity. It seemed he heard the derogatory, offensive word ‘‘nigger’’ aimed at him from every direction while out in public places. Whites expressing their prejudices constantly occurred everywhere. After two weeks of unsuccessful job hunting in New Orleans, Griffin struck out on a bus to the Deep South of Mississippi and Alabama, an area with an even greater reputation for white hostility toward blacks. During routine bus stops along the road to Hattiesburg, Mississippi, Griffin learned that blacks were not allowed off the bus like whites to

90

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

John Howard Griffin

Jim Crow Laws Race has always been central to American laws. Prior to the Civil War, most blacks were slaves. In legal terms, they were considered property, not humans. Slaves could not bring lawsuits, marry, vote, enter into business contracts, or testify in court except against another slave. Immediately following the Civil War in 1865, Southern states used Black Codes to maintain white supremacy by limiting the rights of the newly freed slaves. Many northern states had Black Codes from the early 1800s. The Black Codes denied freed slaves the right to vote, to possess any form of weapon, and to leave a job and move elsewhere. They were considered servants now instead of slaves. Disobeying a Black Code could lead to imprisonment or whippings. Soon thrown out by the temporary Southern governments established immediately after the war, the Codes were followed in the 1890s by Jim Crow laws, which strictly enforced public racial segregation (keeping the races separate) in almost every aspect of public life. By 1915, all Southern states had some form of these Jim Crow laws. The laws varied from one state to another, but their primary thrust was to regulate separate use of water fountains, public transportation, rest rooms, and other public facilities by whites and blacks. They were called Jim Crow laws after a racist fictional character who was popular in America in the early 1800s. The character was a white person with blackened face depicting an uneducated, poor rural black person. Jim Crow laws discriminated against blacks in many ways. For example, they limited the ability of blacks to vote in elections by charging fees, called poll taxes, and applying literacy (reading and writing) tests that were not required of whites. Blacks were also barred from buying homes in certain neighborhoods or areas. A major U.S. Supreme Court decision in 1896 gave support to Jim Crow laws. The Court finally

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

began striking down such laws about twenty years later. Nonetheless, Jim Crow laws remained in effect in the South into the 1950s. In 1954, the U.S. Supreme Court issued the landmark Brown v. Board of Education decision. In the case, a lawsuit challenged a local school board decision in Topeka, Kansas, that denied black student Linda Brown, a third-grader, from attending the all-white public school, which was the school nearest her home. Several other similar instances had occurred in other states, and they were all combined into a single Supreme Court case. The Brown decision stated that racially segregated public schools were illegal. This ruling ended the legal separation of the races in public elementary schools. By mid-1960s, the Jim Crow laws enforcing racial segregation were largely dismantled. However, the legacy of segregation persisted into the twenty-first century through segregationist attitudes and social customs that had been a part of American society for generations. Blacks still found inequality in such things as job and educational opportunities. Certain unwritten social expectations accompanied Jim Crow laws. For example, a black man could not extend his hand to shake a white man’s hand, nor could a black man make eyecontact with a white woman. A black person was expected to refer to whites as ‘‘Mr.,’’ ‘‘Sir,’’ or ‘‘Ma’am,’’ and a black American had to ride in the back of buses or trucks that were also carrying whites. Penalties for violating these rules of behavior could be swift and brutal, including death by lynching. The event that sparked the Civil Rights Movement—Rosa Parks’s (1913–2005) refusal to move to the back of a bus—was an act of civil disobedience against a Jim Crow busing law. Owing to the brave actions of Parks and many others, by the late twentieth century numerous laws and court rulings guaranteed minorities equal access to opportunities as well as equal protection under the laws.

91

John Howard Griffin

stretch and go to a rest room. Upon arrival in Hattiesburg and while walking along a sidewalk, a car of young white men yelled obscenities and threw a tangerine at him. During his journey through Mississippi and Alabama, Griffin discovered a defeated population of black Americans who displayed a sense of hopelessness. An exception was in Montgomery, Alabama, where black leaders were giving the local people hope and energy to force social change. They refused to acknowledge the legitimacy of the segregationist laws and other injustices. They also refused to be provoked by aggressive white behavior toward them. They would spark the civil rights movement that grew into a national effort to gain equal rights for minorities in the nation. By the early 1960s social and legal barriers based on racial prejudice began breaking down. After several weeks of posing as a black man, Griffin briefly stopped taking his medication, and his skin color lightened. Alternating his skin color daily, he posed as a white man and a black man in the same places to observe the different treatment he received. Griffin was shocked once more by the dramatic change in how he was treated when his skin color changed. As a white man, whites were friendly and courteous, blacks suspicious and distrustful. As a white man, he again had easy access to stores, restaurants, and rest rooms. Griffin wore the same clothes as both a white and black man; they were considered shabby for a white man and well-dressed for a black man. During the first week of December, Griffin journeyed to Georgia, still posing as a black man. In Atlanta, he was pleased to discover the progressive attitude toward race relations owing largely to the prominent black leaders of the area and newspapers supportive of justice for blacks. Following his brief stay in Atlanta, Griffin returned to New Orleans as a black man with photographer Don Rutledge to visually document his early days of the experiment. Interestingly, people showed much suspicion around him, wondering why a white photographer would ever want to take photographs of a black person. Overall through his journey, Griffin found quiet desperation in New Orleans, hopelessness and rebellion in Mississippi and Alabama, determination in Montgomery, Alabama, and hope in Atlanta. He captured this experience in his 1961 book Black Like Me.

Things to remember while reading the excerpt from Black Like Me: 

92

The main theme of the book is racial prejudice and segregation— how whites and blacks treat each other differently with little Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

John Howard Griffin

College students picketing against racial segregation in Charleston, West Virginia, in 1961, the height of the civil rights movement in the United States. # B ETT MA NN/ COR BI S.

understanding of each other. However, another important theme is the human capacity for love—that good will survive, even when surrounded by evil such as prejudice. 

The book was published at the height of the civil rights movement in the United States, a time of great turbulence in American black communities. The book added to the turbulence as many whites despised its exposure of racism in the South and despised its author.



Griffin is the only significant character in the book, a true story written in a diary form. He did not begin writing the book until after completing his experiment.

Excerpt from Black Like Me NOVEMBER 7. . . . I had my last visit with the doctor in the morning. The treatment had not worked as rapidly or completely as we had hoped, but I had a dark Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

93

John Howard Griffin

Negro: black person of African heritage.

undercoating of pigment which I could touch up perfectly with stain. We decided I must shave my head, since I had no curl. The dosage was established and the darkness would increase as time passed. From there, I was on my own. The doctor showed much doubt and perhaps regret that he had ever cooperated with me in this transformation. . . . I did not look into the mirror until I finished dressing and had packed my duffel bags. Turning off all the lights, I went into the bathroom and closed the door. I stood in the darkness before the mirror, my hand on the light switch. I forced myself to flick it on. In the flood of light against the white tile, the face and shoulders of a stranger—a fierce, bald, very dark Negro—glared at me from the glass. He in no way resembled me. The transformation was total and shocking. I had expected to see myself disguised, but this was something else. I was imprisoned in the flesh of an utter stranger, an unsympathetic one with whom I felt no kinship. . . . NOVEMBER 8. . . .

Skid row derelict: A homeless person living in an impoverished part of town.

Separate facilities: Separate public facilities, such as rest rooms, that different races were required by local law to use.

94

I caught the bus into town, choosing a seat halfway to the rear. As we neared Canal, the car began to fill with whites. Unless they could find a place to themselves or beside another white, they stood in the aisle. A middle-aged woman with stringy gray hair stood near my seat. She wore a clean but faded print house dress. . . . Her face looked tired and I felt uncomfortable. As she staggered with the bus’s movement my lack of gallantry tormented me. I half rose from my seat to give it to her, but Negroes behind me frowned disapproval. I realized I was ‘‘going against the race’’ . . . I slumped back under the intensity of their stares. . . . I learned a strange thing—that in a jumble of unintelligible talk, the word ‘‘nigger’’ leaps out with electric clarity. You always hear it and always it stings. And it always casts the person using it into a category of brute ignorance. . . . I left the bus on Canal Street. Other Negroes aboard eyed me not with anger, as I had expected, but rather with astonishment that any black man could be so stupid. . . . I hurried to the alley and walked down it into the gloom of a cluttered courtyard. A few Negroes, who could not enter the white bar, were served from the back. They stood around or sat at wooden tables drinking. I saw a sign that read GENTLEMEN and was almost at the door when several voices shouted. ‘‘Hey! You can’t go in there. Hey!’’ I turned back toward them, astonished that even among skid row derelict joints they had ‘‘separate facilities.’’ Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

John Howard Griffin

‘‘Where do I go?’’ I asked. ‘‘Clean on back there to the back,’’ a large drunk Negro said, pointing with a wild swinging gesture that almost made him lose his balance. I went another fifty feet down the alley and stepped into the wooden structure. It was oddly clean. I latched the door with a hook that scarcely held. . . . I began to get thirsty and asked Sterling [Sterling Williams, a black shoeshine man who helped guide Griffin into the black community of New Orleans] where I could find a drink. ‘‘You’ve got to plan ahead now,’’ he said. ‘‘You can’t do like you used to when you were a white man. You can’t just walk in anyplace and ask for a drink or use the restroom. There’s a Negro cafe´ over in the French Market about two blocks up. They got a fountain in there where you can drink. The nearest toilet’s the one you just came from. . . . ’’ Joe [a black acquaintance of Griffin’s] began to cook our lunch on the sidewalk. He put paper and kindling from an orange crate into a gallon can and set it afire. When the flames had reduced to coals, he placed a bent coat hanger over the top as a grill and set a pan on it to heat. He squatted and stirred with a spoon. I learned it was a mixture of coon, turnips and rice, seasoned with thyme, bay leaf and green peppers. Joe had cooked it at home the night before and brought it in a milk carton. When it was heated through, Joe served Sterling and me portions in cut-down milk cartons. He ate directly from the pan. It was good, despite the odor of rot that smoked up from it. . . .

Coon: Shortened reference to raccoon.

NOVEMBER 10–12 Two days of incessant walking, mostly looking for jobs. I wanted to discover what sort of work an educated Negro, nicely dressed, could find. I met no rebuffs, only gentleness when they informed me they could not use my services as typist, bookkeeper, etc. . . . The next morning I went to the Y cafe´ next door for breakfast of grits and eggs. The elderly gentleman who ran the cafe´ soon had me talking—or rather listening. He foresaw a new day for the race. Great strides had been made, but greater ones were to be made still. I told him of my unsuccessful job-hunting. He said it was all part of the pattern of economics—economic injustice. ‘‘You take a young white boy. He can go through school and college with a real incentive. He knows he can make good money in any profession when he gets out. But can a Negro—in the South? No, I’ve seen many make brilliant grades in college. And yet when they come home in the summers to earn a little money, they have to do the most menial work. And even when they graduate it’s a long hard pull. Most take postal jobs, or preaching or teaching jobs. This is the cream. What about the others, Mr. Griffin? A man knows no matter how hard he works, he’s never going to quite manage . . . taxes and prices eat up more than he can earn. He can’t see how he’ll ever Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Y: YMCA facility near where Griffin was staying.

Menial: Undignified or lowly. This is the cream: Top jobs available to educated blacks.

95

John Howard Griffin

have a wife and children. The economic structure just doesn’t permit it unless he’s prepared to live down in poverty and have his wife work too. That’s part of it. Our people aren’t educated because they either can’t afford it or else they know education won’t earn them the jobs it would a white man. Any kind of family life, any decent standard of living seems impossible from the outset. So a lot of them, without even understanding the cause, just give up. . . . ’’ NOVEMBER 14 After a week of wearying rejection, the newness had worn off. My first vague, favorable impression that it was not as bad as I had thought it would be came from courtesies of the whites toward the Negro in New Orleans. But this was superficial. All the courtesies in the world do not cover up the one vital and massive discourtesy—that the Negro is treated not even as a second-class citizen, but as a tenth-class one. His day-to-day living is a reminder of his inferior status. He does not become calloused to these things—the polite rebuffs when he seeks better employment; hearing himself referred to as nigger, coon, jigaboo; having to bypass available restroom facilities or eating facilities to find one specified for him. Each new reminder strikes at the raw spot, deepens the wound. . . .

Pigmentation: Skin coloration.

Contrive: Make up; develop through a scheme.

The Negro’s only salvation from complete despair lies in his belief, the old belief of his forefathers, that these things are not directed against him personally, but against his race, his pigmentation. . . . But at the time of the rebuff, even when the rebuff is impersonal, such as holding his bladder until he can find a ‘‘Colored’’ sign, the Negro cannot rationalize. He feels it personally and it burns him. It gives him a view of the white man that the white man can . . . contrive to arrange life so that it destroys the Negro’s sense of personal value, degrades his human dignity, deadens the fibers of his being. . . . I decided it was time to go into that state [Mississippi] so dreaded by Negroes. . . . In the colored waiting room, which was not labeled as such, but rather as ´ presumably because of interstate travel regulations, I took COLORED CAFE, the last empty seat. The room was crowded with glum faces, faces dead to all enthusiasm, faces of people waiting. . . . They called the bus. We filed out into the high-roofed garage and stood in line, the Negroes to the rear, the whites to the front. Buses idled their motors, filling the air with a stifling odor of exhaust fume. . . . It was late dusk when the bus pulled into some little town for a stop. ‘‘We get about ten minutes here,’’ Bill [fellow bus rider] said. ‘‘Let’s get off and stretch our legs. They’ve got a men’s room here if you need to go’’. . . .

96

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

John Howard Griffin

While traveling by bus and posing as a black man, John Howard Griffin was allowed into the ‘‘colored’’ waiting room only. White passengers waited for the bus in the ‘‘whites only’’ waiting room. TH E LI BR ARY OF C ON GRE SS .

The whites rose and ambled off. Bill and I led the Negroes toward the door. As soon as he saw us, the driver blocked our way. . . . ‘‘Where do you think you’re going?’’ he asked, his heavy cheeks quivering with each word. ‘‘I’d like to go to the rest room.’’ I smiled and moved to step down. He tightened his grip on the door facings and shouldered in close to block me. ‘‘Does your ticket say for you to get off here?’’ he asked. ‘‘No sir, but the others—’’ ‘‘Then you get . . . back in your seat and don’t you move till we get to Hattiesburg,’’ he commanded. . . . ‘‘I can’t be bothered rounding up all you people when we get ready to go’’. . . . We turned like a small herd of cattle and drifted back to our seats. The others grumbled about how unfair it was. The large woman was Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

97

John Howard Griffin

Dirty linen: Local social injustices that bring embarrassment when exposed to the world. Monochrome: Single color.

apologetic, as though it embarrassed her for a stranger to see Mississippi’s dirty linen. . . . I sat in the monochrome gloom of dusk, scarcely believing that in this year of freedom any man could deprive another of anything so basic as the need to quench thirst or use the rest room. There was nothing of the feel of America here. It was rather some strange country suspended in ugliness. Tension hung in the air, a continual threat, even though you could not put your finger on it. . . . We arrived at Hattiesburg around eight thirty. Most of the Negroes hurried to the rest rooms. . . . As I walked down Mobile Street, a car full of while men and boys sped past. They yelled obscenities at me. A Satsuma (tangerine) flew past my head and broke against a building. The street was loud and raw, with tension as thick as fog. . . . Another car roared down the street, and the street was suddenly deserted, but the Negroes appeared again shortly. I sought refuge in a Negro drugstore and drank milk shakes as an excuse to stay there. . . .

Persecuted: Punished for having a certain belief.

I knew of one white man in Hattiesburg to whom I might turn for help— a newspaperman, P. D. East. But I hesitated to call him. He has been so persecuted for seeking justice in race relations I was afraid my presence anywhere near him might further jeopardize him. . . . We discussed [after Griffin later returned to visit his friend P. D.] our experiences until late in the night. . . .

de jure law: Written law.

Mortal: Human.

Cynicism: Distrust of human behavior.

He pointed out that these [local laws enforcing segregation] were simply the old story of legalized injustice. The local state legislature (in opposition to constitutional law), insisted that whatever it decided was de jure law, a position that wipes out the distinction between true and false judgments. . . . A law is not good merely because the legislature wills it, but the legislature has the mortal duty to will only that which is good. This tendency to make laws that are convenient or advantageous rather than right has mushroomed in Southern legislatures. It has produced laws of cynicism scarcely believable in a civilized society. Even when these have been tested and thrown out as illegal by superior courts, they have in some instances continued to be enforced. . . .

What happened next . . . Griffin’s two-month journey through the South posing as a black man not only highlighted to him on a personal level the intensity of racial 98

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

John Howard Griffin

prejudice against blacks, but greatly impressed him with the solidarity and support found among black Americans. After returning to New Orleans in December, Griffin stopped taking his medication. With the return of his white skin color, Griffin returned to his Texas home and began writing about his experiences. Griffin’s article appeared in the March 1960 issue of Sepia, a black-owned magazine established in 1947 in Ft. Worth, Texas, that focuses on issues and achievements of black Americans. Griffin’s story attracted considerable public attention. Following publication of the article, numerous prominent television programs and newsmagazines sought Griffin for interviews. His story spread around the world and congratulations on his exposure of racial prejudice poured in. By midJune 1960, Griffin had received around six thousand letters. All but nine were supportive of his social experiment and resulting article. However, in his hometown of Mansfield, open hostility against Griffin and his family came from white hate groups and others. He was burned in effigy (crude figure representative of a hated person), with the effigy painted half white and half black, on Main Street while police simply stood by and watched. A cross was burned in the schoolyard of a nearby black school, an action commonly taken by white supremacist (those who believe in the superiority of the white race over all others) terror groups. By August 1960, Griffin moved his family out of the United States and into Mexico for their safety. There they stayed for several years before returning to Texas. He also issued a public plea for racial tolerance in the nation. Griffin’s book, published in November 1961, drew many published reviews. One book reviewer called the experiment so simple in design that it was genius. Others found Griffin’s observations about life in America unsettling. Another reviewer claimed it was more effective than any scientific study on race. Black Like Me was considered by many scholars and activists to be the most important book on racism in America in the twentieth century. In the mid-1960s, the federal government established a number of social programs to aid blacks and others caught in a cycle of poverty. The programs included creation of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to build low-income housing and provide rent assistance to those in need. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibited discrimination in employment and banned segregation in public facilities even if privately owned and operated. This included restaurants, hotels, Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

99

John Howard Griffin

stores, workplaces, and schools. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 struck down remaining barriers, such as poll taxes and literacy tests, imposed by states, allowing black Americans to more easily vote in elections. Following publication of his book, Griffin continued efforts to improve the living conditions of blacks in America. Griffin concluded that only love and tolerance could change society, not the violence promoted by militant black leaders such as Malcolm X (1925–1965). Griffin received a number of awards. In 1960, he received the National Council of Negro Women Award, and in 1964 the Pope John XIII (d. 972) Pacen in Terris Peace and Freedom Award, which he shared with President John F. Kennedy (1917–1963; served 1961–63).

Did you know . . . 

Black Like Me remained required reading in thousands of high schools and colleges in the early twenty-first century.



As a white man, Griffin observed that white people treated him with respect and blacks treated him with suspicion and fear. As a black man, blacks were generous and warm while whites were hostile and looked down at him. Griffin concluded that the two races do not understand each other.



Race relations in Texas continued to be an issue at the end of the twentieth century, as demonstrated by the brutal murder of James Byrd (1949–1998) who was dragged to death behind a pickup truck by three young white supremacists. Two of the murderers received death sentences and the third received a sentence of life in prison.



By the early twenty-first century, more than ten million copies of Black Like Me had been sold in the United States, Canada, Britain, Europe, and Japan.

Consider the following . . .

100



The terrorist attacks on New York City and Washington, D.C., in September 2001 brought forward a clash of cultures in their aftermath. What does the book Black Like Me tell us about racial prejudice and intolerance in an era of international terrorism?



Some critics of Griffin’s experiment claimed he could never really experience the extent of problems facing blacks. In what ways might this be true? Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

John Howard Griffin



Griffin criticized newspapers for perpetuating prejudices through stereotypes portrayed in news articles. Look up newspapers from 1959 in the library and see how black Americans are portrayed. What terms are used for blacks? How many articles mention blacks? Do they describe personal achievements of blacks or simply problems? Do the papers’ editorials support racial segregation?



How have social conditions and attitudes changed toward black Americans since 1959? In what ways do blacks still experience prejudice in American society?

For More Information B O O KS

Fremon, David K. The Jim Crow Laws and Racism in American History. Berkeley Heights, NJ: Enslow Publishers, 2000. Griffin, John Howard. Black Like Me. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1961. Griffin, John Howard. Scattered Shadows: A Memoir of Blindness and Vision. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2004. Irons, Peter. Jim Crow’s Children: The Broken Promise of the Brown Decision. New York: Viking, 2002. WEB SIT ES

Davis, Ronald L. F. ‘‘Resisting Jim Crow: An In-Depth Essay.’’ The History of Jim Crow. http://www.jimcrowhistory.org/history/resisting2.htm (accessed on December 12, 2006).

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

101

Multiracial Excerpt from Of Many Colors: Portraits of Multiracial Families

Interviews by Peggy Gilliespie Published in 1994

‘‘Racism has to do with ideas people have in their head. It didn’t matter if my skin was lighter than their skin, I could still be discriminated against. Racism is very confusing!’’

child of one white parent and one black parent is called a mulatto. A mulatto may have a very light complexion and appear white, or have darker skin and appear black. Through U.S. history, the mulatto has never fit neatly into America’s racial categories. America’s third president and a slave owner, Thomas Jefferson (1743–1826; served 1801–09), tried to make a scientific-like formula for mulattos. According to Jefferson’s formula, one-fourth African American blood and any white blood made a mulatto. A more strict formula, the ‘‘one drop’’ rule, became commonplace in the South, where slavery was vital to working the land in support of the plantation (large Southern farms with more than one hundred slaves) economies of the South. Crops, such as cotton, grown by plantations were the basis of the Southern economy and exported to the North and abroad. If a person had as much as one drop of black blood then he was considered black. By the one drop rule, mulattos were black. This enabled slave owners to hold in slavery even persons who were much more white than black. It was common, but not discussed, that a considerable number of slaves’ children were offspring of white owners and bosses and black slave women. These offspring were considered slaves. Long after slavery ended and well into the twentieth century, the one drop rule continued to affect American society. In 1896,

A

103

Multiracial

Changing U.S. Census Categories In the first U.S. Census count conducted in 1790, people had to choose between the categories of free white male, free white female, or other. The other category included free blacks, slaves, and Native Americans. By 1890, the census had White, Black, Mulatto (one-half black), Quadroon (one-fourth black), Octoroon (one-eighth black), Chinese, Japanese, and Native American. In the 1910 census, anyone with one drop of black blood, that is with any known black ancestry at all, was considered black. Hence, the 1910 census form no longer listed the categories of Mulatto, Quadroon, or Octoroon. By 1970, the increasing diversity of the U.S. population was reflected by the census

categories: White, Black, Asian/Pacific Islander, American Indian/Eskimo/Aleut, or Other. These same categories were used in 1980 and 1990. However, in 1990 the inadequacy of these categories was readily apparent as ten million people checked Other. Taking advantage of a self-identification option, Americans wrote in almost three hundred races, six hundred Native American tribes, seventy Hispanic groups, and many different combinations of mixed ancestry. The 2000 Census was adjusted and reflected fifteen categories, including three categories of other: Other Asian; other Pacific Islander; and, some other race. The person was asked to fill in the race in a blank. An individual could mark as many categories as applied.

Homer Plessy (1862–1925) was, according to U.S. census (a regular official count of people in a country by the government) categories of the time, an octoroon. An octoroon had one-eighth black blood or one great-grandparent who was black. Because Plessy was oneeighth black, he was denied a seat in the section of a train reserved for whites. Plessy sued and the case went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court ruled that the one drop rule was correct and issued its infamous decision supporting racial segregation, a ruling that stood for decades. Those persons who had any black ancestry were considered black. The one drop rule did not go both ways. If a person had one drop of white blood, that never made him white. In ruling against Plessy, the Court upheld the Jim Crow laws that were becoming popular in the South at the time, enforcing segregation in railway car accommodations and other public places on the condition that the facilities were of equal quality. This decision became known as the ‘‘separate but equal’’ principle—the cornerstone of Jim Crow laws. In the 1920s, at least thirty-eight states had miscegenation (sexual relations between members of different races) laws. These laws prohibited 104

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Multiracial

anyone with a single drop of Negro blood from marrying a white. By the 1950s, miscegenation laws still existed in at least sixteen states. Wisdom at the time projected that children of black and white marriages—mulattos—would live their lives confused and maladjusted. In 1958, a white man, Richard Loving, married Mildred Jeter, a black woman. They made their home in Virginia, where Richard had grown up. Richard was arrested for violating Virginia’s anti-miscegenation law and sentenced to five years in prison. His sentence was suspended on the condition that he and Mildred leave the state and stay away for twenty-five years. The Lovings, who moved to nearby Washington, D.C., sued the state of Virginia. Their case went to the U.S. Supreme Court. It was decided in the Lovings’ favor in 1967. The Court decision ended all state anti-miscegenation laws. America’s long history of not accepting mixedrace families took another turn in the 1960s and 1970s, an era of civil rights legislation and black power movements. Because of a great need for adoptive homes for black and mixed-race children, white families began adopting these babies and children. Black organizations, focusing on the development of a positive black identity, contended white families were not able to raise adopted black children to be secure in their racial identity. The National Association of Black Social Workers passed a resolution in 1972 that only black families be allowed to adopt black and biracial children. By the late 1980s, thirty-five states had laws banning white families from adopting black children. These laws were finally abandoned in 1996, when President Bill Clinton (1946–; served 1993–2001) signed legislation eliminating any law that prohibited adoption on the basis of race. At that time, black leaders rejoiced over the end of all legislation in the United States that banned interracial marriage or adoption.

A young man displays the racist slogan ‘‘Stop this multiracial madness’’ on his forehead despite the fact that, by 2000, America’s population was an increasingly racially diverse population. # H ULT ON -DE UTS CH C OLL EC TIO N/ COR BI S.

The following excerpt, taken from Of Many Colors: Portraits of Multiracial Families, are written by young mulattos who share insightful stories of growing up in a black and white family. Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

105

Multiracial

Things to remember while reading the excerpt from Of Many Colors: Portraits of Multiracial Families: 

Despite the many difficulties faced, research has shown biracial people often have a great capacity to adapt and adjust within their communities.



Increasingly outspoken, offspring of biracial marriages are playing a special role in society and their communities—bridging gaps among mixed-race people with communication and cooperation.



One of the most frequently asked questions of adults entering into mixed race marriages is, what about the children? Concerns included whether the children would look at themselves as black or white and if they grow up feeling like victims of an intolerant American society, not knowing where they fit in, or grow up secure in their uniqueness. The following excerpts from three young adults, each with one black and one white parent, give insight into the question’s answer.

Excerpt from Of Many Colors: Portraits of Multiracial Families GABE From nursery school to about fourth grade, race and appearance wasn’t an issue. Kids cared only about who was the most fun to play with. When the other kids started noticing and pointing out that my father was black and that I wasn’t just what I appeared to be, it was a hard change for me.

Confederate: Relating to the Confederate States of America, a union of states that withdrew from the United States sparking the American Civil War in 1861.

One of the most significant events in my childhood was traveling down South. I had this huge fear that the Ku Klux Klan (a racist terrorist organization) was going to drag us all off. The Confederate flags all over the place really scared me. I didn’t get any racist comments in junior and senior high. Every once in a while, someone would make a joke about race, without hatred or spite behind it. Like a black kid might say, ‘‘Hey, you should be able to dance better because you’re black.’’ Or a white kid would joke, ‘‘How come you’re not better at basketball?’’ As a group, multiracial people are very poorly defined. For any minority to be able to move forward, they need to be in the public eye. I now see multiracial women and men n modeling, music, acting, and sports—Hallie Berry, Mariah Carey, Paula Abdul, for example. These people are out there

106

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Multiracial

bringing positive attention to multiracial people and to the richness of our dual heritage. I’ve often thought that looking white is almost a disguise where I can hear what people think about the other side. There shouldn’t be another side, but, unfortunately, I have to live in a world where there are two sides. I do think that I have an obligation to protect who I am and who my family is. When I hear antiblack and antiwhite comments, I try to ease these tensions by telling people about both sides. I confront both the white kids and the black kids. MAYA I was seven when our family went down South. It was my first awareness that our family wasn’t ‘‘normal.’’ We were walking into a store, and my mom said, ‘‘Stay close to me because people might look at us weird.’’ I didn’t understand why she was saying that. Then she told me it was because they didn’t see that many multiracial families in the South. I didn’t understand, and it was frightening. I had never had any warning before. We did a study about South Africa and apartheid in my elementary school—a predominantly white private school where I was the only one in my class with African ancestry. I asked the other kids, ‘‘If I went to South Africa, how would they treat me?’’ Everyone in the class agreed that the white South Africans would treat me fine because I look white, but if they found out that I was half black, they would hate me. That helped me to understand that racism has to do with ideas people have in their head. It didn’t matter if my skin was lighter than their skin, I could still be discriminated against. Racism is very confusing!. . . . NKIRUKA White people normally don’t see people like me and my sisters as multiracial. We’re not thought of as ‘‘half,’’ we’re definitely seen as black— and that can be positive or negative. If they find out we’re biracial, they’re surprised, but it quickly leaves their mind. It’s really hard to represent both sides because most people don’t see the white side.

Apartheid: A policy of racial separation and discrimination.

Discriminated: Treated differently on a basis other than individual merit.

I left Nigeria when I was ten, and most of my childhood memories are there. I still speak the language, and I went back to visit my father last summer. I’d like to go to Nigeria for a whole year because I want to be able to function as an adult in the Ibo culture. I want to hold my own and not feel like a visitor. I think I can do that. Nigerians have a different attitude toward interracial families than do African Americans. Nigerians have not been oppressed as directly by white people as black people in America have been. So while I was growing up in Nigeria, being biracial was never an issue for me. People took notice of our lighter skin color, but there was no value attached to it. Coming to America was hard for me. I was immediately perceived as black, and I had to learn what it means to be black in America. It was a new Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

107

Multiracial

Singer Alicia Keys comes from a mixed-race family. Her mother, pictured, is Caucasian; her father is African American. Keys has been quoted as saying that while she embraces both sides of herself, she considers herself to be black. F RA NK MI CEL OT TA/ GE TTY I MA GE S.

thing and a very painful, psychologically twisted thing. I just had to come to terms with it . . . [T]he popularity thing was so important and because I was one out of a few black kids, I could never have been popular. And before that, I was considered so cute in Nigeria! I’ve been remembering how I consciously used to want to be white. I’d look in the mirror and think, ‘‘Why can’t I look more white?’’ I would try to figure out what about my features could possibly be mistaken for white. I never had that desire in my life until I moved to America. 108

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Multiracial

I never announce to people that I’m mixed unless it’s something I’m talking about for a reason. I’m not trying to push it out of my consciousness. That’s what I am, and I accept it. It’s not a problem for me now, but I’ve gone through a lot because of it. I can’t deny that being light-skinned and being very familiar with white culture has helped me in school and at job interviews. And a lot of black guys have fallen into the whole ideal of light-skinned black women [her perception that young black males had a social preference for white or light-skinned women], so it has probably helped me get more dates too. All of this causes resentment in darker-skinned black people. I don’t blame them. One of the biggest underlying reasons why my sisters and I are very concerned with what black people think of us is because the entire society views us as black. We don’t really have the option of going into the white world. I’ll marry whomever I fall in love with, but I think it’s really hard dealing with being biracial. It sounds so awful, but if I married a white man, my kids would be so light that they’d probably have a very hard time. If I did marry a white man, I don’t know where I’d raise our kids, but I cringe to think of raising them in America. Being biracial is one of those things that makes people say, ‘‘It seems like a horrible burden at first, but it could turn out to be a gift.’’ I do appreciate that my mother is white. Because of her, I don’t feel completely alienated from a whole segment of the human race. I know my mother and my mother’s family, and I totally respect them and love them, so I know that not all white people are bad. I feel much more open-minded. Being biracial in America, your life could go so many different ways. It could have been all messed up. To me, it’s the grace of God that we all came out so well.

What happened next . . . By the early twenty-first century, the number of marriages between black and white persons had steadily increased since the 1960s. Likewise, the number of reported births to one black and one white parent increased. The National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) (http://www.cdc.gov/ nchs/births.htm#Tabulated), an agency that keeps records of births by race of parents, reported 8,758 births to black and white parents in 1968, 26,968 in 1981, and 52,232 in 1991. During the period from 1968 to 1991, the NCHS reported a total of 616,850 such births. NCHS also Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

109

Multiracial

estimated that hundreds of thousands more black-white births occurred but were not known because mothers frequently refused to list the race of the father or biracial babies were simply identified as black. By 2000, America’s population was an increasingly diverse racial population. There were over 325,000 black-white marriages. In addition to black-white marriages, the number of other mixed marriages was increasing. Whites and Asians were the most common. One-third of Asian Americans married outside their group. One-fourth of Hispanics married non-Hispanics. U.S. polls indicated that between the 1960s and 2000 acceptance of mixed marriages had steadily increased.

Did you know . . . 

Through U.S. history, persons of black and white ancestry whose appearance was predominantly white sometimes chose to live as white and moved far away from home. They were said to be avoiding the whole issue of race as best as possible. Persons passed as whites to escape the real hardships of being black in America. Families often cooperated with the passing relative, but mourned as if the person had died. As black pride took hold in the United States by the 1980s, passing was considered a cowardly action by others.



Many mulattos proudly chose to identify with the black race. Pressure from their black community to identify as black sometimes influenced their decision.



Increasingly in the twenty-first century, young people who were biracial were proud of their biracial ancestry. Mulatto teens believed they had the right to flow back and forth between races.

Consider the following . . .

110



How much does an individual’s appearance—skin color, hair, eyes—affect the identity search all young people make: a search for who they are, what is their unique identity?



Consider a mulatto teenager’s predicament. He/she loves both black and white sides of the family. Mulatto teens say pressure can come from both black and white friends to choose one group over the other. Black friends ask if they are too ‘‘good’’ to identify with blacks. White friends pull them to identify with their groups. Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Multiracial

Discuss within class or a small group the many different issues a mulatto teen must deal with. 

Should the United States stop collecting information on race in its census and simply identify all U.S. citizens as Americans? Assess the pros and cons.

For More Information B O O KS

Cruz, Barbara C. Multiethnic Teens and Cultural Identity. Berkeley Heights, NJ: Enslow Publishers, Inc., 2001. Funderburg, Lise. Black, White, Other: Biracial Americans Talk About Race and Identity. New York: William Morrow and Company, Inc., 1994. Gilliespie, Peggy. Of Many Colors: Portraits of Multiracial Families. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1994. O’Hearn, Claudine Chiawei. Half and Half: Writers on Growing Up Biracial and Bicultural. New York: Pantheon Books, 1998. WEB SIT ES

‘‘Birth Data.’’ National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS). http://www.cdc.gov/ nchs/births.htm#Tabulated (accessed on December 12, 2006). Project Race. http://www.projectrace.com/ (accessed on December 12, 2006).

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

111

5

Genocide

he end result of extreme prejudice is genocide. Genocide is a planned systematic attempt to eliminate an entire targeted group of people by murdering all members of that group. The word genos is Greek for ‘‘race or tribe.’’ The ending cide means ‘‘to kill.’’ Each genocide that occurs in the world results from issues specific to the country where it takes place. However, all genocides have common characteristics: (1) an organized killing plan developed and supported by officials within the country; (2) a means to carry out the killings which involves militias or the country’s military; (3) racial prejudice (a negative attitude towards others based on a prejudgment about those individuals with no prior knowledge or experience) against the group; (4) scapegoating, or blaming the targeted group for all the country’s ills; (5) depicting the group as subhuman, unworthy of living; and (6) an international community that turns away and does not intervene. The first excerpt, ‘‘Crisis in Sudan,’’ concerns genocide in the African country of Sudan. Beginning in early 2003, gangs of assassin militias called the Janjaweed systematically murdered hundreds of thousands of people. Another two million were displaced, living in refugee (person who flees in search of protection or shelter) camps where they were threatened with death from hunger and disease. The Janjaweed, Arab Muslim Africans, targeted black Africans for elimination. Another form of genocide is cultural genocide. Cultural genocide involves a dominant group attempting to eradicate any expression of characteristics of what they consider to be an inferior culture. The second excerpt comes from ‘‘Early Warning and Urgent Action Procedure, Decision 1 (68): United States of America,’’ and was issued by a committee of the United Nations (an international organization founded in 1945 composed of most of the countries in the world) in early March 2006. The Warning charges the United States with long-standing, systematic efforts to take traditional homelands away from indigenous

T

Sudan 115 Western Shoshone of North America 127

113

Genocide

Native Americans without their participation in the process or having any legal recourse to save their land. The lands play a central role in maintenance of indigenous culture.

114

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Sudan Excerpt from ‘‘Crisis in Sudan’’

Produced by Public Broadcasting System Available at Public Broadcasting System Web site http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/africa/jan-june04/ sudan_6-24.html (accessed on December 12, 2006)

‘‘An estimated ten thousand people have been killed and more than a million driven from their homes in a brutal 16-month conflict in the region of Darfur in western Sudan.’’

udan, located in northeastern Africa, is Africa’s largest country. It is about the size of the U.S. state of Texas. Sudan is predominantly an arid (dry), desert land except immediately around the Nile River, which flows northward through central and eastern Sudan. In the first decade of the twenty-first century, Sudan’s population is slightly over forty million people. Eighty percent are poor farmers or herders. The rest work in government and in industry, primarily the oil industry. Khartoum, located in north central Sudan, is the capital city.

S

Sudan gained independence from Britain in 1956, but became embattled in civil war (a war between two groups of people living in the same country) for much of the second half of the twentieth century. The first civil war ended in 1972, but the region had only about a decade to recover before a second one broke out in 1983 and continued until January 2005. The wars were rooted in strife between the Arab Muslims in the north who control the political, economic, and social fabric of the country, and the people of the southern region, where the country’s oil resources are located. The southern people are not Muslim but adhere to indigenous (native) tribal religious practices or are Christian (followers of a major world religious faith composed of two major branches, Catholicism and Protestantism, who believe Jesus Christ was God’s son). Overall, the Sudanese population is 70 percent 115

Sudan

Soldiers with the Sudan Liberation Army/Movement (SLA/M) drive through Darfur, Sudan. SLA/M members are black Africans originating from Darfur farming communities. # LYN SE Y AD DAR IO /C OR BIS .

Muslim, 25 percent indigenous beliefs, and 5 percent Christian. Ethnically, 52 percent of Sudanese are black Africans and 39 percent are Arabs. In February 2003, a separate conflict broke out in Sudan’s western region known as Darfur, home to five million Sudanese. Claiming discrimination and oppression in government policies, employment, and economic opportunities, non-Arab African tribes of Darfur, known as the Darfur rebels, rebelled against government forces. Darfur rebels include the Sudan Liberation Army/Movement (SLA/M) and Justice for Equality Movement (JEM). SLA/M members are black Africans originating from Darfur farming communities, such as Fur Zagawa and Masalit. Jem members are black African Muslims who were pushed out of the Khartoum Arab government. Rebels accused Arabs of monopolizing the top levels of government and wealth of the country. The conflict between the Darfur rebels and government forces intensified throughout 2003 and into 2004. The nomad Arab militias armed by the 116

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Sudan

A Century of Genocide The following list taken from the United Human Rights Council website (http://unitedhumanrights.org) includes some key occurrences of genocide in the world in the twentieth century. The organization has members worldwide who are private citizens who work to correct human rights violation information that is distorted or denied by their governments. Listed are the dates, the location, and the estimated number of deaths. 

1915–18: Armenia, 1.5 million deaths



1932–33: Ukrainian famine under Russian leader Joseph Stalin (1878–1953), 7 million deaths



1937–38: Nanking (China) massacre, 300,000 deaths



1938–45: Nazi Germany/Holocaust, 6 million deaths



1975–79: Cambodia under leadership of Pol Pot (1925–1998), 2 million deaths



1992–95: Bosnia (breakup of Yugoslavia), 200,000 deaths



1994: Rwanda (Africa), 800,000 deaths

government were called the Janjaweed. Supported by the Sudanese government, the militias rode through Darfur, killing thousands of black civilians and pushing tens of thousands from their homes. Villages were looted, and people’s lives destroyed. Women were raped and children murdered. By the end of 2004, tens of thousands were killed, about 1.8 million were displaced within Darfur, and at least 200,000 refugees had made it to refugee camps, known as camps for displaced persons, in Chad across Sudan’s western border. By 2006 the United Nations Refugee Agency (UNHCR) administered these camps, providing shelter, clean water, food, medical supplies, and education. Those in the refugee camps were threatened by disease and famine. The following excerpt is from an interview by Public Broadcasting System (PBS) reporter Ray Suarez with regional experts in June 2004 on the ever-worsening crisis in Darfur.

Things to remember while reading excerpts from ‘‘Crisis in Sudan’’: 

Nations of the world debated if a genocide was being carried out against black Africans of Darfur. A genocide involves an organized governmental killing plan directed against a particular group of

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

117

Sudan

people. Testimonies from Darfur claimed the Khartoum government stood behind the Janjaweed. In the interview, Jennifer Leaning stated that the situation in Darfur was ‘‘a targeted, systematic, mass killing of an identifiable group.’’ 

Andrew Natsios, also interviewed by Ray Suarez in the excerpt, speaks of the 1948 ‘‘international convention on genocide.’’ He is referring to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, a United Nations’ (UN) treaty presented to the world in December 1948. It was the UN’s answer to the Nazi Holocaust, in which Germany murdered six million European Jews during World War II (1939–45). The treaty’s fundamental intent was that if a threat of genocide loomed over a people, the threat concerned all humanity, and the international community of nations had to act to prevent it.



The Khartoum government denies that genocide was taking place. Instead it referred to the situation as a sad or unfortunate internal conflict.

Excerpt from ‘‘Crisis in Sudan’’ FRED DE SAM LAZARO: It’s been described as the world’s worst humanitarian crisis and threatening to get worse. U. N. Secretary General Kofi Annan warned of genocide on the order of the massacres in Rwanda a decade ago. [In 1994 between 800,000 and 850,000 Rwandans known as Tutsi were killed in an organized genocide carried out by Rwandans known as Hutu.] An estimated ten thousand people have been killed and more than a million driven from their homes in a brutal 16-month conflict in the region of Darfur in western Sudan. About 5 million people or one-sixth of Sudan’s population lives in an area the size of Texas. Arab militias—known as the Janjaweed, reportedly linked to the Sudanese government—have attacked dozens of villages killing black African farmers, burning their homes and stealing their land. The native tribesmen of Darfur had demanded a greater share of Sudan’s wealth. The State Department calls the violence ethnic cleansing, and some villagers in Darfur seem to agree. 118

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Sudan

AHMED ADAM MOHAMED, Refugee (translated): The militia, they take our children, burn our houses. They’re killing us because we are black. FRED DE SAM LAZARO: Among those who have taken refuge in camps on the border with Chad are women who have been raped, families whose homes have been looted and young people wounded in the fighting. In the relative safety of Chad’s refugee camps, the day usually begins around 5 am. Women like Jamila Numere start a daunting pursuit of life’s most basic needs. Water comes from a hastily dug, shallow well . . . Miserable as life seems for refugees like Jamila Numere, she’s among the more fortunate who’ve managed to escape. She walked for four days to reach this camp with her mother, sister and two young sons. JAMILA NUMERE (translated): I was with my husband at home and then when the planes started to bomb, he just disappeared. In the panic, we just ran, you know, in every direction and I haven’t heard news from him since then. I think that either he’s dead or he was arrested and taken to jail or kidnapped. He was a teacher. FRED DE SAM LAZARO: The government in Khartoum—which has denied any involvement with the militia—has drawn widespread international condemnation for human rights abuses and for not allowing relief agencies into Darfur. Some relief is beginning to trickle in, despite attacks on aid vehicles and efforts by the Sudan government to delay shipments of food. The head of the World Food Program toured several hard hit areas last month—and said an additional $140 million in aid is needed to prevent thousands from starving.

Human rights abuses: Being denied basic internationally recognized rights including protection from murder and ethnic genocide, freedom of religion, and fair treatment before the law.

JAMES MORRIS, WFP, Executive Director: People are severely at risk without nutrition, have health problems, are away from their livelihoods. FRED DE SAM LAZARO: But complicating matters is Sudan’s longstanding civil war. Two million people have lost their lives in Africa’s longest—and some say bloodiest—conflict. For 21 years, the Islamic government in the North has battled rebel factions in the mostly Christian South over control of the country’s oil reserves. The United States and other countries were instrumental in brokering a ceasefire that was signed in April, but the ceasefire agreement does not cover the conflict in Darfur.

Current conditions RAY SUAREZ: For more we go to Andrew Natsios, the administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development, and Jennifer Leaning, a professor of international health at Harvard University and a board Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

119

Sudan

A Sudanese woman sits among the damage caused to her village by the Janjaweed, Arab militias supported by the Sudanese government who are accused of carrying out violent crimes against black Africans. # BE NJ AM IN L OWY /C OR BIS .

member of Physicians for Human Rights. She recently spent two weeks in the refugee camps along the Chad-Sudan border. And Dr. Leaning, maybe we could start with an update from that border. What are conditions like for people who have been dislocated in the Darfur region? JENNIFER LEANING: They are pretty grim. There are about 200,000 refugees who have come over in the last several months from the conflict in Darfur. They are scattered along a vast border that is very isolated and hard to reach. UNHCR [the United Nations High Commission for Refugees] is trying to move people from the border into camps where they can begin to give them access to food and water. They accomplished that for about 100,000 of them. There are probably 100,000 still out there. The rainy season is coming up from the south to the north, and an increasing number of these people are getting cut off because the few roads that are there have been completely swamped by the floods of the 120

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Sudan

rains. And the humanitarian community is struggling, but needs a lot more manpower, a lot more infrastructure, and a lot more money to meet the needs of the people over the next several months.

The Sudanese government’s role RAY SUAREZ: Well, the people in this case, instead of looking to their government for help, appear to be convinced that their own government is responsible for their plight? JENNIFER LEANING: That’s exactly the case. They are very clear. As you talk to refugees as we did—my colleague and I spent ten days in the region talking to refugees up and down this border area and to the humanitarians trying to take care of them. The stories are pretty consistent, that a linkage of the Janjaweed militia, who are labeled Arab, and the government of Sudan, is always part of the story. They come in the early morning, surround the villages, systematically go from one end of the village to the other, drive out the men and kill them if they resist, rape the women if they find them, burn down the houses, burn the grain stores, uproot the trees, poison the wells by dropping animals down them, and essentially create a scorched earth and killing field that is driving the people that are nearer the border with Chad into Chad. And if people are too far to flee to the border, too interior Darfur, they go into towns and enclaves within Darfur where we’re hearing about how dire the conditions are in terms of their desperate circumstance. RAY SUAREZ: Andrew Natsios, the government of Sudan and Khartoum insists that it doesn’t support the marauders, doesn’t support these militia groups that are dislocating people from their homes. . . . ANDREW NATSIOS: . . . . And instead of just battling the rebels, they have had this scorched earth policy. Two months ago we asked NASA to take aerial photographs of the villages that we’re getting reports from the ground had been destroyed. We’ve now photographed 576 villages—300 don’t exist anymore. They have been destroyed completely and there are no people in them at all. All the animals are gone, in fact, almost all the shrubbery has been destroyed as well—76 are partially destroyed. It’s very interesting, and in the middle of the destruction there are villages that are completely functional, people are working in them, nothing has been touched in the photographs that we’re receiving right now. . . . Those villages that have been destroyed are either Fur, Masalit or Zaghawa; three African tribes in Darfur. By the way, they are all Muslim. There are no Christians or animists in Darfur. The Arab villages are untouched, so this is clearly and indisputably from our own research and U. N. research an ethnic cleansing campaign, at a minimum, at a minimum. The atrocities that have been going on we’ve recorded in our reports, the Physicians for Human Rights have recorded, the United Nations Commission Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Marauders: Raiders who roam about looking to rob.

Animists: Believer that all biological things in nature and non-living objects have conscious life.

121

Sudan

on Human Rights has recorded. We have a DART team out there—Disastrous Assistance Response Team. We’ve been interviewing people in the villages, and the atrocities which Dr. Leaning just described are exactly the same reports that we’re getting.

A case of genocide? RAY SUAREZ: By referring to it as ethnic cleansing, and there’s been widespread condemnation around the world of what’s going on in Darfur, a lot of people have been careful not to use the word genocide. Why? ANDREW NATSIOS: Well, there is an international convention from 1948 on genocide, and what it means or does not mean is something that experts have to review. And in fact, there is a review going on right now of whether or not, from the U.S. government’s perspective, this is taking place or not. The review is not completed, but it is taking place at a very high level. RAY SUAREZ: Dr. Leaning, does it meet your definition? JENNIFER LEANING: We struggled with this as an organization, as a board, and as team members going out to look at what we could find. And we think that people of goodwill who have their eyes open are all acknowledging that this is a targeted, systematic, mass killing of an identifiable group. What we have concluded based on looking at a lot of evidence from other excellent groups, including U.S. government, and from our own survivor testimonies that we got in the field, we’ve concluded that we should call this an unfolding genocide, that if we look at the terms of the convention it includes, as the definition, the attempt to destroy in whole or in part a people on the basis of, and there are four categories of basis. The non-Arab Darfurians are very distinct in terms of their language, their lifestyle, their culture from the Arab populations that are attacking them. And everything we can see in terms of destruction of life and livelihood and claims to the land and capacity to stay there, and attempts to drive them thoroughly from the region, would suggest that we are looking at a genocide in action, and that we think it’s important to try to operationalize the term of genocide. It’s an extraordinarily weighty and important legal term. We think it’s important to try to operationalize it in an early warning mode so that there is an alert that goes out to the great powers to say, do something, intervene, and bring this to a stop. . . . RAY SUAREZ: Andrew Natsios, Dr. Leaning, thank you both. JENNIFER LEANING: Thank you very much.

122

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Sudan

African Union peacekeepers help an injured family who survived an attack by Janjaweed soldiers in Darfur, Sudan. # L YNS EY ADD ARI O/ CO RB IS.

What happened next . . . By early 2006 Amnesty International (AI) reported that as many as three hundred thousand people had been murdered in Darfur since February 2003. More than two million civilians had been displaced. The displaced had either made it to one of about fourteen refugee camps along the Chad-Darfur border or were internally displaced somewhere within Darfur. Called a humanitarian crisis of the greatest proportions by international human rights watch groups, human rights abuses were overwhelming. Abuses of the worst order included widespread murder of black men, women, and children, rape, torture, and enslavement. Disease and malnutrition continued to kill thousands. By mid-2004, a few hundred African Union (an alliance of African nations) peacekeepers were sent to Darfur. By early 2006 their numbers had increased to between six and seven thousand. However, they struggled to stabilize the situation. Armed attacks continued on villages and the government continuously obstructed both peacekeepers and Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

123

Sudan

humanitarian teams from assisting the displaced millions. The African Union agreed in early 2006 to turn the peacekeeping mission over to the UN by fall of 2006 but the Sudan government said it would not accept UN troops in its country. U.S. President George W. Bush (1946–; served 2001–) and the U.S. Congress stated the situation in Darfur amounted to genocide and called for thousands of international peacekeeping troops to enter Darfur immediately. However neither European countries, Asian countries, nor the United States were inclined to send troops. The UN was reluctant to undertake a new peacekeeping mission because it was already committed to other peacekeeping in Bosnia-Herzegovina and lacked sufficient troops to undertake another one. The chaos in Darfur was spreading into Chad. Chad and Sudan have a long history of conflict. Violence between the two escalated rapidly in 2006.

Did you know . . . 

Many individuals, both from SLA/M and JEM, continue to be held as political prisoners. They are held incommunicado, unable to communicate with anyone outside of their detention center, and without a trial.



Humanitarian aid workers and directors of humanitarian agencies are in constant danger of being harassed, or arrested and held for long periods by the Janjaweed.



According to Amnesty International, a human rights watchdog agency, black men and women continue to be brought before socalled public order courts in Khartoum and sentenced to beatings. Their offenses included breaking dress code rules, selling tea without a license, and selling alcohol without a license.

Consider the following . . .

124



Explore reasons why nations of the international community hesitate to call the mass murders in Darfur a genocide.



The Darfur situation turned grim in 2004, with tens of thousands of murders. Yet in America, the three news networks’—ABC, NBC, and CBS—combined time devoted to reporting on Darfur was twenty-six minutes for the entire year. Psychological research shows that humans are aghast at the murder of a single identifiable person, but as numbers steadily increase, minds go Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Sudan

numb. Whereas an outpouring of aid occurs for victims of natural disasters, such as hurricanes and tsunamis, the response to genocides is almost nothing. Explore reasons for this phenomenon.

For More Information B O O KS

De Waal, Alex. Famine That Kills: Darfur, Sudan. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005. Flint, Julie, and Alex de Waal. Darfur: A Short History of a Long War. New York: Zed Books, 2005. Prunier, Gerard. Darfur: The Ambiguous Genocide. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2005. Rudolph, Joseph R., Jr., ed. Encyclopedia of Modern Ethnic Conflicts. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2003. WEB SIT ES

‘‘Crisis in Sudan.’’ Public Broadcasting System. http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/ africa/jan-june04/sudan_6-24.html (accessed on December 12, 2006). Human Rights Watch. http://hrw.org (accessed on December 12, 2006).

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

125

Western Shoshone of North America Excerpt from ‘‘Early Warning and Urgent Action Procedure, Decision 1 (68): United States of America’’

Posted on the United Nations Web site http://www.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cerd/docs/68decision-USA.pdf Issued March 10, 2006

‘‘The Committee recommends to the State party [United States] that it respect and protect the human rights of the Western Shoshone peoples, without discrimination based on race, color, or national or ethnic origin. . . . ’’

n March 10, 2006, the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) issued a strongly worded statement aimed at the U.S. government from its home in Geneva, Switzerland. The statement urged the United States to stop all actions against the Western Shoshone peoples (indigenous Native American peoples who live in eastern California and western Nevada) of Nevada. This statement resulted from almost 150 years of land disputes between the Western Shoshone and the U.S. government. In 1863, the Western Shoshone Nation of Indians signed the Treaty of Ruby Valley with representatives of the U.S. government. The treaty was primarily one of friendship, not land cession (to give up something to someone else). At that time, American citizens did not want land in eastern Nevada. They simply wanted to get safely through Shoshone lands on their way to California and Oregon. As the Shoshone were losing natural resources to the grazing herds of cattle, oxen, and horses of the white emigrant trains, they increasingly raided the wagon trains for food, including the livestock. The treaty recognized Western Shoshone control of a large area and identified boundaries of that land. It gave the United States limited use and access to the lands. Through the 1870s following the treaty, Western Shoshone lands in northeastern Nevada became increasingly desired by

O

127

Western Shoshone of North America

U.S. citizens for the gold deposits the lands held. Through the remainder of the nineteenth century and early twentieth century white settlement of the region occurred at the best watered lands and much of the less desirous dry areas became established as public lands of the United States. To provide some compensation for the taking of Indian lands, the U.S. government established the Indian Claims Commission (ICC) in 1946 following World War II (1939–45). The purpose of the ICC was to provide monetary payments, not give back lands, a decision not satisfactory to most Indians. A decision on compensation for Western Shoshone lands was issued in October 1962. The U.S. government awarded the Western Shoshone $27 million in 1979, but the tribe refused to accept the payment, saying they wanted their land back instead. They claimed they never agreed to sell or abandon the land, or give it to the United States. In reaction, the U.S. government accepted it on the tribal behalf, exercising its legally defined trust responsibility to conduct business for Indians regardless of tribal wishes. The government then claimed that the case was closed. The money was placed in a holding account for future distribution to the Shoshone whenever they should decide to receive it. During the latter part of the twentieth century, the ancestral lands of the Western Shoshone saw steady growth in gold mining activities. By the early twenty-first century, the ancestral lands produced most of the gold mined in the United States and almost 10 percent of the world’s gold production. Two Western Shoshone sisters, Mary and Carrie Dann, led the charge of the tribe in challenging the loss of ancestral lands to the United States after the United States sued them in 1974 for trespass of their cattle raising operation onto federal lands. Operating a cattle ranch in northeastern Nevada, they continued to refuse to pay the U.S. government for rights to graze on public lands, claiming their ancestral lands were unjustly taken by the U.S. government. In response, the government seized 232 cattle belonging to the sisters in September 2002 and sold them at a public auction to pay past grazing fees.

Things to remember while reading excerpts from ‘‘Early Warning and Urgent Action Procedure, Decision 1 (68): United States of America’’: 

128

The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) is an international group of human rights experts that meets twice a year in Geneva, Switzerland, to review accusations of human rights abuses reported around the world. Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Western Shoshone of North America

Carrie Dann of the Western Shoshone nation. AP IM AGE S.

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

129

Western Shoshone of North America

130



CERD had requested an explanation from the United States in regard to the concerns raised by the Western Shoshone in 2003 and again in 2005, but did not receive a response either time.



The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights ruled in January 2003 that the process used by the United States through the Indian Claims Commission violated international human rights law by denying Western Shoshone the right to legal protection and the right to hold property. According to the Commission, the United States has no legal right to claim Western Shoshone lands.

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Western Shoshone of North America

The Merriam Report In 1926, the U.S. Secretary of Interior hired Lewis Merriam to investigate the conditions of Native Americans. The Native Americans had just been granted U.S. citizenship through the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924. Merriam was a researcher at the Institute of Government Research, later renamed the Brookings Institution. After two years of investigating and researching, Merriam issued his report. The findings strongly condemned past U.S. policies toward Native Americans. Merriam found that most lived in extreme poverty with poor sanitary conditions. Access to education and healthcare was poor. Infant mortality (death) rate of 191 deaths for every 1,000 births was the highest of any ethnic group in the United States, much higher than the general U.S. population. Merriam concluded that efforts to force Native Americans to adopt the ways of the dominant white culture

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

were not working. Placed on remote reservations with few resources, Native Americans were unable to adjust to white society. In early 1933 newly elected U.S. president Franklin D. Roosevelt (1882–1945; served 1933– 45) took office. He appointed social worker John Collier, a well-known advocate of Indian rights, to the position of Commissioner of Indian Affairs. Using recommendations made in the Merriam Report, Collier worked through Congress the Indian Reorganization Act in 1934. The act guided establishment of tribal governments so that tribes largely governed themselves and opened the door to federal funds for establishing Indian businesses. In addition, the use of native languages, the practice of traditional religions, and the making of tribal crafts were no longer discouraged by the government.

131

Western Shoshone of North America

132

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Western Shoshone of North America

What happened next . . . Complicating a U.S. response to CERD’s requests was a large, ongoing lawsuit in U.S. federal court in Washington, D.C. In Cobell v. Norton Native Americans charged in 1996 that the U.S. government consistently mismanaged Indian properties over a 150-year period. Due to ineptness (lack of ability) and dishonesty, the Native Americans claimed that Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

133

Western Shoshone of North America

Recognition of Indigenous Rights Several efforts have been made to protect and promote the human rights of indigenous peoples. Throughout the world, extractive industries such as as mining, timber harvests, and oil exploration threatened indigenous cultures through forced resettlement, loss of access to native food resources, and environmental destruction of traditional homelands. In 1997, the Organization of American States, an international organization of over thirty nations in the Americas, adopted the American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The United Nations had earlier drafted a similar declaration in the 1980s, known as the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. However, it was still not officially adopted by the early twenty-first century. In the meantime, the UN did declare the decade of 1995 to 2004 the International Decade of the World’s Indigenous Peoples that served to increase public awareness of the discrimination faced by indigenous populations. All of these efforts recognized indigenous populations as the social groups most vulnerable to economic and social discrimination.

approximately 500,000 American Indians had lost billions of dollars. Throughout the long time period, the U.S. government had retained the responsibility to collect revenues resulting from mining, oil and gas operations, timber cutting, grazing of livestock, and other commercial activities occurring on Indian reservations across the nation. The massive legal case is likely to result in major reforms of U.S. Indian policies and an accounting of the monies actually lost. With a change of leadership in Congress from the Republican Party to the Democratic Party in November 2006, the Indians hoped that a proposed $8 billion settlement might be more easily reached. The Western Shoshone continued to fight for increased representation in U.S. decisions that affect their lands and culture. They wish of be fully informed in the future before government decisions are made and participate in the decision-making. The United States contends that no human rights violations are involved. Rights to the land were lost by the Western Shoshone through the gradual spread of settlement on their lands by non-Indians by 1872.

Just as with the Cobell lawsuit, the Western Shoshone may press ultimately for a solution by the U.S. Congress through legislation rather than via an administrative solution from the administration. In 2002, Congress offered the prospect of an increased payment of $140 million to the tribe through the proposed Western Shoshone Claims Distribution Act. However, the Western Shoshone continued to fight against any type of monetary settlement. They instead continued to seek ownership of their ancestral homeland. As a result, the bill died before passage.

Did you know . . . 

134

This was the first United Nations’ decision targeting U.S. treatment of Native Americans. Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Western Shoshone of North America



Amnesty International and other human rights watch groups continue to monitor violations of indigenous peoples’ human rights in the Americas, including North, Central, and South America. Findings are continually posted on their Web sites.



Plans to develop the Yucca Mountain repository for nuclear waste by the U.S. Department of Energy were progressing very slowly in 2006 while facing many regulatory hurdles. According to the YuccaMountain.org watchgroup Web site (http://www.yucca mountain.org/new.htm) the opening date to begin delivering nuclear waste to the facility was 2017.



Among the most notorious policies of the United States that systematically took ancestral lands away from Native Americans was the Dawes Act of 1887. The act divided up the communally owned (shared ownership of property used for the good of the community) Indian reservations into small, private allotments (plots of land given to a person for farming purposes) and sold the so-called excess lands to the public. By the late 1920s, Native Americans had forever lost 90 million acres out of 126 million acres of land still held at the time the act was passed.

Consider the following . . . 

The Western Shoshone did not yield their traditional homelands to the United States through the 1863 treaty they signed. Rather, they allowed certain limited use of their lands and safe passage for emigrant wagon trains from the eastern United States traveling to the West Coast through their territory. Divide the class into two groups and debate who now has legal use of the traditional homelands, which include much of the state of Nevada.



Research whether Native American tribes within the present-day United States have the right to approach the United Nations concerning their issues. The United Nations was established to address international disputes and severe human needs. Is this an international dispute or a severe human need, or both?



Why did the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights rule that the U.S. Indian Claims Commission violated international human rights law?

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

135

Western Shoshone of North America

For More Information BOOKS

Deloria, Vine, Jr. Custer Died for Your Sins: An Indian Manifesto. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1988. Ellis, Clyde. To Change Them Forever: Indian Education at the Rainy Mountain Boarding School, 1893-1920. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1996. Strickland, Rennard. Tonto’s Revenge: Reflections on American Indian Culture and Policy. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1997. WEB SIT ES

‘‘Early Warning and Urgent Action Procedure, Decision 1 (68): United States of America.’’ United Nations High Commission on Civil Rights. http:// www.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cerd/docs/68decision-USA.pdf (accessed on December 12, 2006). YuccaMountain.org. http://www.yuccamountain.org/new.htm (accessed on December 12, 2006).

136

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

6

World War II Ethnic Strife

orld War II (1939–45) was a global conflict in the mid-twentieth century that involved almost every part of the world. The war was fought between Allied forces led by the United States and Great Britain and the Axis powers led by Germany and Japan. Ultimately up to fifty million people lost their lives and many millions more were wounded. It was the bloodiest conflict in world history. Though officially starting in September 1939 when Germany invaded Poland, military expansions by Germany in Europe and Japan in Southeast Asia were already well under way. The war was a major influence on world history. It marked the first time nuclear weapons were used on civilian populations, it allowed the spread of a communist (a political and economic system in which a single political party controls all aspects of citizens’ lives and private ownership of property is banned) movement from Russia into eastern Europe and Asia including China, and led to a shift in power in the world from the European countries to two world superpowers, the United States and the Soviet Union.

W

Isabella Leitner 141 Mine Okubo 155 Universal Declaration of Human Rights 169

The war was driven by nationalistic, racial, and ethnic prejudices (a negative attitude towards others based on a prejudgment about those individuals with no prior knowledge or experience). Germany was dominated by the Nazi Party, a political party in Germany more formally known as the National Socialist German Workers’ Party led by German dictator Adolf Hitler (1889–1945) from 1920 to 1945. Hitler and the Nazis based Germany’s military expansion not only on the revived nationalistic pride of Germany following its defeat in World War I (1914–18), but also prominently on the racist idea of firmly establishing the Aryan race. Aryan race refers to people living mostly in northern Europe. They are characterized as tall, blond, and blue-eyed. Though no such thing as an Aryan race actually exists, Hitler promoted it as the master race with the Germans at the top. To achieve Aryan dominance, Nazi Germany embarked on the extermination of all peoples it considered detrimental to the purity of the Aryan race as well as to the politics of 137

World War II Ethnic Strife

Nazi Germany, known as the Holocaust. This program of genocide (a deliberate destruction of a political or cultural social group) pursued by Nazi Germany during World War II led to the murder of eleven million people including six million Jewish men, women, and children. Japan, like Germany, was also expanding militarily in the 1930s. As the democratically elected Japanese government was faltering during the early 1930s the military increasingly gained political power. Because Japan did not have many natural resources to support its growing industries, military leaders decided to establish a colonial empire based on its nationalistic desires, much like European nations had done in earlier centuries. In 1931 Japan invaded and seized the northeast Chinese province of Manchuria, a region rich in iron and coal. By 1937 Japanese forces began moving deeper in China to control other regions rich in resources Japan needed. Though condemned by other nations in the world for its military aggression, the Japanese continued expanding. With the United States beginning to take economic measures to halt the Japanese expansion, Japan launched a surprise attack on U.S. military bases in Hawaii on December 7, 1941, known as the bombing of Pearl Harbor. This act of aggression marked the entrance of the United States into the world war that had already been going on for over two years. The war finally ended in 1945 with the surrender of Germany and Japan. Following the war, nations of the world were increasingly concerned about abuses of human rights (freedom from unlawful imprisonment, torture, or execution) caused by hatred, prejudice, and discrimination. The United Nations (UN) was founded in June 1945 to promote world peace and human rights for people worldwide. The UN was created to serve as an arbitrator (one who decides disputes) in times of conflict, when peace appears no longer feasible. Two situations during the war that prompted human rights concerns were the genocide of European Jews by Nazi Germany and internment of Japanese Americans in remote camps primarily in the Western United States. Genocide is the end result of extreme prejudice. It is a planned, systematic attempt to eliminate an entire targeted group of people by murdering all members of that group. Beginning in 1933 and continuing through World War II, the Nazi army under leadership of Germany’s dictator, tyrannical ruler Adolf Hitler, systematically rounded up and murdered over six million European Jews. This horrific episode in world history was known as the Holocaust. In the first excerpt of this chapter, The Big Lie: A True Story, Isabella Leitner was a twenty-eight-year-old 138

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

World War II Ethnic Strife

Jewish woman living in Hungary when the Nazis swept into her country and rounded up over 400,000 Hungarian Jews for transport to death camps, also commonly called concentration camps. In the excerpt, Isabella explains what she and her family endured when sent to Auschwitz, one of the largest and most infamous death camps. The second excerpt is taken from Citizen 13660 and describes a young Japanese American woman’s experience as she was ordered to an internment camp. Japanese Americans were held as if prisoners for up to three years in these camps until the United States felt comfortable that the war was being won. Although most were U.S. citizens, they were stripped of all rights. The internment of Japanese Americans in camps was one of the worst examples of U.S. prejudice and discrimination against a single ethnic group in U.S. history. The last primary source in this chapter is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted on December 10, 1948, by forty-eight nations, members of the newly formed United Nations organization. The Declaration was in part a response to the trampling of human rights during World War II. The Declaration has been and remains in the twenty-first century the foremost document on human rights ever written and adopted by the worldwide community.

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

139

Isabella Leitner Excerpt from The Big Lie: A True Story

Written by Isabella Leitner Published in 1992

‘‘Many people fell ill. Mrs. Klein went crazy. She screamed hour after hour. Mrs. Fred’s little girl, Sarah, died in her arms. Mrs. Hirsch’s aged father died shortly after our journey began. But the train did not stop.’’

olocaust refers to the Nazi Germany genocide of between six and seven million Jewish men, women, and children. Overall eleven million people were killed including Jews, Slavs, Roma (gypsies), political prisoners, prisoners of war, the disabled, and homosexuals. The mass killings of Jews had the classic characteristics of genocide: an organized killing plan developed by the government and carried out by the military; long-standing prejudice against the targeted group; scapegoating (blaming all difficulties on the targeted groups); and characterizing the group as unworthy to live. The National Socialist German Workers’ Party, called Nazis, came to power in Germany in January 1933 under the leadership of Adolf Hitler. Hitler and his Nazi army carried out the planned roundup and killing of European Jews between 1933 and 1945. The greatest activity, from 1942 to 1944, occurred as World War II raged. Long-standing prejudice against Jews dating back centuries allowed Germany to pursue the genocide. Strife between Jews and Christians began after the crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth around the year 29. Jesus Christ, a Jew, was believed by Christians to be the son of God. Jews did not accept him as the son of God. Christians blamed Jews for allowing his death.

H

141

Isabella Leitner

Jews were commonly the scapegoats of the societies in which they lived. They were blamed for all the ills that befell not only their society, but their country. In the fourteenth century, they were blamed for the plague that killed millions of people in Europe. In the late Middle Ages, many hardworking Jewish businessmen prospered in trade, banking, and financing. Jews prospered because of experience and knowledge handed down to them from one generation to the next. This success brought resentment from non-Jews along with greater prejudice and discrimination. Jews were blamed for countries’ economic woes. Throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, Jews struggled to maintain their families and livelihoods. When the Nazis came to power in Germany in 1933, they preached extreme nationalism, the belief that a particular nation and its culture, people, and values are superior to those of other nations. Many Germans suffered from poverty and hunger and were angry over their nation’s plight. The German economy was devastated by the harsh penalties imposed on it by other European nations resulting from its defeat in World War I. This was compounded by the effects of the Great Depression, a global economic downturn in business during the 1930s that led to much unemployment and hunger. Nazis tried to pull Germans together to overcome severe economic conditions of the time. Through emotional public speeches and propaganda (information that is spread for the purpose of promoting a cause), they planted among German society strong racist ideas of purifying the German population. Such a purification would require ridding the country of all Jews, the population considered the chief enemy of the state. After having lived with hopelessness for years, German citizens were ready for nearly anything or anyone who might be able to lift them from their desperation. Hitler, a gifted and motivating speaker, gave Germany an enemy to hate as he reviled the Jews and laid the blame for the nation’s problem at their feet. The German public violently protested against Jews living in Germany. Laws were passed placing severe restrictions on Jews in the country. Jews were fired from government jobs, and those who worked for themselves had their businesses vandalized. Jewish students at all grade levels were banned from schools. Synagogues (places of worship) were damaged or burned to the ground, and books written by Jews were burned in huge bonfires held in the centers of towns. Marriage between Jews and non-Jews was prohibited. Jews were required to register any property they owned with government authorities. 142

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Isabella Leitner

Two Jewish internees at the Csepel concentration camp in Hungary, each with the yellow Star of David sewn to their clothing. # C ORB IS .

Jews were characterized as not worthy to live. They were commanded to wear yellow stars representing the Jewish Star of David on their clothing, were forced from their homes into packed, filthy housing areas known as ghettos, and then, beginning about 1941, were loaded onto cattle cars bound for death camps. The genocide began, first in Germany, and spread during World War II. Jews living in twenty-one European countries, most in Central and Eastern Europe, were affected by the mass killings. Germany invaded Hungary in March 1944. Until that time, Hungary’s government, where anti-Semitism was less, had refused to transport its Jews to German camps. However, when Nazis took over, 440,000 Hungarian Jews were rounded up for transportation. The following is from The Big Lie: A True Story by Isabella Leitner. Isabella was living in Hungary when her family was caught up in the genocide. Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

143

Isabella Leitner

Things to remember while reading an excerpt from The Big Lie: A True Story: 

Although Jews had a long history of persecution, they had never formed a nation or army. Jewish religion discouraged fighting against an enemy. Any form of resistance was essentially suicide, and the Jewish faith prohibited suicide. Jews traditionally believed whatever occurred was God’s will.



The Jewish population found it impossible to defend themselves against the well-armed German military forces. They did not anticipate the German plan of extermination.



The rapid expansion of the German Nazi army into Eastern Europe caught the world by surprise. Countries affected were not prepared to adequately defend theselves.

Excerpt from The Big Lie: A True Story My name is Isabella, and I was born in a small town called Kisvarda. Kisvarda is located in the northeastern part of Hungary. Today, about nineteen thousand people live there. Of these, only a handful are Jews. When I lived there, in the 1940s, almost four thousand Jews called Kisvarda home. I was one of them. I first opened my eyes to the world in Hungary, as did my four sisters and one brother, our parents, their parents, and their parents before them. No one can remember how far back in time our family tree was planted in Hungary, but it is certain that it was a very long time ago. Today, the date March 20, 1944. . . . [Isabella begins her story of what happened to her family in 1944] My sister, Potyo, is the ‘‘baby’’ of the family. She has just become a teenager. Then come Regina, Philip, myself, Chicha, and Cipi. All of us are bright, active young people. We all know that war is raging in Europe, but the fighting is far away from Kisvarda. We know that Nazi Germany has invaded the countries around us. We hear rumors that terrible things have happened—and are still happening—to Jews in those countries. . . . My father left for the United States in 1939. He left shortly after a band of Hungarian Jew-haters roamed through the streets of Kisvarda looking for Jews to attack. They smashed the windows of Jewish-owned shops. They beat up the shopkeepers and threatened their customers. 144

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Isabella Leitner

‘‘Things will only get worse,’’ my father said. ‘‘The Nazis are not yet in Hungary, and already the local Jew-haters are at work.’’ ‘‘We must leave Kisvarda. In America we will be safe. I will send for you when I get immigration papers. . . . ’’ For two years my father tried to get papers for us in America, but all his efforts were in vain. . . . Overnight, life in Kisvarda changed. What we had previously believed to be only talk now became fact. The town crier strode into the public square. . . . ‘‘Attention! Attention!’’ the short man cried. ‘‘Here are the orders from Budapest. Listen carefully. The orders must be obeyed.’’

Town crier: Person who makes public announcements.

‘‘1. Starting tomorrow, all Jews must wear a yellow star on their clothes to mark them as Jews.’’ ‘‘2. Starting tonight, no Jew can walk the streets after 7:00 p.m.’’ ‘‘3. Starting tomorrow, no Jewish children can go to public school.’’ We could not believe our ears. How could the town crier be saying such things? There must be some mistake. But there was no mistake. Mama sewed yellow stars on our clothes that afternoon. She kept us indoors after 7:00 P.M. And she kept Regina and Potyo home from school the following morning. Rat-a-ta-tat! Rat-a-ta-tat! Rat-a-ta-tat! The town crier was back in the square. ‘‘Attention! Attention!’’ he cried as we gathered around him. ‘‘Today’s orders are as follows:’’ ‘‘1. No Jew can own a radio. All Jews must turn in their radios at Town Hall. Refusal will bring punishment.’’ ‘‘2. No Jew can ride a bicycle. All Jews must turn in their bicycles at the police station. Refusal will bring punishment.’’ ‘‘3. No Jews can talk to non-Jews in public. These orders will be strictly obeyed!’’ As each day passed, new rules were announced. Jews cannot do this. Jews cannot do that. . . . We all felt like prisoners in our own homes in Kisvarda. The day after Passover, two Hungarian gendarmes came to our home. Unlike our regular police, who carried only sidearms, they carried rifles with fixed bayonets and wore feathered hats.

Passover: A Jewish holiday. Gendarmes: Policemen.

‘‘Get your family together. Take food and clothing,’’ one of them shouted at Mama. ‘‘Take enough, but be outside in ten minutes!’’ . . . We all marched in a ragged line under the gendarmes’ watchful eyes. . . . Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

145

Isabella Leitner

During World War II, thousands of Jewish families were forced from their homes into packed, filthy housing areas known as ghettos before being transported to concentration camps. AP I MA GE S.

Several blocks away, in a vacant rundown area, we met groups of Jews from other neighborhoods. They were already gathered and waiting. For what? We didn’t know. . . .

Ghetto: Impoverished, overcrowded neighborhood.

146

At long last, each family was given quarters in the rundown area. A ghetto was to be formed. In spaces where four or five people once lived, thirty or forty of us were now crowded. . . . Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Isabella Leitner

May twenty-eighth was my birthday, but we had no celebration. That day, a young German soldier came to the ghetto with a gleaming pistol and a barking dog. ‘‘You will all be ready at 4:00 A.M. for deportation,’’ he announced. ‘‘Each of you can take along 50 kilos of belongings. Be ready on time, or you will be shot!’’ . . .

Deportation: Lawful expulsion from a country.

In the dark hour of 4:00 A.M., May 29, 1944, hundreds of families throughout the ghetto began appearing in their courtyards. Each man, woman, and child was carrying a bundle, package, backpack, or suitcase. Each was taking along the best possessions of a lifetime. A feeling of terror was in the air. There were Nazis with guns and dogs, watching our every move. . . . We were herded to the railroad station—our family and all the other Jewish families of Kisvarda. . . . At the station, I wondered why the train had no passenger coaches, only old cattle cars without windows. The answer was not long in coming. The Nazis began to force us into the cattle cars. The Nazis shouted at us in German, a language we did not understand. It sounded like Los! Los! Los! It sounded like dogs barking. They packed seventy-five to eighty people in each cattle car. Old men and women. Children clinging to their mothers. Infants in their mothers’ arms. Mama held Potyo close to her body. Philip piled our belongings around them as a wall of protection. Cipi, Chicha, Regina, and I held hands to keep from being separated. When the cattle car was stuffed to its limit, the door was sealed. There were so many people and so little space, no one was able to sit. We could hardly breathe. With a squeal and a rumble, the train began to roll away from Kisvarda. For two days, we were given no food to eat, no water to drink. We ate only what we had brought for the journey—the bread, jam, and boiled potatoes. The food was not enough, but we made it last by nibbling. Many people fell ill. Mrs. Klein went crazy. She screamed hour after hour. Mrs. Fred’s little girl, Sarah, died in her arms. Mrs. Hirsch’s aged father died shortly after our journey began. But the train did not stop. When it did, on May thirty-first, we were in Poland, at a place called Auschwitz, a place none of us had ever heard of. . . . When the cattle car doors were opened, more Nazis with guns and dogs waited for us. Strange-looking men shouted us out of the train. All personal belongings were left behind.... ‘‘Out! Out! Los! Los! Fast! Fast!’’ Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

147

Isabella Leitner

The shouting men were dressed in dirty striped suits, and they carried clubs. They beat anyone who moved too slowly. Later, we found out that they, too, were prisoners of the Nazis. Some were criminals who were working for the Germans. ‘‘Stay with me! Stay together!’’ Mama shouted at us. A handsome German officer with a silver pistol was in charge. He wore white gloves, and kept pointing his right thumb either to the left or to the right as each person passed before him. This inspection, we learned, was called ‘‘selection.’’ The German officer was Dr. Josef Mengele. Dr. Mengele sent Mama and my sister Portyo to the left. ‘‘Be strong,’’ Mama cried as she left us. ‘‘I love you.’’ Dr. Mengele sent the rest of us to the right. ‘‘Portyo, I love you!’’ I shouted, but I don’t know whether she heard me. Philip was led away with the other men who had been sent to the right. Cipi, Chicha, Regina, and I were taken with the other women to a large, wet room. There, in front of laughing German soldiers, we were forced to take off our clothes for what they called ‘‘disinfection.’’ Standing naked, we were embarrassed, ashamed, and frightened. Then, while we stood there, some women with clippers began to cut off all our hair. Regina and I were crying. Cipi and Chicha were sobbing and trying to hide their nakedness. But the Germans didn’t care. Soon we were totally without hair. I stared at my sisters. They stared at me. I could hardly recognize them. They no longer looked like Cipi, Chicha, or Regina. They looked like strange two-legged animals that I had never seen before. I was sure that I looked the same to them. A woman prisoner now threw ragged dresses at us, and we covered ourselves. . . . As the days passed, we learned what Auschwitz was. It was a huge Nazi death camp surrounded by barbed wire fences. The wire was electrified to keep prisoners from escaping. At Auschwitz, between ten and twenty thousand people were killed every day in the summer of 1944. Much of the killing was done right after the cattle cars arrived with their loads of weary prisoners. Those sent to the left by Dr. Mengele, like Mama and Potyo, were led directly to their deaths. The killing was done mainly in poison gas chambers that were disguised as shower rooms. The people who were ‘‘selected’’ to die were each given a bar of soap. ‘‘You are going to take a nice hot shower. Remove all your clothes, and leave them where you are. You will find them when you return.’’ 148

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Isabella Leitner

The unsuspecting prisoners, eager to cleanse themselves after their long cattle car journey, obeyed. They did not know they were going to their deaths. For once they were locked in the ‘‘shower’’ rooms, the Nazis released poison gas, not water, into the chambers. Immediately after the gassing, the dead bodies were hauled to nearby ovens called crematoriums. There, they were burned as fast as possible. The skies darkened with thick black smoke for miles around, and the smell was awful. Almost all the prisoners in Auschwitz at this time were Jews. We were kept in barracks called Blocks. Each Block held one thousand prisoners and one Kapo, a prisoner who was in charge. There were thirty-two Blocks in my part of Auschwitz. My part was called Lager C. The prisoners in my Block had no true beds. Instead, we slept on tripledeck wood shelves called Pritsches. I slept on a top shelf, with my three sisters and ten other girls. The shelf under us also held fourteen girls, and the bottom shelf another fourteen. The shelves often broke, and those on top came tumbling down on the girls below. Screams and shouts filled the night when the Pritsches broke. And nobody slept. Even when the Pritsches did not break we could not sleep, because the Germans held roll calls to count us. A roll call was called Zahlappell, and they were held twice a day. During Zahlappell, everyone had to line up outdoors, outsides the Block. We stood in rows of five, and there were hundreds and hundreds of rows. Counting us took hours, and during this time, we had to stand without moving. The Kapos, who were prisoners themselves, helped the Germans. They beat us if we moved out of line. The food the Nazis gave us was mostly soup and bread. The soup looked like dirty water and was foul-smelling. The bread, we believed, was made from flour mixed with sawdust. At first, Cipi and Chicha had to hold my nose and force the soup down my throat. Later, because of my hunger, I was glad to get it. Dr. Mengele decided who was to live and who was to die. If you were sick, old, or frail, you had no chance to live. Young children or mothers with babies were selected to die immediately. Only the strong and healthy could hope to survive. Everybody was afraid of Dr. Mengele. Whenever he came to make a selection, Cipi, Chicha, Regina, and I ran from Block to Block to escape him. One night, he shot at us with his silver pistol. Fortunately, he missed in the dark. Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

149

Isabella Leitner

Concentration camp prisoners were not given real beds, but instead slept on wooden shelves stacked one on top of the other. NAT IO NAL AR CHI VE S.

Other times, Dr. Mengele made selections during Zahlappell. It was impossible to run away then, because we were all standing in rows of five. We stood straight and tall. We pinched Regina’s cheeks to make them rosy and healthy-looking. We told her to stand on tiptoe. That way she looked taller than she really was. And Dr. Mengele passed us by. A few days after we were brought to Auschwitz, some prisoners brought us a piece of wood that had instructions and a message carved into it. The instructions said: ‘‘My four sisters are in Lager C. Their name is Katz. Whoever finds this piece of wood, please toss it over the fences until it reaches them.’’ The message was shorter: ‘‘You must live. You simply must. I love you.’’ Philip had found a way to reach us. His message was brief, but it kept our spirits alive for a long time. 150

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Isabella Leitner

A group of Jewish children being held at the Auschwitz concentration camp in Poland. U .S. HOL OC AUS T MU SE UM.

During the six months we spent in Auschwitz, we saw many prisoners starve to death. They starved not because they could not eat the terrible food, but because there was never enough, bad as it was. The starving prisoners looked like walking skeletons. They were called Muselmans. When Dr. Mengele saw a Muselman, he sent her off to the ovens. We saw other prisoners beaten or shot by the Nazis. Once during Zahlappell, Irma Greza, a woman Nazi offer, made Chicha kneel and hold two rocks in the air until roll call was over. ‘‘You will be very sorry if you drop them,’’ Greza said. To us this meant that Chicha would be shot. But Chicha was very brave. She held the rocks high for hours and did not drop them. It was a small victory, but still a victory. Chicha had stayed alive, and that gave all who saw her the courage to carry on. . . .

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

151

Isabella Leitner

What happened next . . . Cipi, Chicha, Regina, and Isabella were moved from Auschwitz to another camp in eastern Germany called Birnbaumel in late 1944. There they were forced to dig holes in the cold ground meant as traps for Russian tanks and trucks that were advancing toward Germany. The third week of January 1945, the four girls and other prisoners at Birnhaumel began what was to be a forced three-week death march to the Bergen-Belsen camp deeper inside Germany. Those who could not go fast enough were beaten and when they fell, they were shot. On the third day, as a blizzard engulfed the marchers, Isabella, Chicha, and Regina escaped by running to a deserted house and hiding in the dog house. Cipi tried also to escape but was caught, beaten, and later died at BergenBelsen. The same day the three girls escaped, the Russian Army marched into the village immediately behind the Germans. The girls were freed, well cared for, and sent on a two-week comfortable train ride to Odessa, a severely damaged Russian city on the Black Sea. The girls’ father was in America, so on April 6, Isabella, Chicha, and Regina sailed on the SS Brand Whitlock for the United States. They settled in Brooklyn, New York. Philip, their brother, had been shot by the Nazis, but was recovering in a U.S. hospital in Germany. He soon joined the family for their new life in America. The family had lost their mother and two sisters. The Nazis, while suffering defeat after defeat on the battlefield, still wanted to kill every Jew. Mass killing continued even as Russian troops began reaching a few camps as early as summer 1944. They reached Auschwitz in January 1945. The Germans were staggeringly successful in the Jewish genocide. Between six and seven million Jews were killed, 64 percent of the Jews in Europe. This was 35 percent of the world’s Jewish population. For the millions of displaced Jews who had nowhere to return to, displaced person camps were created in Europe. Some remained in the camps for years. The camps did not finally close until 1952. More and more people looked to the British-controlled Palestine on the eastern shore of the Mediterranean Sea to establish a Jewish homeland. The independent nation of Israel emerged in 1948. In December 1948, member nations of the United Nations signed the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Each nation that signed the treaty declared it would cooperate with other nations to ensure genocide never happened again. The articles 152

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Isabella Leitner

of the treaty defined genocide, listed punishable acts, stated that private individuals as well as rulers and officials could be tried in a court of law, and declared that trials would be held within the country where the genocide took place or in an international court.

Did you know . . . 

The German leaders referred to the genocide of Jews as ‘‘the final solution of the Jewish question.’’



The term holocaust derives from the Greek word holokauston, which refers to a sacrifice, burned in whole, to God. The word was used since the late nineteenth century to describe major disasters. Since World War II, it has been used solely to refer to Nazi Germany’s genocide of Jews, whose whole bodies were burned in buildings called crematoriums and in open fire pits.



At great risk to themselves, a few individuals sought to save Jews from death camps. One was Oskar Schindler (1908–1974), a businessman who used slave labor in Poland. In reality for a Jew to be on Schindler’s list of workers meant that he or she would most likely escape the Nazi terror. A 1993 movie, Schindler’s List, told a fictionalized version of the story.



For survivors, the Holocaust was never to be forgotten. Memories of prisoners being humiliated, tortured, and killed were horrific. Memorials and museums continue to be built. The United States Holocaust Museum on the Mall of Washington, D.C., realistically walks visitors through the unspeakable experience of a Nazi death camp.

Consider the following . . . 

Imagine you are a German who does not share your nation’s hatred of the Jews. How could you help Jews in your community?



You are a Jew in the Holocaust who has been selected by the Nazis to maintain order of Jewish prisoners in one of the death camps. How would you react when given the choice to persecute your fellow Jews or die yourself, and what would you do to help their plight?



Based on literature written over the decades since the end of the war, what are the reasons identified about why Nazis were able to carry on with the Jewish genocide?

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

153

Isabella Leitner



The surviving Jewish population has untiringly and extensively educated the world on genocide. Their continuing slogan is ‘‘Never Again.’’ The United Nations adopted the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in 1948. Consider what has occurred in the second half of the twentieth century and early twenty-first century. Has genocide of targeted peoples stopped? Explain.



By the late 1990s and early twenty-first century, some Europeans and others say the Holocaust never occurred. What was causing people to make such claims?

For More Information BOOKS

Gilbert, Martin. The Holocaust: A History of the Jews of Europe during the Second World War. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1986. Leitner, Isabella. The Big Lie: A True Story New York: Scholastic Inc., 1992. Rogasky, Barbara. Smoke and Ashes: The Story of the Holocaust. New York: Holiday House, Inc., 2002. Wiesel, Elie. Night. New York: Hill and Wang, 1960. WEB SIT ES

United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. http://www.ushmm.org/ (accessed on December 12, 2006).

154

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Mine Okubo Excerpt from Citizen 13660

Written and illustrated by Mine Okubo Published in 1946

‘‘The woman in charge asked me many questions and filled in several printed forms as I answered. As a result of the interview, my family name was reduced to No. 13660. I was given several tags bearing the family number. . . . ’’

ollowing the surprise Japanese attack on the U.S. military shipyards and airfields at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, resulting in the U.S. entry into World War II, fears ran high in the United States that the Japanese would attempt an attack on the western U.S. mainland. Americans were convinced there were spies within the Japanese American communities. About 127,000 Japanese Americans lived in the United States, the majority on the West Coast—93,000 in California and 19,000 in Oregon and Washington. FBI agents moved through Japanese communities within hours of the Pearl Harbor attack and arrested prominent leaders. The cause for arrest was nothing more than the possibility that these citizens of Japanese descent maintained sympathy with Japan. Japanese banks were closed, accounts frozen (could not withdraw the money), and homes searched for any item, such as short-wave radios, that could be used to send signals to Japanese ships should they come to the U.S. west coastline. The situation in 1941 was much like the situation following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, when the U.S. government took similar actions against Arab Americans. U.S. president Franklin D. Roosevelt (1882–1945; served 1933–45), under heavy pressure from politicians, the military, and public, issued Executive Order 9066 on February 19, 1942. The order required removal

F

155

Mine Okubo

A Japanese American-owned grocery store that was sold when Executive Order 9066 was signed in February 1942, requiring all persons of Japanese ancestry be removed from California, Washington, Oregon, and Arizona. NA TI ONA L AR CH IVE S.

of all persons of Japanese ancestry from California, Washington, Oregon, and Arizona to staging or gathering areas for transportation to assembly centers. The government quickly established assembly centers at fairgrounds, racetracks, and stockyards. Japanese Americans were given only a few weeks to take care of business including selling houses, stores, and cars, and packing only what they could carry. Pets and other valuables too big to carry had to be left behind if provisions for them had not been made. Mine Okubo (1912–2001), who held bachelor’s and master’s degrees in fine arts from the University of California at Berkeley, and her brother were caught up in the internment process. They were given family unit number 13660, which became the name of Okubo’s book. They were taken to Tanforan race track in California, where they lived in a stable until moved to an 156

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Mine Okubo

internment camp in central Utah called Topaz. The following excerpt from Citizen 13660 describes the shock of evacuation to an assembly center and what they found when they arrived.

Things to remember while reading excerpts from Citizen 13660: 

About 70 percent of Japanese Americans were U.S. citizens, having been born in the United States.



In all, there were ten hastily constructed internment camps in remote areas: two in California, two in Arizona, two in Arkansas, and one each in Utah, Wyoming, Colorado, and Idaho. These heavily guarded camps were home to about 110,000 Japanese Americans for two to three years during World War II.



Prejudice against Asian Americans, overwhelmingly of Japanese and Chinese ancestry, was long-standing since the mid-nineteenth century when they began arriving in the United States. Laws, solely based on ethnicity, restricted Japanese and Chinese immigration, landownership, and U.S. citizenship.

Excerpt from Citizen 13660 I had a good home and many friends. Everything was going along fine. Then on December 7, 1941, while my brother and I were having late breakfast I turned on the radio and heard the flash—‘‘Pearl Harbor bombed by the Japanese!’’ We were shocked. We wondered what this would mean to us and the other people of Japanese descent in the United States. Our fears came true with the declaration of war against Japan. Radios started blasting, newspapers flaunted scare headlines. On December 11 the United States declared war on Germany and Italy. On the West Coast there was talk of possible sabotage and invasion by the enemy. It was ‘‘Jap’’ this and ‘‘Jap’’ that. Restricted areas were prescribed and many arrests and detentions of enemy aliens took place. All enemy aliens were required to have certificates of identification. Contraband, such as cameras, binoculars, short-wave radios, and firearms had to be turned over to the local police. At this time I was working on mosaics for Fort Ord and for the Servicemen’s Hospitality House in Oakland, California. I was too busy to bother about the reports of possible evacuation. Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Sabotage: Destructive action for the purpose of disabling an enemy. Enemy aliens: Japanese, Italians, and Germans in the United States who were not U.S. citizens.

157

Mine Okubo

However, it was not long before I realized my predicament. My fellow workers were feeling sorry for me; my Caucasian friends were suggesting that I go east; my Japanese American friends were asking me what I would do if all American citizens and aliens of Japanese ancestry were evacuated. Letters from a sister in Southern California informed me that Father had been whisked away to an internment camp. . . . The people looked at all of us, both citizens and aliens, with suspicion and mistrust. On February 19, 1942, by executive order of the President, the enemy alien problem was transferred from the Department of Justice to the War Department. Restriction of German and Italian enemy aliens and evacuation of all American citizens and aliens of Japanese ancestry was ordered. Public Proclamation Nos. 1 and 2 appeared in the newspapers. Three military areas were designated, including practically all of the coastal states of Washington, Oregon, and California, and the inland states of Arizona, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, and Utah.

Antagonism: Resentment and hostility.

Evacuation was voluntary; people of Japanese ancestry were instructed to move out of the region on their own. Several thousand moved out of the vital coast areas but growing suspicion and general public antagonism caused unforeseen difficulties. On March 27, 1942, voluntary evacuation was halted and the army took over, to bring about a forced and orderly evacuation. On March 24, Public Proclamation No. 3 established the curfew. All American citizens and aliens of Japanese ancestry and other enemy aliens had to be home between the hours of 8 p.m. and 6 a.m. I had to have a special permit to travel to Oakland where I was employed because it was outside a five-mile radius of my home. Violation of any of the regulations meant fines and imprisonment. The Federal Reserve Banks took charge of property owned by the evacuees, while the Farm Security Administration took over the agricultural property. This was necessary because of the social and economic vultures preying upon the unfortunates expecting to be evacuated. ‘‘Be prepared for the Relocation Centers. Bring work clothes suited to pioneer life,’’ was, in effect, one of the instructions. We made all kinds of hurried preparations. I had no difficulty finding boots and jeans but had to get friends to help find duffel bags, as most of the stores were sold out of them.

Exclusion: Evacuation.

158

Shelter for 100,000 evacuees was constructed by the army within a space of three weeks. Race tracks and county fair grounds were changed overnight into assembly centers surrounded by military police and barbed wire. Fifteen centers were established, Manzanar in southern California being the first. Exclusion orders followed in rapid succession and the first formal mass evacuation started on March 31. Thousands were evacuated every day Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Mine Okubo

A map showing the locations of the Japanese internment camps constructed in the United States in 1942. Mine Okubo was held at the Topaz camp. # MA PS .CO M/ CO RBI S.

from the designated areas, and soon all American citizens and aliens of Japanese ancestry were moved from the entire state of California, the western half of Oregon and Washington, and the southern third of Arizona. In all, 110,000 were moved out; two thirds of them were native American citizens. On April 24, 1942, Civilian Exclusion order No. 19 was issued and posted everywhere in Berkeley. Our turn had come. We had not believed at first that evacuation would affect the Nisei, American citizens of Japanese ancestry, but thought perhaps the Issei, Japanese-born mothers and fathers who were denied naturalization by American law, would be interned in case of war between Japan and the Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Naturalization: Citizenship gained by immigrants to a new country.

159

Mine Okubo

United States. It was a real blow when everyone, regardless of citizenship, was ordered to evacuate. Civil Control Stations were established by the Wartime Civil Control Administration in each of the designated areas. One member of each family was asked to register for the family; people without families registered individually. On Sunday, April 26, 1942, I reported to Pilgrim Hall of the First Congregational Church in Berkeley to register for my brother and myself—a family unit of two. Soldiers were standing guard at the entrance and around the buildings. A woman seated near the entrance gave me a card with No. 7 printed on it and told me to go inside and wait. I read the ‘‘funnies’’ [comics] until my number was called and I was interviewed. The woman in charge asked me many questions and filled in several printed forms as I answered. As a result of the interview, my family name was reduced to No. 13660. I was given several tags bearing the family number, and was then dismissed. At another desk I made the necessary arrangements to have my household property stored by the government. On Tuesday when I returned to the Civil Control Station, I found our names posted on the board along with the family number. My family unit of two was scheduled to leave with the next to the last group at 11:30 a.m. on Friday, May 1, 1942. Our destination was Tanforan Assembly Center, which was at the Tanforan Race Track in San Bruno, a few miles south of San Francisco. We had three days and three nights to pack and get ready. My brother was excused from the University with a promise that he would receive his B.A. degree in June. Our friends came to cheer us up and to wish us luck. It was like old home week but we were exhausted from work and worry. On the last morning the main part of the packing was finished but there was still plenty to be done. I asked different friends to take care of some of my cherished possessions. In the last hour I dashed to the bank to get some money, picked up my laundry, and paid my household bills. We tagged our baggage with the family number, 13660, and pinned the personal tags on ourselves; we were ready at last. Our friends came to take us to the Civil Control Station. We took one last look at our happy home. The entire city block around the Civil Control Station was guarded by military police. Baggage was piled on the sidewalk the full length of the block. Greyhound buses were lined alongside the curb. We said good-bye to our friends and entered the Civil Control Station. Hundreds of evacuees were already there. A guide directed us to Group No. 4 160

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Mine Okubo

Japanese Americans boarding a bus bound for the Manzanar, California, relocation camp in 1942. T HE L IB RAR Y O F CO NGR ES S.

to which we were assigned. Sandwiches and fruit were served by the church people. At 11:00 a.m. Group 4 was called. We picked up our hand luggage and fell into line. The military police opened the bus door and we stepped into the bus as our family number was called. Many spectators stood around. At that moment I recalled some of the stories told on shipboard by European refugees bound for America. We were silent on the trip except for a group of four University of California boys who were singing college songs. The bus crossed the Bay Bridge. Everyone stared at the beautiful view as if for the last time. The singing stopped. At about 12:30 we arrived at Tanforan Assembly Center. The gates were opened by military guards and the bus drove into the Tanforan Race Track grounds. Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

161

Mine Okubo

Baggage of all sizes and shapes was piled high along the driveway in back of the grandstand, and earlier arrivals were searching among the stacks for their possessions. We waited in the parked bus for fifteen minutes; then the bus was driven around to the front of the grandstand. The solider got out and opened the door and we filed out past him. My brother and I were separated at this point. I was asked to sit on the bench with the women and wait while my brother lined up with the men as was searched from head to toe for contraband. Straight-edged razors, knives more than four inches long, and liquor were considered contraband. Partitioned: Divided.

Barrack: Living quarters.

Medical examination followed. I was asked to enter one of the slightly partitioned and curtained compartments and was ordered to undress. A nurse looked into my mouth with a flashlight and checked my arms to see if I had been vaccinated for smallpox. . . . A guide was called to take us to our home, Barrack 16, Room 50. We went practically halfway around the race track and then diagonally across the center field through sticky mud and tall weeds. The ground was wet from the downpour of the day before. Those who had come on that day were drenched and their baggage was soaked. Friends who had entered the camp the previous week had warned us what camp was like so we came prepared with boots. When we arrived it was not raining, but now it started to sprinkle. We followed the guide past the race track to the other side where the horse stables were. We passed many stables before Stable 16 was pointed out to us. It was an isolated building surrounded by tall weeds and standing high above the ground. It was the only barrack with a raised walk and railing. The guide left us at the door of Stall 50. We walked in and dropped our things inside the entrance. The place was in semidarkness; light barely came through the dirty window on either side of the entrance. A swinging halfdoor divided the 20 by 9 ft. stall into two rooms. The roof sloped down from a height of twelve feet in the rear room to seven feet in the front room; below the rafters an open space extended the full length of the stable. The rear room had housed the horse and the front room the fodder. Both rooms showed signs of a hurried whitewashing. Spider webs, horse hair, and hay had been whitewashed with the walls. Huge spikes and mails stuck out all over the walls. A two-inch layer of dust covered the floor, but on removing it we discovered that linoleum the color of redwood had been placed over the rough manure-covered boards. We opened the folded spring cots lying on the floor of the rear room and sat on them in semidarkness. We heard someone crying in the next stall. It was no use just sitting there, so we went to work cleaning the stall. We took turns sweeping the floor with a whisk broom. It was the only practical thing we had brought with us.

162

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Mine Okubo

By this time it was four o’clock and suppertime in camp. We rushed back to the huge grandstand. The ground floor served as the mess hall for the 5,000 evacuees then in the center; later it would serve 8,000. When we arrived, four lines, each a block long, waited outside the mess-hall doors. It was very windy and cold. An hour passed and we finally reached the door only to learn that the line did not lead anywhere. The thought of starting over again left us when we saw the length of the other lines. We decided to crowd ourselves in, as so many others were trying to do, but it was impossible. Everyone was hugging the person ahead. Fortunately we discovered a friend who made room for us. People glared at us as we squeezed into line. At the dishware and the silverware counter I picked up a plate, a knife, and a fork. I wiped my plate clean with my handkerchief and held it out to the first of the cooks, who was serving boiled potatoes with his hands. The second cook had just dished out the last of the canned Vienna sausages, the main part of the dinner, so I passed by him and received two slices of bread from a girl at the end of the food counter. We were pushed into the mess hall, where the entire space was filled with long tables and backless benches. Each table was supposed to accommodate eight persons, but right now each was a bedlam of hungry people. We looked for an empty place but could find none. The air was stuffy and, having temporarily lost our appetites, we decided to forget about eating. We went in search of our belongings. Some of the baggage had been piled in the driveway at the entrance to the gates but most of it had been dumped in front of the grandstand. We climbed and fought our way through hundreds of crates, trunks, duffel bags, and cartons, but could not find our baggage. Truckloads were arriving about every two hours, so we decided our belongings would turn up later. By this time the mess-hall line was short and we decided to try again. We managed to get some canned hash besides the potato and the two slices of bread. The mess hall had cleared to a great extent and the atmosphere was more pleasant. A pitcher of tea and a number of cups were on each table. We sat down to eat our first meal in the center. We carried our dirty dishes to the dishwashing counter. Groups of young fellows were removing the garbage with one hand and dipping the plates into a soapy mess with the other at a mass-production rate of speed. The cups and plates were thrown on racklike shelves to drain and dry. An enormous two-trailer Bekins Truck drove up as we left the mess hall. Lads who looked about sixteen years old were in charge of the unloading, and when the truck stopped they went to work. Packages and boxes came hurtling out; some of them split open as they hit the ground. My brother ran to the other side of the truck to watch for ours to appear. I was about to give up my vigil when suddenly he shouted, ‘‘Here they come!’’ I ran to join him Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

163

Mine Okubo

The typical interior of a barracks home at a Japanese relocation camp. Families had to hang sheets to create ‘‘rooms’’ within the bare, one-room living quarters. N ATI ON AL A RC HIV ES .

just as he caught one of our suitcases. It was a cheap wooden one and could not take the beating; the cover was torn loose from the hinges. We collected our baggage and hailed a truck to have it delivered to our barrack. The truck was already bulging, but our belongings were tossed in, too, and we climbed on top and held on. On the long, bouncing ride back to the barrack we stopped to make several deliveries. At Barrack 16 we were unloaded with our goods. We dragged our stuff to our stall. It was now getting late in the evening, so we started on the half-mile walk back around the race track to get our mattresses. The mattress department was a stable filled with straw. We were given bags of ticking and were told to help ourselves to the straw. The few cotton mattresses available were reserved for the sick and the old. 164

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Mine Okubo

When we had finished filling the bags, the openings were sewed roughly together and we carried the bags away. It was very windy and dusty on the way back and we had some difficulty managing the awkward load. Friends who were there before us had advised us to bring some foodstuffs, so we opened a can of peaches and ate them with crackers. We shook the mattresses and flattened them out and made our beds with the sheets and blankets we had brought along. We ‘‘hit the hay’’ around ten that night, but learned very quickly that sleep was not to be easily won. Because the partitions were low and there were many holes in the boards they were made of, the crackling of the straw and the noises from the other stalls were incessant. Loud snores, the grinding of teeth, the wail of babies, the murmur of conversations—these could be heard the full length of the stable. Moreover, it was very cold and we were shivering. One blanket was not enough to keep us warm. We got up and opened the duffel bags and the suitcases and spread everything over our beds. Sleep finally overtook us around midnight. Thus ended our first day in the Tanforan Assembly Center. The first month was the hardest because adjustments had to be made to the new mode of life. The naked barracks and whitewashed stalls had to be fixed up into living quarters, and we had to get used to the lack of privacy of camp life. . . . The weather in Tanforan was fair. It was sunny on most days but always windy and dusty. My stall faced north and the sun never reached it. It was uncomfortable. I had a cold most of the time. Every person leaving or entering the center was searched. No evacuee was permitted to leave the center except incase of emergency or death. Rules were very strict.

What happened next . . . At the end of the war, a great deal of hatred for people of Japanese heritage still existed in the United States. Reports of cruelty and inhumane acts by Japanese military during the war overshadowed the bravery of the Japanese Americans fighting for the United States. General hostility made some Japanese Americans fearful of leaving the camps and reentering U.S. society. Community leaders, especially in the Pacific Coast states, resisted Japanese settling in their communities. Graffiti of racial slurs and threatening physical harm appeared on buildings. Hostile signs placed in store and cafe´ windows announced Japanese would not be served. In addition to anger over the war, hostilities were rooted in fear of Japanese American competition for jobs. Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

165

Mine Okubo

Those Japanese Americans returning to their previous homes found they had lost their property and had no income or money with which to start their lives. Japanese Americans lost hundred of millions of dollars of income they would have made if they had not been taken to the camps and property they had owned before the war. The U.S. government offered no assistance. Housing was in critically short supply for all Americans, and Japanese Americans were turned away from every door. Japanese American churches organized hostels for those returning from camps, other settled into old army barracks. For years after the war, Japanese Americans were judged only by their ancestry and endured severe prejudice. Okubo mailed detention camp sketches she made to a San Francisco art show where they won awards. Her artistic talent led to a job in New York City with Fortune magazine. Because she had found employment, she was allowed to leave Topaz in January 1944. Okubo exhibited her work from California to the Northeast for the next fifty years and was published in leading American magazines, such as Time and Life.

Did you know . . . 

The detention of Japanese Americans was challenged in the courts and made it all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. In the 1944 case of Korematsu v. United States, the Court upheld the detentions as a military necessity, just as the U.S. government had claimed.



Thousands of Japanese Americans served with distinction in the U.S. armed forces overseas. The Japanese American 442nd Regimental Combat team became the most decorated army unit of World War II. The 100th Battalion made up of Nisei (Japanese Americans born in the United States to immigrant parents) recruits who volunteered while living in the internment camps and Hawaiian soldiers compiled such an impressive war record that they earned the nickname Purple Heart Battalion for their aggressive combat style. The term Purple Heart refers to the U.S. medal awarded to military personnel who are wounded or killed in combat.



Citizen 13660 won the 1984 American Book Award and was still used in classrooms in the early twenty-first century.

Consider the following . . . 

166

Following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attack on the United States, Arab and Muslim Americans feared they might be rounded Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Mine Okubo

up and sent to internment camps just as Japanese Americans had been after the attack on Pearl Harbor. However, internment camps were not established for those living in the United States. Why do you think such camps were not created? Did the U.S. government and American public learn from the World War II experience? 

Even though you have had the advantage of discussing and better understanding the dangers of racial prejudice, put yourself in the place of Americans on Sunday, December 7, 1941, as they listened on the radio to accounts of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. Honestly assess what your feelings would have been toward those of Japanese descent.



Put yourself in the place of a young Japanese American sent to an internment camp during World War II. What would your feelings be toward the U.S. government? Once released after several years of detention, would you forgive or would you be bitter?

For More Information B O O KS

Cooper, Michael L. Remembering Manzanar: Life in a Japanese Relocation Camp. New York: Clarion Books, 2002. Inada, Lawson Fusao. Only What We Could Carry: The Japanese American Internment Experience. Berkeley, CA: Heyday Books, 2000. Okubo, Mine. Citizen 13660. New York: Columbia University Press, 1983. Sun, Shirley. Mine Obuko: An American Experience. San Francisco: East Wind Printers, 1972. Tunnell, Michael O. The Children of Topaz: The Story of a Japanese-American Internment Camp. New York: Holiday House, 1996. WEB SIT ES

Japanese American National Museum. http://www.janm.org (accessed on December 12, 2006). National Japanese American Historical Society. http://www.nikkeiheritage.org (accessed on December 12, 2006).

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

167

Universal Declaration of Human Rights Excerpt from ‘‘Universal Declaration of Human Rights’’

Adopted by the United Nations Published on the United Nations Web site http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html

‘‘Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.’’

orty-eight member states (nations) of the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on December 10, 1948. In adopting the Declaration those forty-eight nations affirmed their belief that ‘‘recognition of the . . . dignity . . . of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice, and peace in the world. . . . ’’ The United Nations (UN) was established following World War II (1939–45) in June 1945 with fifty member states. Its purpose is to promote world peace through assuring security and human rights for all the world’s people. By 1948, the UN had a total of fifty-eight member states. The Declaration was the first document adopted by an international organization and meant to apply universally to all nations and people of the world. Although the member states varied significantly in their political and economic systems, and culturally, the Declaration represented a common vision of and goals for the world community. For more than half a century, the Declaration has affected the lives of people worldwide and remains as powerful, perhaps even more powerful, a document in the early twenty-first century as it was in the mid-twentieth century. The Declaration is not a statement merely written with beautiful, hopeful words but little substance. Instead, it states specific detailed

F

169

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

fundamental human rights in thirty articles (sections). Many of these articles recall words of the U.S. Declaration of Independence written in 1776 and the U.S. Constitution written in 1787. The articles state: that humans are born free and equal with regard to dignity and rights; that everyone has the right to ‘‘life, liberty and security’’; the right to equal protection under the law, innocent until proven guilty, the right to come before a competent court of law; freedom of religion, speech, and thought; and freedom of assembly and association. The articles state that humans have rights in very practical day-to-day matters: freedom of movement and residence; right to own property; marriage rights; right to vote; right to employment, to freely choose that employment, and to receive appropriate pay; right to an adequate standard of living; and the right at minimum to an elementary education. Writing the Declaration The UN created in 1946 the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, made up of eighteen member states. That commission then chose a committee of eight persons to draft the Declaration, their first item of business. The eight individuals were from Australia, Chile, China, France, Lebanon, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), the United Kingdom, and the United States. The member from the United States was Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt (1884– 1965), wife of the recently deceased U.S. president Franklin D. Roosevelt. Roosevelt was appointed lead of the Human Rights Commission, and chief writer of the Declaration. Mrs. Roosevelt would later comment on many occasions that drafting the Declaration was her life’s proudest achievement.

Mrs. Roosevelt clearly and precisely guided the two-year process of writing the Declaration. As related by Sondra Myers in her 2002 book The Democracy Reader, Mrs. Roosevelt’s often quoted question she presented to the committee was, ‘‘Where, after all, do universal human rights begin? In small places, close to home—so close and so small that they cannot be seen on any maps of the world. Yet they are the world of the individual person; they neighborhood he lives in; the school or college he attends; the factory, farm or office where he works. Such are the places where every man, woman and child seeks equal justice, equal opportunity, equal dignity without discrimination.’’ The following document is the ‘‘Universal Declaration of Human Rights’’ in its entirety. In creating this document Roosevelt and her committee address the rights of humans that are required in their everyday lives. 170

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Eleanor Roosevelt, left, was appointed lead of the Human Rights Commission, and chief writer of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. # B ETT MA NN/ CO RBI S.

Things to remember while reading the ‘‘Universal Declaration of Human Rights’’: 

Since its founding, the United Nations’ central principle has been protection and furthering of human rights for men, women, and children alike.



Universal means ‘‘covering all.’’

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

171

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

172

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

173

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights details fundamental human rights in thirty articles. The articles state that humans are born free and equal with regard to dignity and rights. HU LTO N AR CH IVE /G ETT Y I MAG ES .

174

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

175

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

People marching in New Delhi, India, in support of the 50th anniversary of the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights. AP I MA GE S.

176

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

177

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

What happened next . . . Although not legally binding itself, the Declaration became the basis for numerous human rights documents and treaties that are legally binding on nations. Its principles of political, legal, economic, and social rights have been included in the constitutions of newly established nations, in laws of nations, and adopted into international organizations. Throughout the last half of the twentieth century, the UN established numerous avenues to monitor human rights in nations and investigate charges of abuse. UN special representatives, experts, and appointed committees traveled to nations for monitoring, promotion, and for education on human rights issues. When requested by governments, the UN has opened offices within a country to protect and further explain and promote human rights. However the UN recognizes that discrimination against ethnic groups, religious and gender discrimination, and even genocide still occur within the world community. Further, too many people continue to live in dire poverty with little dignity.

Did you know . . .

178



The Declaration has been translated into over two hundred languages.



The forty-eight member states that adopted the Declaration in 1948 were Afghanistan, Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Burma, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Denmark, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, France, Greece, Guatemala, Haiti, Iceland, India, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Liberia, Luxembourg, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Siam (Thailand), Sweden, Syria, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay, and Venezuela.



In 1948, eight member states abstained from voting (did not vote) on the Declaration and therefore did not adopt its principles. Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

They were Byelorussia, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Saudi Arabia, Ukraine, Union of South Africa, USSR, and Yugoslavia. Two member states were not present when the vote was taken.

Consider the following . . . 

Choose one of the countries that failed to adopt the Declaration in 1948. What was its approach to and promotion or lack of promotion of human rights in the second half of the twentieth century?



The principles for which Eleanor Roosevelt stood made her the perfect leader of the committee that wrote the Declaration. Research her life. Discover and report on some of those principles.



At the start of the twenty-first century have most people of the world achieved freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want? Where has the goal been realized? Where has it not been realized?



How many member states (nations) belong to the United Nations at the start of the twenty-first century? Find out how many have adopted the Declaration.

For More Information B O O KS

Freedman, Russell. Eleanor Roosevelt: A Life of Discovery. New York: New Clarion Books, 1993. Gareis, Sven Bernhard, and Johannes Varwick. The United Nations: An Introduction. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005. Hareven, Tamara R. Eleanor Roosevelt: An American Conscience. New York: Da Capo Press, 1975. Myers, Sondra. The Democracy Reader. New York: International Debate Education Association, 2002. WEB SIT ES

United Nations. ‘‘Universal Declaration of Human Rights’’ http://www.un.org/ Overview/rights.html (accessed on December 12, 2006).

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

179

7

Prejudice in Society

any types of prejudice (a negative attitude towards others based on a prejudgment about those individuals with no prior knowledge or experience) exist in the world, the most common being ethnic, racial, religious. Two that do not fall into these most common categories are social class prejudice and prejudice against persons of different sexual orientation. Categories of people based on their wealth and social standing are known as social classes. A group of people who share a similar social and economic status belong to a particular social class. Class differences normally involve inequalities and prejudices between members of different groups. In societies that are highly stratified (social classes arranged in an order based on their perceived degree of importance), chances for education, jobs, and economic advancement are influenced by what class a person is born into. Class levels in some countries are called castes. Caste systems based on family origins and the type of work one does are prevalent in many Asian and African countries. Prejudice and discrimination (treating some people differently than others or favoring one social group over another based on prejudices) against persons belonging to lower caste levels is common. Approximately one in every twenty-five people of the world is a victim of caste discrimination. That statistic means about 250 to 300 million—179 million in India alone—worldwide suffer from caste discrimination. India is an example of a country with rigid class levels or castes. Even though the caste system is legally banned, it nevertheless continues to dominate Indian society. The first excerpt, ‘‘Untouchable,’’ describes discrimination that a class of people in India called the Untouchables must live with every day. Although not members of any specific social class, those persons whose sexual orientation differs from male-female attraction face social prejudice worldwide. Those who identify as gay, lesbian, or bisexual are

M

India’s Untouchables 183 Matthew Shepard 193

181

Prejudice in Society

sexually attracted to the same sex as themselves. Gay refers to males who are sexually attracted to other males. Lesbian refers to females who are sexually attracted to other females. Bisexual persons are attracted to both same sex and people of the opposite sex. Gays, lesbians, and bisexuals are a diverse group of people who do not belong to a particular social class, but are found in all social classes and throughout the world. Although they live with the hope of acceptance, understanding, love, and happiness, for centuries they have been subjected to severe prejudice, discrimination, oppression, and violence. At the start of the twenty-first century in the United States, a large network of gay, lesbian, and bisexual organizations lent support, attempted to educate the general public, and lessened prejudice against those with same-sex orientation. Matthew Shepard, a twenty-one-year-old gay male living in Wyoming, was brutally tortured and left to die because he was gay. The second excerpt, ‘‘Dennis Shepard’s Statements to the Court,’’ comes from a statement to the jury that convicted one of Matthew’s assailants. The statement by Dennis Shepard, Matthew’s father, reveals the love a father has for his son and how hate-based, prejudice-filled violence still existed in America in the late twentieth century.

182

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

India’s Untouchables Excerpt from ‘‘Untouchable’’

Written by Tom O’Neill Published in National Geographic, June 2003

‘‘The Hindu caste system has its own instruction manual. The Laws of Manu, compiled at least 2,000 years ago by Brahman priests, prescribes . . . what to eat, whom to marry, how to earn money, when to fight, how to keep clean, whom to avoid.’’

he ancient caste system in India is an extreme version of social class stratification. Stratification means people in a society are separated into different social groupings and the groupings are placed in a descending order, with the most respected at the top and the least respected at the bottom. India’s caste system is rigid and does not allow for movement between different levels. Prejudice and discrimination among castes is a defining characteristic of the Indian caste structure. India is one of the most densely populated countries in the world. Its population at the start of the twenty-first century was about one billion. Seventy-five percent of the population lives in rural areas. Religion is a very important part of Indian life. Two of the world’s major religions, Hinduism and Buddhism, originated in India. Hinduism is followed by a large majority of India’s population, about 82 percent. India’s caste system, interwoven with the Hindu religion, dates back 1,500 years. The caste system is based on Hindu legend about a primordial being (a living organism that existed at the beginning of evolution from which all life came). From this being’s mouth came Brahmans, the priest and teachers in Hindu society. Brahmans are the highest caste system. From the legendary figure’s arms come the government leaders and soldiers, members of the second-ranking caste, the

T

183

India’s Untouchables

Kshatriya. Farmers, merchants, and businessmen are in the third ranking caste, the Vaisyas. Vaisyas come from the being’s thighs. The lowest caste is the Sudras, laborers, that come from the being’s feet. Within each caste are many subgroups associated with the particular occupations. Brahmans, Kshatriyas, Vaisyas, and Sudras are the four Hindu castes. These castes or groupings are called varnas. Whatever caste or varna a baby is born into will be his or her varna for life. Marriages for young people are arranged within one’s caste. Each caste has its codes of conduct and unique lifestyles. For example, upper caste members receive better education. For centuries lower caste members were forbidden to even acquire books. Sudras’ work never allows them to gain financial independence or accumulate wealth. All wealth in Indian society is reserved for the top three castes. Below the four varnas is a fifth group called Achuta, known as Untouchables. Another name for Untouchables is Dalits. The Untouchables did not come from the Hindu legendary being and are not considered a caste. Instead, they are considered a filthy, polluted, unworthy grouping. One in six Indians is an Untouchable, approximately 160 million Indians. Restricted to where they can live and what jobs they can hold plus lack of access to education and medical care, they face discrimination throughout their lives. When a baby is born to Untouchables, that baby is labeled impure at its first breath of life. Untouchables perform the most menial jobs and tasks that others would not even talk about. They empty and clean latrines, remove dead animals from the streets, and unclog sewers by dropping down manholes into the filth of human excrement, clearing the plugs with their hands and buckets. Only Untouchables cremate the dead because touching the dead is a polluting act. Untouchable women perform jobs such as hauling rocks at quarries in baskets on their heads and carrying and stacking newly made bricks. The red brick’s dust fills their lungs resulting in debilitating lung disease. Castes are distinguished by degrees of purity and pollution. Any close contact with people of lower caste pollutes the person of a higher caste. Following contact with Untouchables, the higher caste members must undergo a ritual purification process, such as a short bath. The polluting Untouchables are not allowed to use the same water sources as others or live in the same housing areas as people of the castes. Working in unsanitary jobs and being forced to drink unsafe water lead to a high rate of diseases among Untouchables. The caste system grouping and discrimination has been banned by the Indian constitution since the mid-twentieth century. Nevertheless, the system continues with all its prejudices and discriminatory practices. 184

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

India’s Untouchables

Lower caste Hindus line a road in the eastern Indian state of Bihar to protest their inability to take part in the 1999 Indian general elections. A P IM AGE S.

The ban is rarely enforced by police or courts. The primary reason is that Indians believe the caste system was in fact divinely ordained (created by God). It is and always has been a basis of the Hindu religion. By 1950, the Indian constitution included a quota system attempting to allow Untouchables a way to improve their lives. A quota system reserves a certain number of places in government or higher education for the discriminated group. Fifteen percent of seats in the legislature were reserved for Untouchables. Although widely opposed by the Indian population, the quota has allowed some Untouchables and their families to significantly improve their lives. Popular Indian leader Mahatma Gandhi (1869–1948), beginning in the 1930s, tried to dispel the idea that any human was impure. Gandhi attempted to halt prejudice and discrimination against Untouchables by giving the name Harijan, people of God, to the Untouchables. However, Gandhi never officially rejected the caste system and is resented by many Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

185

India’s Untouchables

Outstanding Untouchable Leaders Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar was an Untouchable born in western India. Extremely bright, he managed to obtain scholarships to study in the United States, Britain, and Germany. Ambedkar returned to live in India and practiced law. He worked to improve the lives of Untouchables and helped secure representation for them on government legislative groups. Between 1947 and 1950 he led the way to outlaw discrimination against Untouchables in the Indian constitution. Martin Macwan was born an Untouchable in the western Indian state of Gujarat. He became a child laborer but managed to obtain an education receiving a college degree in 1980. In 1980 he

founded Navsarjan Trust to advocate for the Untouchables. Macwan’s trust trains Untouchables how to be leaders for the Untouchable movement. The movement addresses many areas of discrimination including violence against Untouchables, just wages, women’s rights, and clean drinking water. Navsarjan Trust works with Untouchables in over two thousand villages. Macwan has received many human rights awards including Human Rights Watch highest recognition in 2000 and the Seventeenth Annual Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Award, named after the former U.S. Attorney General who had worked for civil rights causes and was assassinated in 1968.

Untouchables as not a true reformer. Untouchables consider Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar (1891–1956) and Martin Macwan (1959–) as heroes and leaders for their cause (see sidebar).

Things to remember while reading excerpts from ‘‘Untouchable’’: 

In everyday Indian life, open acts of discrimination against Untouchables occur regularly.



When Untouchables attempt to assert legal rights or protest their treatment, they are frequently met with violence, including sexual violence against the women, and destruction of homes. Crime against lower caste members and the Untouchables almost always go unpunished.

Excerpt from ‘‘Untouchable’’ Karma: Behavior in a past life directly influences or affects his current life.

186

The sins of Girdharilal Maurya are many, his attackers insisted. He has bad karma. Why else would he, like his ancestors, be born an Untouchable, if not to pay for his past lives? Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

India’s Untouchables

Look, he is a leatherworker, and Hindu law says that working with animal skins makes him unclean, someone to avoid and revile. And his unseemly prosperity is a sin. Who does this Untouchable think he is, buying a small plot of land outside the village? Then he dared speak up, to the police and other authorities, demanding to use the new village well. He got what Untouchables deserve. One night, while Maurya was away in a nearby city, eight men from the higher Rajput caste came to his farm. They broke his fences, stole his tractor, beat his wife and daughter, and burned down his house. The message was clear: Stay at the bottom where you belong. Girdharilal Maurya took his family and fled the village of Kharkada in India’s western state of Rajasthan. It took two years for him to feel safe enough to return—and then only because human rights lawyers took up his case, affording him a thin shield of protection. ‘‘I see them almost every day,’’ Maurya now says of his attackers. ‘‘They roam around freely.’’ Maurya has agreed to meet me—after dark—in the dirt courtyard of his village house. He is a tall, handsome man of 52, his hair white, his face lined with worry. On a chilly February night he pulls a bathrobe tight around him. His wife moves in the shadows preparing tea. They live with the rest of their caste on the southern end of the village, downwind of the upper caste families who believe that they must not smell Untouchables.

Revile: Verbally abuse.

Caste: Social class.

Human rights: Freedom from unlawful imprisonment, torture, and execution.

The court case against his attackers drags on, Maurya explains in a tense, level voice. He tries to sound positive: Untouchables use the well pump now; one of his sons has advanced to college, the first of his caste from the village. But once Maurya confesses that he is still scared of his attackers, his voice rises—and his wife turns up the radio inside to mask it. ‘‘The government refuses to address problems like this business about the well because they say the caste system legally does not exist. Well, look around you. People treat animals better than us. This is not natural. We’re only asking for human rights.’’ His voice grows even louder to beseech the surrounding night: ‘‘Why did the gods let me be born in such a country?’’ . . . Embedded in Indian culture for the past 1,500 years the caste system follows a basic precept: All men are created unequal. . . . The ancient belief system that created the Untouchables overpowers modern law. While India’s constitution forbids caste discrimination and specifically abolishes Untouchability, Hinduism, the religion of 80 percent of India’s population, governs daily life with its hierarchies and rigid social codes. Under its strictures, an Untouchable parent gives birth to an Untouchable child, condemned as unclean from the first breath. Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Beseech: To call into.

Precept: Belief. Belief system: Set of values that guides people’s lives. Hierarchies: Some people valued more than others. Social codes: Patterns of expected behavior.

Strictures: Religious beliefs.

187

India’s Untouchables

The ‘‘Dalits’’ or ‘‘Untouchables’’ march in December 2003 to increase awareness of the plight of this part of society, considered ‘‘impure’’ according to the rigid caste system still in place throughout India. # A NTO IN E SE RR A/I N VI SU /C ORB IS .

Yet Untouchables don’t look different from other Indians. Their skin is the same color. They don’t wear rags; they are not covered with sores. They walk the same streets and attend the same schools. . . . Scarlet: Color red.

Defilements: Blood or other human wastes considered impure. Cremate: Burn.

188

But despite outward signs of normalcy, Untouchables may as well wear a scarlet tattoo on their foreheads to advertise their status. ‘‘You cannot hide your caste,’’ insists Sukhadeo Thorat, a faculty member at Jawaharlal Nehru University in New Delhi and among the few Untouchables in India with a Ph.D. in economics. ‘‘You can try to disguise it, but there are so many ways to slip up. A Hindu will not feel confident developing a social relationship without knowing your background. Within a couple of months, your caste will be revealed.’’ Family name, village address, body language all deliver clues, but none so much as occupation. Untouchables perform society’s ‘‘unclean work’’— work that involves physical contact with blood, excrement, and other bodily ‘‘defilements’’ as defined by Hindu law. Untouchables cremate the dead, clean latrines, cut umbilical cords, remove dead animals from the roads, tan hides, sweep gutters. These jobs, and the status of Untouchability, are passed down for generations. Even the vast number of Untouchables who work at ‘‘clean’’ Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

India’s Untouchables

jobs, mostly low-paying farmwork for landlords, are considered impure. In an outwardly free society, Untouchables are trapped at the bottom of a system that can’t function without discrimination. Many people would point out that the crudest, most overt forms of discrimination have largely disappeared, the result of sporadic reform movements before and after India’s independence in 1947. It’s true that at least in the public sphere, Untouchables have made progress since the days— within living memory—when they were beaten if their shadow touched a higher caste person, wore bells to warn of their approach, and carried buckets so their spit wouldn’t contaminate the ground. Untouchables couldn’t enter schools or sit on a bench near a higher caste person. . . . The Hindu caste system has its own instruction manual. The Laws of Manu, compiled at least 2,000 years ago by Brahman priests, prescribes for each varna what to eat, whom to marry, how to earn money, when to fight, how to keep clean, whom to avoid. ‘‘Manu is engraved inside every Hindu,’’ said Umashankar Tripathy, a Brahman priest I met in Varanasi, the revered pilgrimage city located on the banks of the Ganges River. Tripathy sat crosslegged on a straw mat in the temple where he teaches. He wore the traditional dhoti, a long loincloth with a tunic buttoned over it. His clothes were spotless, his hands as soft as fine leather gloves. Tripathy hews to the words of Manu. He explained that as a Brahman he must uphold the code of purity, the basis for dividing society from top to bottom. ‘‘I do not eat meat or drink alcohol. I will not eat vegetables like ginger or onion that are grown in the ground. My mind should be as clean as my clothes.’’ A proper Brahman should never come in contact with an Untouchable, Tripathy instructed, ‘‘A Brahman wouldn’t even touch the feet of Gandhi,’’ he said, referring to the deified leader of India’s independence. ‘‘Gandhi was a Vaisya; Brahmans are superior’’. . . . One morning in Ahmadabad, the largest city in the western state of Gujarat, I followed a team of five Bhangis assigned to unclog sewers in the middle-class neighborhood of Khanpur. They belonged to a scavenger workforce of more than 10,000 in the city. The team, dressed in clean, neat street clothes, stopped at a manhole outside a mosque. Dinesh Parmar, a lithe 25-year-old with a gold chain glittering around his neck, removed the cover. Cockroaches scurried from the darkness as the stench from below filled the street. Parmar hesitated for only an instant, then dropped into the hole—with no gloves, no gas mask. His body hidden inside, he methodically lifted bucket after bucket of excrement over his head, upending them on the street. Flies clustered thickly. Then he stopped, dizzy from the carbon monoxide seeping out of the sewer. The supervisor nodded, allowing Parmar to climb out. The previous year 30 Bhangis had died from gas poisoning in the sewers of Ahmadabad. Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Overt: Clearly visible.

Pilgrimage city: Holy place regularly visited by believers.

Hews: Listens intently.

Deified: God-like.

Scavenger: Trash removal.

Methodically: Steadily. Carbon monoxide: Poisonous colorless and odorless gas made by decaying human waste.

189

India’s Untouchables

Parmar left brown footsteps as he led the way to a nearby lane. He climbed down into several more manholes to scoop up clots of sludge. Women stared from doorways, veils pressed to their noses, speaking only to complain that their toilets were jammed. After the last hole, Parmar stood mutely in the middle of the lane, arms and legs coated in filth.

Meticulously: Thoroughly.

Parmar asked the watching women for soap and water. Finally one came forward, shrieking at the others that they should be ashamed. Parmar undressed on the street and meticulously washed his clothes, body, and hair. ‘‘It is my fate. I won’t get another job, I’m not educated,’’ Parmar said as he walked along the street with his crew, dripping wet but clean again. ‘‘Some places I get help to get washed up, others not, but even good people never offer me a cup of tea.’’ Parmar has a daughter. ‘‘I will educate her,’’ he vowed. ‘‘If her fate is good, she’ll get a better job.’’ He broke away and chased after his co-workers, puddles drying quickly behind him.

What happened next . . . Discrimination and violence against Untouchables has significantly increased in the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries. Especially in poor, uneducated regions of India, militias have formed to resist Untouchables who try to increase and stand up for rights for their group. Militias carry out vigilante-like (volunteers to punish suspected criminals outside the legal system) crimes, such as murder and rape against Untouchables who dare to speak out. Hope lies with the Untouchable activists and the few who have been able to hold government positions. Lines between castes have blurred somewhat in the cities but not in the rural villages. Even those Untouchables who have managed an education and have good jobs say they still are unable to conceal their Untouchability. They point out that lines between castes, and the prejudice that accompanies it, continues as a driving force in Indian society.

Did you know . . . 

190

Untouchables divide into subgroups just as the four castes do. Subgroups include the Doms and Musahar. Doms cremate and bury the dead. Musahar scavenge and hunt for rodents. The lowest Untouchable subgroups are Bhangis, Pakhis, and Sikkaliars. All three are known as manual scavengers who do the filthiest work, Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

India’s Untouchables

such as unplugging toilet holes, carting away animal feces, and so on. 

India boasts that it is the world’s largest democracy, rapidly modernizing with software industries and nuclear energy. Yet severe discrimination against Untouchables continues. A horrific practice that occurs almost daily is throwing acid into the face of an Untouchable who dares to step out of line and try to assert himself.



In rural India, Untouchables deliver most babies, since delivery involves blood and body fluids that are considered impure, including cutting the umbilical cord. Extra pay is sometimes offered to kill female babies because they are not expected to help the family as much as males in working in the agricultural fields when they grow older.

Consider the following . . . 

Research the life of Mahatma Gandhi. Do you believe he did all he could to end Untouchability? Why do many Untouchables, especially the most educated, not consider him as being a leader for their cause?



Study the life of Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar. What positive contributions did he make to increase Untouchables’ standing?



Research what educational opportunities young Untouchables have.



The term Dalit rather than Gandhi’s Harijan is preferred by most Untouchables to describe themselves. Where did the term come from and why is it preferred?

The lines between castes, and the prejudice that accompanies them, continues as a driving force in Indian society. Here, a member of the Dalit, or Untouchables, caste wears a headband that reads ‘‘Cast Out Caste.’’ I NDR AN IL MU KH ER JEE /A FP/ GE TTY I MAG ES .

For More Information B O O KS

Bayly, Susan. Caste, Society and Politics in India from the Eighteenth Century to the Modern Age. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1999. Freeman, James M. Untouchable: An Indian Life Story. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1979. Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

191

India’s Untouchables

Jadhav, Narendra. Untouchables: One Family’s Triumph over the Caste System in Modern India. New York: Scribner, 2005. Robb, Peter G. A History of India. New York: Palgrave, 2002. PE RIODIC AL

O’Neill, Tom. ‘‘Untouchable.’’ National Geographic, June 2003. WEB SIT ES

Info Change News and Features. http://www.infochangeindia.org (accessed on December 12, 2006). Navsarjan Trust, Eujarat, India. http://www.navsarjan.org (accessed on December 12, 2006).

192

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Matthew Shepard Excerpt from ‘‘Dennis Shepard’s Statements to the Court’’

Spoken by Dennis Shepard Published by the Matthew Shepard Foundation

‘‘You made the world realize that a person’s lifestyle is not a reason for discrimination, intolerance, persecution, and violence. This is not the 1920s, 30s, and 40s of Nazi Germany. My son died because of your ignorance and intolerance.’’

ay, lesbian, and bisexual persons face daily prejudice and threats simply because of their sexual orientation—the same-sex attractions. The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, in agreement with the National Mental Health Association, found that about 50 percent of gay men and 20 percent of lesbians were verbally or physically abused in high school in the early twenty-first century. Teenagers surveyed were more prejudiced against gay people than against any other minority group. School is a setting many gay or lesbian students learn to dread. A majority of teens surveyed said that if it came out that they were gay, they would expect hostilities to be directed toward them. Actions range from anti-gay verbal harassment to violent beatings. Such attacks have lasting, harmful effects on the victims’ mental and physical well-being and their ability to succeed in school. Those who witness such actions are also adversely affected. Gay, lesbian, and bisexual youth grow up just as straight youth, with a need for acceptance, freedom of self-expression, and love. This maturing process is difficult for straight youth. For those who are part of a minority that daily experiences prejudice, discrimination and outright hatred, growing up can be excruciating. Family is often a refuge for ethnic-minority young people who experience prejudice. However,

G

193

Matthew Shepard

family members frequently find it difficult to accept that a son, daughter, niece, or nephew is gay or lesbian. Likewise, gay and lesbians generally cannot turn to churches for help. Most churches either totally condemn same-sex attraction or have continuous heated and divisive debates on the issue. In 1998, Matthew Shepard, a twenty-one-year-old gay student, attended the University of Wyoming in Laramie, majoring in political science and foreign relations. Although Matthew had a loving, supportive family, just as many other gay young people, he had experienced anti-gay harassment. Matthew was born in Casper, Wyoming, on December 1, 1976, to Judy and Dennis Shepard. He attended school in Casper through his sophomore year in high school. When his parents moved to Saudi Arabia for employment, Matt spent his junior and senior years at the American School in Lugano, Switzerland. He also traveled throughout Europe. Matt’s parents knew their son was gay and quietly accepted it. They focused on Matt’s exceptional ability to work with people and were pleased how easily he made friends. On the night of October 7, 1998, Matthew left a campus bar with Aaron McKinney, age twenty-two, and Russell Arthur Henderson, age twenty-one, who told Matt they were gay. In a remote area east of Laramie, on Snowy Mountain View Road, they tied Matt to a fence post, beat and tortured him, and left him to die. Eighteen hours later, Matt was found by a cyclist. He died of massive head injuries surrounded by family at Poudre Valley Hospital in Fort Collins, Colorado, just after midnight on October 12, 1998. Matthew’s funeral, on Friday, October 16, was attended by friends he had made throughout the world. Matthew was apparently chosen for kidnapping because he was gay. To avoid trial and possible death penalty, Henderson pled guilty in April 1999 to murder and kidnapping. He was sentenced to two consecutive life terms without parole. In November 1999 a jury in Laramie, Wyoming, convicted McKinney of second degree murder, robbery, and kidnapping of Shepard. The following excerpt is from Dennis Shepard’s statement to the court at the sentencing hearing for McKinney. His statement lovingly revealed deep respect for Matthew, his grief at the loss of his son, his understanding that his son died because he was gay, and his anger toward McKinney. 194

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Matthew Shepard

A cross made of stones rests below the fence where gay student Matthew Shepard was tied and beaten on October 7, 1998, just outside Laramie, Wyoming. AP IM AGE S.

Things to remember while reading excerpts from ‘‘Dennis Shepard’s Statements to the Court’’: 

Much of the U.S. population at the start of the twenty-first century continued to be homophobic. Homophobic describes people’s prejudicial fear and hatred of homosexuals, those persons who hold same-sex attractions, both gays and lesbians. For many Americans, homosexuals are sinful, perverse, unworthy humans.



In order to foster a healthier atmosphere, parents of gay and lesbian children, educators, counselors, and other interested persons attempt to open discussions about understanding, compassion,

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

195

Matthew Shepard

and acceptance of those with same-sex orientation in order to educate more and more of society. This is done both formally, via organizations, and on a more personal, local level, in schools. 

Matthew did not hide that he was gay. His father stated that Matt ‘‘quietly let it be known that he was gay’’ and that he believed his son’s stand was courageous.

Excerpt from ‘‘Dennis Shepard’s Statements to the Court’’ November 4, 1999

Synonymous: Closely identified. Gay bashing: Speaking hatefully about homosexual people. Out of proportion: Into a bigger problem than it really was. Tolerate: Put up with.

Your honor, members of the Jury, Mr. Rerucha [prosecuting attorney]: I would like to begin my statement by addressing the jury. Ladies and gentlemen, a terrible crime was committed in Laramie thirteen months ago. Because of that crime, the reputation of the city of Laramie, the University of Wyoming, and the State of Wyoming became synonymous with gay bashing, hate crimes (violent attacks against a person because of his race, ethnicity, religion, or gender), and brutality. While some of this reputation may be deserved, it was blown out of proportion by our friends in the media. Yesterday you, the jury, showed the world that Wyoming and the city of Laramie will not tolerate hate crimes. Yes, this was a hate crime, pure and simple, with the added ingredient of robbery. My son Matthew paid a terrible price to open the eyes of all of us who live in Wyoming, the United States, and the world to the unjust and unnecessary fears, discrimination, and intolerance that members of the gay community face every day. Yesterday’s decision by you showed true courage and made a statement. That statement is that Wyoming is the Equality State; that Wyoming will not tolerate discrimination based on sexual orientation; that violence is not the solution. Ladies and gentlemen, you have the respect and admiration of Matthew’s family and friends and of countless strangers around the world. Be proud of what you have accomplished. You may have prevented another family from losing a son or daughter. . . . A trial was necessary to show that this was a hate crime and not just a robbery gone bad. . . . My son Matthew did not look like a winner. After all, he was small for his age—weighing, at the most, 110 pounds, and standing only 5‘2‘‘ tall. He was rather uncoordinated and wore braces from the age of 13 until the day he died. However, in his all too brief life, he proved that he was a winner. My son—a gentle, caring soul—proved that he was as tough as, if not tougher than, anyone I have ever heard of or known. On October 6, 1998, my son

196

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Matthew Shepard

tried to show the world that he could win again. On October 12, 1998, my first-born son—and my hero—lost. On October 12, my first-born son—and my hero—died 50 days before his 22nd birthday. He died quietly, surrounded by family and friends, with his mother and brother holding his hand. All that I have left now are the memories. It’s hard to put into words how much Matt meant to family and friends and how much they meant to him. Everyone wanted him to succeed because he tried so hard. . . . Matt’s gift was people. He loved being with people, helping people, and making others feel good. The hope of a better world free of harassment and discrimination because a person was different kept him motivated. All his life he felt the stabs of discrimination. Because of that he was sensitive to other people’s feelings. He was naive to the extent that, regardless of the wrongs people did to him, he still had faith that they would change and become ‘‘nice.’’ Matt trusted people, perhaps too much. Violence was not a part of his life until his senior year in high school. He would walk into a fight and try to break it up. He was the perfect negotiator. He could get two people talking to each other again as no one else could. Matt loved people and he trusted them. He could never understand how one person could hurt another, physically or verbally. They would hurt him, and he would give them another chance. This quality of seeing only good gave him friends around the world. He didn’t see size, race, intelligence, sex, religion, or the hundred other things that people use to make choices about people. All he saw was the person. All he wanted was to make another person his friend. All he wanted was to make another person feel good. All he wanted was to be accepted as an equal. . . . I loved my son and, as can be seen throughout this statement, was proud of him. He was not my gay son. He was my son who happened to be gay. . . . How do I talk about the loss that I feel every time I think about Matt? How can I describe the empty pit in my heart and mind when I think about all the problems that were put in Matt’s way that he overcame? No one can understand the sense of pride and accomplishment that I felt every time he reached the mountain top of another obstacle. No one, including myself, will ever know the frustration and agony that others put him through because he was different. . . . Matt officially died at 12:53 a.m. on Monday, October 12, 1998, in a hospital in Fort Collins, Colorado. He actually died on the outskirts of Laramie tied to a fence that Wednesday before, when you beat him. You, Mr. McKinney, with your friend Mr. Henderson, killed my son. . . . Matt became a symbol—some say a martyr, putting a boy-next-door face on hate crimes. . . . Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Martyr: Person who makes a major personal sacrifice

197

Matthew Shepard

Suspects in the assault of Matthew Shepard are placed under arrest in Laramie, Wyoming. (Seated, left to right): Russell Henderson, Aaron McKinney, and Chastity Pasley. A P IM AG ES .

My son was taught to look at all sides of an issue before making a decision or taking a stand. He learned this early when he helped campaign for various political candidates while in grade school and junior high. When he did take a stand, it was based on his best judgment. Such a stand cost him his life when he quietly let it be known that he was gay. He didn’t advertise it, but he didn’t back away from the issue either. For that I’ll always be proud of him. He showed me that he was a lot more courageous than most people, including myself. Matt knew that there were dangers to being gay, but he accepted that and wanted to just get on with his life and his ambition of helping others. Matt’s beating, hospitalization, and funeral focused worldwide attention on hate. Good is coming out of evil. People have said ‘‘Enough is enough.’’ 198

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Matthew Shepard

You screwed up, Mr. McKinney. You made the world realize that a person’s lifestyle is not a reason for discrimination, intolerance, persecution, and violence. This is not the 1920s, 30s, and 40s of Nazi Germany. My son died because of your ignorance and intolerance. I can’t bring him back. But I can do my best to see that this never, ever happens to another person or another family again. As I mentioned earlier, my son has become a symbol—a symbol against hate and people like you; a symbol for encouraging respect for individuality; for appreciating that someone is different; for tolerance. I miss my son, but I’m proud to be able to say that he is my son. . . . .

Nazi Germany: The German government that killed and tortured millions of European Jews and others, including homosexuals. Symbol: One thing that stands for something else.

Your honor, members of the jury, Mr. Rerucha, thank you.

What happened next . . . Candlelight memorials were held across the nation for Matthew Shepard and in protest of prejudice and discrimination against gays. By November 1999 both Henderson and McKinney had received two consecutive life imprisonment sentences. President Bill Clinton (1946–; served 1993– 2001) released a statement on November 3 following McKinney’s sentencing that is available on the website http://www.fedglobe.org/actions/ whpress110399.htm (accessed on December 12, 2006). This verdict is a dramatic statement that we are determined to have a tolerant, law-abiding nation that celebrates our differences, rather than despising them. Our nation must unite in outrage against hate-based violence. We cannot surrender to those on the fringe of our society who lash out at those who are different. Their crimes impose a particular cost on society by tearing at the social fabric. It is my continued hope that together, as a nation, we will work to repair that fabric.

Matthew’s parents founded the Matthew Shepard Foundation with a website www.matthewshepard.org. The Foundation’s key goal is through education to replace hate with understanding, compassion, and acceptance. Foundation members urge programs supporting diversity and acceptance of differing groups within society. Judy Shepard, Matt’s mother, traveled throughout the United States to speak on behalf of the Foundation. On October 10, 1998, in response to the attack on Matthew, President Clinton urged stronger anti-hate crime legislation. At the time of Matthew’s death, forty-one states had hate crime laws, with twenty-one specifically addressing sexual orientation crimes. Clinton called for passage of the Hate Crime Prevention Act. The U.S. Senate Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

199

Matthew Shepard

Candlelight memorials were held across the United States for Matthew Shepard and in protest of prejudice and discrimination against gays. E VA N AG OST IN I/ GET TY I MA GE S.

passed the act in 1999. An update of the act, the Hate Crimes Prevention Act, was still waiting for passage in late 2006. It would strengthen the U.S. Justice Department’s ability to prosecute crimes committed due to the victim’s sexual orientation, gender, or disability. 200

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

Matthew Shepard

Did you know . . . 

A play, ‘‘The Laramie Project’’ based on the national reaction to Matthew’s death in Laramie, was produced by students in schools across the nation. However, even the play was a target of prejudicial misunderstanding and banned at some places for its subject matter and language.



Gay, lesbian, and bisexual young people grow up feeling loneliness, alienation, a sense that something is very wrong about themselves, and a fear of letting anyone know.



‘‘Coming out’’ is the name given to the process of gay and lesbian people telling family and friends that they are gay. First gays and lesbians must learn what their sexual orientation is and then accept it. Because of gay, lesbian, and bisexual literature, and support organizations and websites, the process was becoming easier by the early twenty-first century. Still, suicide remained the leading cause of death among gay, lesbian, and bisexual youth.

Consider the following . . . 

In what ways can safe environments be created in schools for gay, lesbian, and bisexual students? Check out suggestions of the GayStraight Alliance Networks at http://www.gsanetwork.org.



Find out if a P-Flag (Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays) group is in your community. Invite a speaker to come to your class.



Visit the Matthew Shepard Foundation website at http:// www.matthewshepard.org. List various ways to replace prejudice and hate with understanding.



In Los Angeles gay and lesbian leaders declared Shepard a martyr to anti-gay hatred. What did they mean by martyr and what did they hope to accomplish with this declaration?

For More Information B O O KS

Loffreda, Beth. Losing Matt Shepard. Life and Politics in the Aftermath of AntiGay Murder. New York: Columbia University Press, 2000. Mastoon, Adam. The Shared Heart: Portraits and Stories Celebrating Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Young People. New York: William Morrow and Company, Inc., 1997. Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources

201

Matthew Shepard

Reed, Rita. Growing Up Gay: The Sorrows and Joys of Gay and Lesbian Adolescence. New York: W.W. Norton, 1997. WEB SIT ES

Gay, Lesbian and Straight Teachers Network (GLSTN). http://qrd.org/qrd/www/ orgs/glstn/ (accessed on December 12, 2006). Gay-Straight Alliance Network. http://www.gsanetwork.org (accessed on December 12, 2006). Leadership Conference on Civil Rights (LCCR) and Leadership Conference on Civil Rights Education Fund (LCCREF). http://www.civilrights.org (accessed on December 12, 2006). PFLAG (Parents, Families, and Friends of Lesbians and Gays). http://www.PFLAG. org (accessed on December 12, 2006). Shepard, Dennis. ‘‘Dennis Shepard’s Statements to the Court, November 4, 1999.’’ Matthew Shepard Foundation. http://www.matthewsplace.com/ dsstatementtocourt.htm (accessed on December 12, 2006).

202

Prejudice in the Modern World: Primary Sources