sign in sign up
<<
Home , Timothy Tyson

One Community, One Book Blood Done Sign My Name by Timothy B. Tyson SUGGESTED DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

At this time, the beginning of the 21st Century, we celebrate the largely peaceful movement that led to racial desegregation in the . History lessons teach us that heroes such as Martin Luther King Jr. and were able to change the face of America largely through their non-violent activism. Indeed, the government website devoted to MLK Day states, ―[Dr. King‘s] philosophy of nonviolent , and his strategies for rational and non-destructive social change, galvanized the conscience of this nation and reordered its priorities. His wisdom, his words, his actions, his commitment, and his dream for a new way of life are intertwined with the American experience.‖

But Timothy Tyson, the author of Blood Done Sign My Name, pushes us to understand the true history of the movement for racial equality in the United States. Far from comfortably embracing the fundamental human rights of all persons, it was fraught with human rights violations from both sides of the color line and at every juncture. Blood Done Sign My Name is an honest account of the struggle for racial equality in the American South, and, as Tyson states, it is an attempt to ―transcend our history‖ by confronting the truth about how African Americans finally won their freedom.

The framework of the post-World War II movement for international human rights provides a useful guide to understanding this complex and complicated history. Beginning with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) adopted by the UN General Assembly on Dec. 10, 1948 and signed by the United States, prohibitions of slavery and unequal treatment of others based on race, color, ethnicity, and religion became increasingly matters of official international legal policy. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD), each adopted in 1966 and each ratified by the United States, are widely accepted and legally binding treaties that reinforce the inherent dignity and equality of human beings as enshrined in the UDHR. Both the Covenant and the Convention prohibit differential treatment on the basis of race, color, descent, or ethnic origin, and each requires their States Parties to ensure the equal enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms regardless of race or ethnicity.

1. Article 26 of the UDHR states that ―[e]veryone has the right to education.‖ In addition, the United States Congress passed the , which outlawed segregation in U.S. schools and public places. The author says that the official history of Granville County, NC states that the schools undertook ―voluntary desegregation.‖ Yet, years later in 1970, schools in Oxford were still segregated despite the fact that the community was approximately 40% or nearly half African-American. In addition, children in the black schools had fewer textbooks than students in the white schools, and those that they did have were already used and might be several editions behind those in the white schools. What does this say about the federal law on

1 desegregation plus the right to education and its benefits described in the UDHR? Does this constitute differential treatment on the basis of race as prohibited by the ICCPR and the ICERD?

2. The Library Bill of Rights was adopted by the American Library Association on June 18, 1948, almost six months before the UDHR. Two of its provisions state that ―[m]aterials should not be excluded because of the origin, background, or views of those contributing to their creation‖ and that ―[a] person‘s right to use a library should not be denied because of origin, age, background or views.‖ On page 21, the author describes his mother‘s first visit to the Oxford Public Library when she tried to check out Jubilee by Margaret Walker, a black novelist and poet. The white librarian told his mother that she did not want to read that book and set it aside, checking it out to his mother only when she insisted that she did want to read the book. What does this unexpected attempt at censorship in the U.S. in the 1970s say about the culture of Oxford? Whose fundamental rights were being violated by the censorship?

3. The history of racial discrimination in America carries with it a subtext of gender discrimination as well. As the author notes on page 37, ―[s]egregation, I understood without even having to be told, existed to protect white womanhood from the abomination of contact with uncontrollable black men.‖ What stereotypes of women are played upon in this fear? Of black men? Can you think of images in the media, both then and now, that help to reinforce those stereotypes? Does the reinforcement of these stereotypes violate any human rights?

4. The author views the underlying motive for the murder of Henry ―Dickie‖ Marrow to be the fear of sex between black men and white women. He describes a 1662 statute passed in Virginia which reversed English common law and gave children the racial status of the mother. ―Free white men could father ‗black‘ slave children but black men could never father ‗white‘ children.‖ Therefore, if slave owners had children with slave women, they profited from the free labor of those slaves. How do these laws and practices reconcile with the UDHR principle that ―all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights‖?

5. At a in Birmingham, Alabama described on page 70, the followers of Martin Luther King, Jr. were greeted by dogs and fire hoses authorized by the city‘s public safety officer, a noted segregationist. All of this was caught on television and aired nationwide. Article 5 of the UDHR says that ―no one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.‖ Would you classify the safety officer‘s action as such? Is it reasonable to believe that the safety officer might have believed that he was taking necessary action for the safety of the public as a whole? If not, why not? If so, how does one enforce UDHR Article 5?

6. The U.S. Constitution also contains several human rights provisions. The 14th Amendment states that the government cannot ―deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.‖ How then, was the Federal Bureau of Investigation able, upon ―hearing Dr. King‘s dream of racial reconciliation and equal

2 citizenship,‖ to launch a ―calculated effort to destroy King‘s personal life‖ and try ―to blackmail the eloquent young preacher into committing suicide‖ as described on page 106? Would any threat posed by Dr. King warrant this type of activity on behalf of the government?

7. The human rights framework protects not only civil and political rights, but socioeconomic and community rights also, e.g., the right to a ―standard of living adequate for health and well-being‖ and the ―right to a clean and healthy environment.‖ Why then, as described on page 142, did the city of Oxford neglect to pave the streets where black people lived and to enforce health and housing codes buildings rented by where African-Americans? The author notes that ―[s]ome of the houses rented to blacks had smelly, illegal outhouses that would not have been permitted in white neighborhoods.‖ Do these kinds of human rights violations in street maintenance and housing still exist in the United States?

8. International human rights law supports a right to just treatment even when one being subjected to legal discipline, including proportional punishment for perpetrators, redress for victims, and access to courts, hearings, and fair trials. Contrast this to what happened with the Teels who were not even taken to jail for several days after the killing of Mr. Marrow and their subsequent acquittal by an all white jury despite numerous eyewitness accounts of the murder. Would proper punishment of the Teels have prevented or minimized further human rights abuses during the struggle for racial equality? Would it have provoked yet greater racial discord?

9. In one passage on page 195, a parishioner comes to Tyson‘s uncle Earl‘s back door in the middle of the night to anonymously tell him she was proud he was her preacher. On another occasion, despite fierce opposition to the contrary, a white school teacher supports Vernon Tyson‘s proposal to invite a black preacher to give the Sunday sermon at the all-white Methodist church. What might have made these individuals speak up? What compels people to speak up for human rights when it is not popular to do so? Is it appropriate to remain silent in the face of racial injustice?

10. Article 20 of the UDHR states that ―everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.‖ The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees freedom of speech and freedom of assembly. However, Article 4(b) of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination requires states to ―declare illegal and prohibit organizations, and also organized and all other propaganda activities, which promote and incite racial discrimination, and shall recognize participation in such organizations or activities as an offence punishable by law.‖ Are the U.S. Constitution and the ICERD in conflict? Should one trump the other and, if so, which one? The U.S. Constitution, it may be argued, permits hate speech. If this be correct, should the U.S. Constitution be further amended to prohibit hate speech? Why? Why not? Is there any reason why racially based hate speech should not be banned or severely restricted by a democratic society that professes racial harmony as a matter of fundamental public policy? Can competing claims to human rights be

3 balanced and, if so, how? Are there examples in the book of one type of human right winning out over another?

11. Throughout the book, various gatherings, marches, and demonstrations were described, organized by both members of the movement for racial equality as well as members of the white supremacy cause such as the Ku Klux Klan (KKK). In what instances were the rights of assembly protected (and even supported) by the state and law enforcement and in what instances were the rights infringed? Do they together suggest state-sponsored racial discrimination?

12. On page 164, Martin Luther King, Jr. is quoted as saying that ―[a] riot is at bottom the language of the unheard.‖ But he promoted , for which he was criticized by the ―‖ movement. On page 252, Eddie McCoy said that ―a lot of what we did was wrong [firebombings; burning tobacco warehouses]…but it did make a difference.‖ History shows that social transformation occurs when ―a large enough number of people organize a movement powerful enough to push…down [unjust social orders].‖ Are violence and resort to force and economic and social damage justified when there are so many rights to be gained or lost?

13. In a recent NPR interview (Day to Day July 12, 2007), one former student of the , Minnijean Brown Trickey, describes the violence she experienced as one of the first blacks to attend Little Rock High in 1957. At one point, Minnijean describes what happened to her as terrorism. Would you consider what happened to both the blacks and whites of Oxford as terrorism? Why? Why not?

14. Article 21 of the UDHR guarantees everyone the right to vote as well as to participate in government. But what happens when leaders fail to represent the voice of the people? For example, on pg. 216, the author describes the march that led to the mayor‘s doorstep following Henry Marrow‘s funeral.. ―I remember going to the door, the state capitol door,‖ Chavis said, ―and knocking on the door, and couldn‘t get an answer. A lot of people in Oxford who had marched ,‖ Chavis continued, ―was hoping and praying the governor would give us an audience, that the governor would step up and call for justice in Oxford. It did not happen.‖ What happens when the official ‗voice of the people‖ is contrary to fundamental human rights? Why do leaders fail to adhere to commonly held notions of equality and dignity?

15. Despite the passage of the Civil Rights Act in 1964, it took many years for blacks to enjoy the rights and freedoms this law provides. Tim Tyson describes an incident when, as late as 1991, a black friend was denied access to a club because of his race–a clear violation of the Civil Rights Act. Why didn‘t Tim and his friend contact the authorities? What is to be done when social attitudes do not comport with the law?

16. Many of the early legal challenges to racial segregation were avoided through the privatization of formerly public spaces, including swimming pools and public schools. Why did the government draw the line of de-segregation between the public and private sphere when human rights violations most certainly continued to take place

4 following privatization? If a discriminatory action lacks the imprimatur of the state, do you think it makes the action less harmful? What other rights are affected by the government‘s reluctance or unwillingness to infringe on the private sphere?

17. Throughout the book, many whites justify their attitudes and behaviors towards blacks by saying that they employ blacks and treat them just like family. When Billy Watkins tried to placate Tim Tyson about the unfair outcome of the Teel trial, he stated that ―a black girl worked in my office during the whole trial.‖ (pg. 297) Do you believe this is equality of treatment as stipulated by international human rights law? Can equality be realized through economic rights alone? Do you think that same ―black girl‖ could have been a lawyer herself in Oxford? Tyson called these relationships paternalistic. Do you agree or disagree? What sort of relationships do you see between blacks and whites in your community?

18. Tyson mentions ―white supremacy‖ throughout the book and the inbred feeling of superiority among whites. He states that, even more harmful, white supremacy led African-Americans to believe ―that they could not stand up for themselves.‖ Is this the underlying theme of the book and part of the motive behind the killing of Dickie Marrow whose life was considered expendable? Note that international law protects ―[l]ife, liberty and the physical integrity of the person—the right to be treated with humanity and dignity and with due process of law; prohibits arbitrary killing and detention, torture and other cruel treatment.‖

19. On pages 279-80, the author states that his generation believed that anyone who tried to change history would be assassinated. Review the number of prominent political and civil rights figures who were assassinated during the 1960s and ‗70s. Does this justify a certain amount of cynicism on his part? Does he ultimately pull himself out of this morass and make some sense of it all?

20. When Tim Tyson returned to Oxford in the 1980s to do research for his thesis (pg. 294-95), all of the records of the murder and the trial were missing from the library, the newspaper offices, the courthouse, and the state archives. Tyson was even chased out of town by a police van after asking about the Teel case (pg. 299). Even today on the Oxford website, there is no mention of Tyson‘s book, the Teel trial, or the civil rights struggles of the 1960s and 1970s.

a. The UDHR protects the rights to ―seek, receive and impart information.‖ The United States reaffirmed this right when it passed the Freedom of Information Act, allowing for full or partial disclosure of information held by the government. Were the records missing from the Oxford archives a violation of the author‘s right to information?

b. Do you agree with Doug White, the former assistant chief of police, when he told Tyson, ―you can’t write about this. All it will do is stir up bad feelings and cause trouble.‖ (pg. 298). What effect does whitewashing history have on people who have been victimized, especially given the

5 international norm of providing redress to victims for crimes committed against them?

21. The author writes on page 318 that ―[o]ur failure to confront the truth about how African-Americans finally won their freedom presents a major obstacle to genuine racial reconciliation.‖ The book states that civil rights laws were passed less because it was the right thing to do than because the U.S. looked bad to the rest of the world and because of the economic and global-political consequences that might ensue from such a perception. How does this contrast to U.S. reactions to human rights violations in other countries such as Cuba? Iraq? Iran?

23. On page 165, Eddie McCoy says that poor black kids, as he had been, are not expected to finish school but to end up in jail. The Sentencing Project issued a report in July 2007 which reveals that in Iowa, with a 2% black population, blacks are 13.6 times more likely than whites to be imprisoned. (Mauer, Marc; King, Ryan S. Uneven Justice: State Rates of Incarceration by Race and Ethnicity.) After reading this book, it might be easy to say that such blatant discrimination could only happen in the South. Judging from the above statistic, is that true?

24. Do you think studying the through a human rights framework and recognizing the ways in which our country‘s history of racial segregation has worked to infringe on rights across the spectrum including the fundamental rights to life, liberty, bodily integrity, fair trial, peaceful assembly, racial and gender equality, and socio-economic well-being have been successful in revealing what Tyson prescribes as understanding ―the historical truth about how African-Americans finally won their freedom‖ and ―the road that brought us here‖?

25. The first sentence of the book changed the author‘s world. Does it set the tone for the events and the history described in the book? Are the human rights challenges present at the start of the book, leading to the killing of Dickie Marrow, rectified by the by the time of the book‘s end? Today, does our system of government and justice do a better job of protecting the fundamental human rights of racial minorities? If so, how and to what extent? If not, why not?

26. On page 267, the author writes that his father, the Methodist minister in Oxford, imagined himself as ―a swinging door‖ across the color line that divided the townspeople. ―He hoped to become a peacemaker and help explain blacks and whites to each other.‖ Could this also describe the author, using this book to bridge the gap? Can a white person successfully take on this kind of racial mediation role and do you believe that it is still necessary today?

6