While comparing Claudette Colvin’s experience in the fight for equality and civil rights with that of young activists in the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement, one can cite both similarities and differences. Ms. Colvin, as a young girl, did not have the same opportunities to publicize her story as people have today. According to Hoose, Claudette’s act did not receive sufficient publicity initially, although she did it before Rosa Parks, her follower (40). At the same time, one can note the public interest in Ms. Colvin’s attempt as a success factor. She drew attention to the problem of racial segregation and oppression of the black population. As a result, more people became concerned about the existing social constraints and restrictions, which may be considered an accomplishment.
One of the differences between the activities of Claudette Colvin and young BLM activists lies in distinctive political situations. At the time of the arrest of the young African American woman, the Republicans were the ruling party in the country. Today, as Rojas notes, “BLM supporters are mainly young and Democratic-leaning” (1410). For Ms. Colvin, this was difficult to attract many supporters to the problem of inequality due to the existing segregation vestiges and the dominant belief in the inadmissibility of equality. Modern activists have many resources and means of influencing the government due to social media, liberal legislation, and significant changes in the country’s political life over more than half a century. At the same time, one should take into account that, despite the scale of today’s protests, the problem of racism continues to exist, which unites the interests of different generations. Therefore, from a political and social perspective, both movements can be characterized by barriers and successes.
Works Cited
Hoose, Phillip. Claudette Colvin: Twice Toward Justice. Farrar Straus Giroux, 2010.
Rojas, Fabio. “Moving Beyond the Rhetoric: A Comment on Szetela’s Critique of the Black Lives Matter Movement.” Ethnic and Racial Studies, vol. 43, no. 8, 2020, pp. 1407-1413.