
          An Imperfect Assessment of Movement Flank Actions.
          Reviewed by Morgan, Mary NellMary Nell Morgan
          Vol. 12, No. 1, 1990, pp. 12-13
          
          Black
Radicals and the Civil Rights Mainstream, 1954 1970 By Herbert
H. Haines (Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press. 1988. 244
pps. $24.95).
          Herbert Haines's analysis in Black Radicals and the
Civil Rights Mainstream challenges the popular notion that
so-called radical blacks did more to harm than to help the civil
rights movement during the activism of the late I950s and throughout
the 1960s. Haines examines external financial support, which he calls
"exogenous income," to test his thesis. The various sources of
"exogenous income" are individuals, churches, labor unions,
foundations, corporations, miscellaneous organizations (such as social
and fraternal groups), and the government.
          Using the concept of "radical flank effects," which he defines as
the helpful or harmful consequence for moderates of radicals' actions,
he argues that an increase in external financial support indicates
helpful effects, while the converse indicates harmful effects.
          "Radicalism" is a relative term. It is important to understand
this, Haines insists, if one is to understand social movements by
suppressed people. Any suggestion to change is likely to be considered
radical. Indeed, the mainstream civil rights organizations of the
1960s--especially the National Association for the Advancement of
Colored People (NAACP)--were once considered radical Haines argues,
and this is the crux of his thesis, that it is precisely the emergence
of radical alternatives which motivated white support of, rather than
white backlash against, the so-called black moderates once themselves
called radical.
          Using seven civil rights organizations to form a continuum, moving
from left to right, moderate to radical, beginning with the National
Urban League and ending with the most radical, the Student Non-Violent
Coordinating Committee--with the National Association of Colored
People, the Legal Defense and Educational Fund, the Southern Regional
Council, the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, and the
Congress of Racial Equality in between in that order--Haines presents
funding information for the years from 1952 to 1970. There are,
however, numerous gaps in the income information and several areas of
concern which, Haines admits, make his argument imperfect.
          Fully 46 percent of the exogenous income is either estimated or
missing: three pages of footnotes, in small print, are offered to
explain this! Despite this data deficit, Haines proceeds with his
argument. Observing that from 1957 there was a general increase in the
exogenous income of the moderate groups, a "dramatic increase in
the level of exogenous income for the movement as a whole during the
1960s," and a general decrease after 1965 for the more radical
SNCC and CORF, Haines concludes that the radicals benefitted the
treasuries of the moderates.
          I focus on the financial question because it is, by far, the
dominant theme in Haines's argument. To a lesser extent, he looks at
legislation enacted in response to actual and threatened violence by
radical groups like the Black Muslims and the Black Panthers as a way
the radicals benefitted the moderates. "The most important pieces
of legislation. affecting the rights of black Americans--the Civil
Rights Act of 1964, the Economic Opportunity Act, the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act, and the Voting Rights Act of 1965--were all
enacted in the midst of an unprecedented racial crisis which seemed to
reflect a widespread rejection by blacks of gradualist, legalistic
means." Since these laws were responses to old NAACP and NUL
demands, such as integrated schools and protected black franchise,
they are considered positive radical flank effects; an indication that
when given the option between radical and moderate demands, government
officials chose the later.
          Another area of my concern is the question of how the continuum of
organizations was selected. It is not clear how Haines decided which
organizations to include. Very early in the introduction Haines states
that the book's focus is on "...black protest in both its civil
rights and nationalistic forms..." As already noted, Haines refers
to the Black Muslims and the Black Panthers as groups whose growing
appeal to blacks and whose direct action approaches--which included
abandoning nonviolence as a philosophy--led to greater acceptance of
the moderate alternative. Yet these organizations are not included
among those for which he analyzes income. Given the apparent
difficulty encountered in acquiring income information for most of the
organizations studied, perhaps the absence of any reliable data of
this kind for these groups led 

to their omission.
          As a final concern, I register a complaint which I no longer regard
as minor. It is particularly pertinent, because it is of an error
which crops up over and over again. I refer to the account of the
circumstances which led to Mrs. Rosa Parks's arrest. Haines states
what has become usual: Mrs. Parks refused to go to the back of the bus
as required by law and upon refusal was arrested. The more accurate
account is that Mrs. Parks was occupying a seat in the first row
designated for "colored." When all of the seats in the "white" section
were taken, it was customary in Montgomery for the bus driver to force
blacks out of their seats, beginning with the first row of seats for
"coloreds." This practice was guided by the principle that no white
person should stand while a "colored" was seated. Mrs. Parks was told
to give her seat to a white male. She refused, saying she was tired
from her day's toil. Upon refusing she turned her head and looked out
the window, ignoring the threats of arrest. She was arrested and the
Montgomery Bus Boycott followed.
          The version of the incident given by Haines--and even the
Rev. Jesse Jackson recently gave a similar account on the television
program A Different World--proliferates. Indeed,
it seems to be emerging as a modern myth. Several of my students have
told me that the only version of the Rosa Parks incident they had
heard was that given in Haines's book and "confirmed" by Jackson. In
fact, I have been presented with the argument that the inaccurate
version is better because it gives a more dynamic posture to
Mrs. Parks and the occasion which is widely accepted as the moment
which sparked the activism of the modern civil rights movement. This
is similar to saying that if one says that Columbus discovered America
in 1492 that is not falsifying history, because indeed he did discover
the Americas for Europe.
          Despite the problems noted above, this book is worth reading. I
especially recommend it to persons interested in the funding sources
of the civil rights movement.
          
            Mary Nell Morgan, is associate professor of political
science at Xavier University of Louisiana, currently on leave to serve
as visiting associate professor of American Studies at Skidmore
College in Saratoga Springs New Fork. Early in her career, in the
mid-1970s, Dr. Morgan was a research assistant at the Southern
Regional Council.
          
        