By Saswat Pattanayak
It was only natural that Rosa Parks received the
unprecedented recognition, as the first woman in
American history to lie in state at the Capitol, an
honor usually reserved for Presidents of the United
States.
After all, as the conservatives would have liked to
put it: She was the perfect American woman. Securely
married, well settled, employed and was a quiet,
patient, spiritual woman. The American dreamer. One
whose dream could be retold by Martin Luther King Jr.
years later.
In the revisionist histories, there have been at
least two versions of the same story. One that
portrayed her as a humble woman, a seamstress, who
got tired of segregation one day in December, 1955
and refused to give up her seat on a Montgomery,
Alabama bus. Her individual action then led to a
whole nationwide movement like magic. This led to the
non-violent leader Martin Luther King, Jr., to lead
the people down the long road to freedom, which was
established with the end of segregation. And the
world became free of discrimination in the United
States.
Following this story, people wonder what would have
happened to MLK if Parks would not have boarded that
bus that day. And what would have happened of all of
us. Yes, by all of us, I mean ALL OF US. Asians in
America as well (We owe it all to the mutual freedom
struggles, dammit. Else, today the Indian and Chinese
software engineers would not be negotiating salaries
in the States. I wonder if most of the American born
kids of Asian heritage have any idea of the
connections. Or if all the temporary workers realize
the saga of exploitation amidst the glory of
dollarizations.)
This version also relates to the idea that the trip
was not planned. Indeed, Rosa Parks has said on
various occasions that she had not planned to be
arrested. She had boarded the bus to reach home.
The second version takes a stab at the first and
claims, well, you see, Rosa Parks was not tired
(indeed Park has said this too). And that she was not
the first one to do it anyway. She was required to be
there. That she was the perfect case for the
NAACP and all plans were
underway.
Time magazine wrote of her: “Parks was not the
first to be detained for this offense. Eight months
earlier, Claudette Colvin, 15, refused to give up her
seat and was arrested. Black activists met with this
girl to determine if she would make a good test case
— as secretary of the local N.A.A.C.P., Parks
attended the meeting — but it was decided that a more
“upstanding” candidate was necessary to withstand the
scrutiny of the courts and the press. And then in
October, a young woman named Mary Louise Smith was
arrested; N.A.A.C.P. leaders rejected her too as
their vehicle, looking for someone more able to
withstand media scrutiny. Smith paid the fine and was
released.”
Hence this version demystifies the previous version
and basically says, the trip was well planned. And
that MLK was anyway going to lead the movement since
he knew it was coming. And that the legendary trade
union leader E. D. Nixon apparently said, “My God,
look what segregation has put in my hands!” Parks was
the ideal plaintiff for a test case against city and
state segregation laws.
Both versions do not tell the story. Because they
claim to be the stories themselves. Rosa Parks was an
event, not a process. And the event is being confused
as being the process. After all its easy to recall an
event, celebrate and normalize it. MLK has become a
national event today. Malcolm X and Paul Robeson are
today featuring on the postage stamps. And Rosa Parks
is an icon today—of righteousness, humbleness and
generosity.
Let’s reset the contexts. The prepositions:
a. Rosa Parks was married to Raymond Parks.
Actually after her husband’s death in 1977, she even
co-founded an organization named after both of them.
And yes, Raymond Parks was the force behind her. We
shall soon need to discuss who Raymond Parks was
since no one pretty much discusses him.
b. Rosa Parks was a social activist long before the
bus event. She was involved in a process that
culminated in the event. We shall need to understand
the processes that led to her actions.
What do we know about Raymond Parks?
Well,
the official foundation named after both “The Rosa
and Raymond Parks Institute” says the following about
Raymond:
"Raymond Parks married Rosa McCauley December 18,
1932. He was a barber from Wedowee in Randolph
County, Alabama. He had little formal education but a
thirst for knowledge and a no nonsense approach to
life. He supported his wife's "Quiet Strength" and
encouraged youth to get a good education to sup-port
themselves, their families and to eliminate
discrimination in this country.”
If
you notice the page, there are just two pictures of
Rosa. Nothing about Raymond.
Wow!
Part I:
Well, to begin with, Raymond was a barber alright.
But he was an activist way before Rosa had stepped
in. So much so that he was raising funds for the
National Committee to Save the Scottsboro Boys! Does
that sound a bell? So the story begins from here.
What has been conveniently forgotten in the recent
recalling of history is that the case of Scottsboro
Boys was the first event that actually put the
process of struggle in place.
It involved the alleged gang rape of two white girls
by nine black teenagers on the Southern Railroad
freight run from Chattanooga to Memphis on March 25,
1931. And yes, this was a case that the NAACP then
during the 30's refused to take up.
“The
NAACP, which might have been expected to rush to
the defense of the Scottsboro Boys, did not. Rape
was a politically explosive charge in the South,
and the NAACP was concerned about damage to its
effectiveness that might result if it turned out
some or all of the Boys were guilty. Instead, it
was the Communist Party that moved aggressively to
make the Scottsboro case their own…. The Communist
Party, through its legal arm, the International
Labor Defense (ILD), pronounced the case against
the Boys a “murderous frame-up” and began efforts,
ultimately successful, to be named as their
attorneys. The NAACP, a slow-moving
bureaucracy, finally came to the realization that
the Scottsboro Boys were most likely innocent and
that leadership in the case would have large public
relations benefits. As a last-ditch effort to beat
back the ILD in the battle over representation,
NAACP officials persuaded renowned defense attorney
Clarence Darrow to take their case to Alabama. But
it was by then too late. The Scottsboro Boys, for
better or worse, cast their lots with the
Communists who, in the South, were “treated with
only slightly more courtesy than a gang of
rapists.”
Scottsboro Boys thus rejected NAACP’s offer and
sought the help from the more radical leftist
activists. And Raymond Parks was working in support
of the Boys and promote radicalism within the NAACP.
(For a short time much later, under Nixon, the
radicalized NAACP worked together with the ILD to
call for anti-lynching laws.) Rosa Parks got involved
with the case of the Boys by marrying Raymond in
1932. Raymond was at that time collecting money to
support the Scottsboro Boys. After marrying, Rosa
took a number of jobs, ranging from domestic worker
to hospital aide. At her husband’s urging, she
finished her high school studies in 1933, at a time
when less than seven percent of African Americans had
a high school diploma. Despite the Jim Crow laws that
made political participation by blacks difficult, she
persevered in registering to vote, succeeding on her
third try. This was made possible because both of
them were members of the Voters’ League.
Part II:
In December 1943, after 11 years of marriage with
Raymond who was a radical leftist activist, Parks
became active in the American Civil Rights Movement,
joined the Montgomery chapter of the NAACP, and was
elected volunteer secretary to its president, Edgar
Nixon. Lest we forget, Nixon was a renowned trade
unionist of the time. He became president of the
Alabama NAACP only in 1947 and radicalized it. He was
a close associate of Philip Randolph, the renowned
labor leader (again whose stories are hardly
discussed).
Nixon naturally came in problems with the moderates.
He resigned qith disgust from the Montgomery
Improvement Association (MIA) which was being headed
by Martin Luther King, Jr., as its president.
Nixon died unsung, although he was the one without
whom the bus boycott could never have taken place as
a process. Remember that Nixon put up his home as
security to post the bond for Parks!
Not only Nixon, who was on the political left of the
things and was conveniently shoved to the history’s
closed pages, but we need to remember Clifford Durr
(1899 – 1975) who was an Alabama lawyer who defended
activists and others accused of disloyalty during the
New Deal and McCarthy eras. He was the one who
represented Rosa Parks in her challenge to the
constitutionality of the ordinance requiring the
segregation of passengers on buses in Montgomery that
launched the Montgomery Bus Boycott.
Who was Durr? He was branded as a communist and was
put under FBI surveillance in 1942, because he had
defended a colleague accused of left-wing political
associations. His wife’s vigorous support for racial
equality and voting rights for blacks and their
friendship with Jessica Mitford, a member of the
Communist Party, made both of them even more suspect.
The FBI stepped up its interest in Durr in 1949, when
he joined the National Lawyers Guild. He subsequently
became the President of the Guild! And yes, hold on,
Durr's wife had employed Rosa Parks as the
seamstress.
Durr called the jail when authorities refused to tell
Nixon what the charges against Parks were and he and
his wife accompanied Nixon to the jail when Nixon
bailed her out. Nixon and Durr then went to the
Parks’ home to discuss whether she was prepared to
fight the charges against her. Parks was then as
aforesaid, working as voluntary secretary to Nixon.
They had together waited for a politicized Parks to
come to the scene. For 23 years now, Rosa Parks had
support of her husband who was involved in several
progressive struggles including Scottsboro defense,
the campaign against lynching, and the struggle for
voter and citizenship rights. When she did not give
up her seat on that bus, it was culmination of the
long process of revolution by resistance.
It's another matter, this third version of
progressive saga-- of active involvement of left wing
leaders and activists, always disgraced by both the
mainstream white liberals and the cautious black
leadership in the US-- has been hijacked and replaced
as an odd event for national celebration--by moderate
activists and revisionist historians.
It must have pained her, but in her book
“Quiet Strength”, Rosa Parks is categorical about
one thing, that she did not change anything alone:
“Four decades later I am still uncomfortable
with the credit given to me for starting the bus
boycott. I would like [people] to know I was not the
only person involved. I was just one of many who
fought for freedom.”
And
yet this one of many has been canonized. For it
helps to canonize than to contextualize. The dangers,
as the establishments notice are not the heroes
themselves. It is their heroic acts as part of a
larger process that inspire generations. It is not
individual acts of pacifying moderate church leaders,
but radicalized moves by barbers like Raymond and
lawyers like Durr and angry seamstresses like Rosa
Parks who had taken to the streets to join worldwide
radical movements addressing cases like Scottboro
Boys or Labor Unions.
But if we go back to those pages, we will be flooded
with gory images, not legendary icons. History of
struggles have been fought with political aims and
those aims of yesteryears conflict with the political
agendas of today's. Hence the attempts to iconize the
angry freedom fighters.
After all, all icons look good on statues—they always
put a smile on their lips.
Tags: Saswat, Black Power, Feminism, Communism, USA, History