Category Archives: Empowerment

CORE’s Rules for Direct Action

The Congress of Racial Equality and its Rules for Direct action

The Congress of Racial Equality (CORE) and its Rules for Direct Action were foundational to the civil rights movement in the United States. These rules were inspired by Mahatma Gandhi’s principles of nonviolence and were instrumental in shaping the strategies of CORE and other civil rights organizations, including Martin Luther King Jr.’s leadership in the broader movement. Below is an overview of CORE’s Rules for Action and how they compare to the principles of other organizations.

1. CORE’s Rules for Direct Action

CORE’s Rules for Direct Action were designed to guide activists in their efforts to challenge racial segregation and discrimination through nonviolent resistance. These rules emphasized preparation, discipline, and a step-by-step approach to achieving change.

Key Rules for Action:

  1. Investigate: Before taking action, activists were instructed to thoroughly investigate the issue at hand. This involved gathering facts and understanding the root causes of the problem.
  2. Document: Activists were required to document the facts of the situation to build a strong case for their demands. This step ensured credibility and transparency.
  3. Negotiate: CORE emphasized negotiation with those in power to resolve the issue peacefully. This step reflected their commitment to nonviolence and dialogue.
  4. Take Direct Action: If negotiation failed, activists were encouraged to take nonviolent direct action. This could include sit-ins, boycotts, or other forms of civil disobedience designed to draw attention to the issue and pressure decision-makers.

Principles of Nonviolence:

  • CORE’s actions were rooted in nonviolence, inspired by Gandhi’s philosophy of civil disobedience. Activists were trained to remain peaceful even in the face of violence or provocation.
  • The goal was to expose the injustice of segregation and discrimination while maintaining the moral high ground.

2. How CORE’s Rules Compare to Other Organizations

Other civil rights and social justice organizations adopted similar principles, though their approaches varied depending on their goals and leadership structures.

Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC):

  • Led by Martin Luther King Jr., the SCLC also emphasized nonviolent direct action and negotiation.
  • The SCLC’s campaigns, such as the Montgomery Bus Boycott and the Birmingham Campaign, followed a similar step-by-step approach: investigation, negotiation, and direct action.

Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC):

  • SNCC worked closely with CORE, particularly in the South, and shared its commitment to nonviolence.
  • However, SNCC placed a stronger emphasis on grassroots organizing and empowering local communities to lead their own movements.

Fellowship of Reconciliation (FOR):

  • CORE was initially an offshoot of the Fellowship of Reconciliation, a pacifist organization that promoted nonviolence and civil disobedience.
  • FOR provided training and support to CORE members, helping to shape their strategies and philosophy.

3. Leadership and Decision-Making in CORE

CORE’s leadership structure combined top-down guidance with grassroots participation:

  • Top-Down Leadership: CORE’s national leadership, including figures like James Farmer, provided strategic direction and training for activists.
  • Grassroots Participation: Local CORE chapters had significant autonomy to organize actions and respond to issues in their communities.

During mass protests, leadership was often structured but flexible, allowing for both coordination and organic participation. For example:

  • During the Freedom Rides, CORE leaders coordinated the overall strategy, but local activists and participants played a critical role in executing the actions.

4. Use of Culture and Symbols

CORE, like other civil rights organizations, used cultural tools to inspire and mobilize people:

  • Language: CORE’s messaging emphasized equality, justice, and nonviolence. Their rhetoric appealed to universal values and the moral conscience of the nation.
  • Symbols: CORE used symbols of unity and resistance, such as the American flag, to highlight the contradiction between the nation’s ideals and the reality of segregation.
  • Music: Songs like “We Shall Overcome” were central to CORE’s actions, uniting participants and reinforcing their commitment to nonviolence.
  • Wardrobes: Activists often dressed formally during protests to project dignity and respectability, countering stereotypes and appealing to public sympathy.

5. Broader Implications of CORE’s Rules

CORE’s Rules for Direct Action became a model for nonviolent resistance worldwide. Their emphasis on preparation, discipline, and moral clarity ensured that their actions were both effective and ethically grounded. These principles continue to influence modern social movements, from environmental activism to racial justice campaigns. By combining strategic planning with cultural tools, CORE and similar organizations demonstrated the power of nonviolence in achieving systemic change.

History and Influence of CORE article CLICK HERE

“We’re All in This Together” ?

Since Trump’s second election I have been hearing talk that “We’re all in this together”.

Ultimately, the true meaning of “all” lies not in its historical usage but in the ongoing efforts to make it **genuinely inclusive**—a call to action for continued progress in the pursuit of justice.

The phrase “justice for all” and the use of the word “all” in foundational American documents like the Constitution have often been sources of reflection, critique, and debate, especially when viewed through the lenses of **history, sociology, political science, and social justice**. While the language of “all” suggests inclusivity and universality, the reality of its application—particularly at the time of its writing—was far more exclusive.

Let’s unpack the concept of **”all”** in this context by examining its historical roots, implications, and how modern disciplines like sociology and political science have interpreted it.

—

**Historical Context: “All” and the Constitution**

When the United States Constitution was drafted in 1787, and later when the Bill of Rights was ratified, the language of these documents was steeped in **Enlightenment ideals** like liberty, equality, and justice. However, these ideals were **not universally applied**:

– The **Three-Fifths Compromise** (Article 1, Section 2 of the Constitution) explicitly treated enslaved Black individuals as **three-fifths of a person** for purposes of representation and taxation. This was a political concession to Southern states that wanted to maximize their influence in Congress while maintaining the institution of slavery.

– The framers of the Constitution, many of whom were **slaveholders** (e.g., George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison), did not intend for “all” to mean **everyone** in society. The rights and freedoms outlined in the Constitution initially applied almost exclusively to **white male property owners**—excluding women, Native Americans, Black people (enslaved or free), and the poor.

– The phrase “justice for all”, while noble in principle, was in practice deeply hypocritical during this era. It excluded large swaths of the population, including those subjected to systemic inequalities like slavery and disenfranchisement.

—

**The Evolution of “All” in Social and Political Thought**

Over time, the meaning of “all” has been challenged, expanded, and redefined through **historical struggles and movements**. Disciplines like history, sociology, and political science provide tools to understand how this concept has evolved.

1. **History and Archaeology**: 

   – Historical records and archaeological evidence demonstrate that societies often have **hierarchies of inclusion and exclusion**. In the U.S., the founding documents reflect the sociopolitical norms of the 18th century, where racial inequality and systemic oppression were institutionalized.

   – The abolitionist movement, Civil War, Reconstruction, and Civil Rights Movement all illustrate moments in history where the **definition of “all” was contested and expanded** to include those previously excluded.

2. **Sociology and Social Sciences**:

   – Sociologists examine how language like “all” is used to **construct social hierarchies** and enforce power dynamics. The rhetorical use of “all” creates an illusion of unity while masking structural inequalities.

   – For example, the concept of **”colorblindness”** in modern racial discourse can be critiqued as a way to ignore systemic racism while claiming that “all” people are treated equally under the law.

3. **Political Science**:

   – Political theorists often critique the **original exclusionary frameworks** of liberal democracies like the U.S. Constitution. Scholars like W.E.B. Du Bois and Angela Davis have argued that the rhetoric of equality in American politics has historically been a tool to **legitimize unequal systems**.

   – The expansion of voting rights (e.g., 15th and 19th Amendments) and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 are examples of how political movements have worked to make “all” more inclusive in practice.

4. **Social Work and Activism**:

   – Social work emphasizes the need for **equity** (fairness) rather than equality (sameness). While “justice for all” implies equality, social workers advocate addressing **systemic barriers** that prevent marginalized groups from accessing justice.

   – Activists today often challenge the gap between the **ideal of justice for all** and the realities of systemic racism, economic inequality, and social injustice.

—

**What Does “All” Truly Mean?**

The word “all” is both a promise and a paradox in American political and social discourse. Its meaning depends on who is included and excluded in its application. Historically, “all” has been a **selective term**, wielded to uphold existing power structures while denying rights to marginalized groups.

In a broader philosophical sense, “all” should imply **universality**, but achieving true inclusivity requires:

1. **Acknowledging historical exclusions** and their ongoing legacies (e.g., systemic racism, sexism, and classism).

2. **Critically examining language** and how it reinforces power dynamics.

3. **Taking action** to dismantle systems of oppression and expand the circle of inclusion.

—

**Conclusion: “All” as a Call to Action**

The U.S. Constitution’s use of “all” in phrases like “justice for all” set an **aspirational standard**—one that the nation has struggled to meet. History, sociology, and other disciplines highlight the ways in which “all” has been used to exclude rather than include. However, they also offer tools for understanding and reshaping this concept to reflect a more equitable and just society.

Something You Can Do

Posted on by
Reply

Spokane, like many cities in the United State has seen its share of protests over the years. And year after year thousands show up at the Martin Luther King Rally and March. Who’s who of Black Spokane will show up. Black organizations and community centers show up. Church groups show up. Local press shows up. Politicians show up. They are ethnically and economically diverse. In 2011 there was a bomb found along the MLK March route. For the following year thousands more turned out for the march.

One of the current cliches is that we are all in it together. But how is this expressed in terms of social justice? In the constitution it says liberty and justice for all, but Blacks were counted as only 3/5ths of a person. The diversity of the nation has increased through immigration but we still all live in our silos and everyone was not and is not considered equal. One of most segregated organizations are our churches. But now when we are on the verge of a tyranny when everyone is losing their rights suddenly we are all in it together. But our protests are still segregated. The only diverse marches and rallies here in Spokane are the Martin Luther King rally and march in January of each year.

Thousands Turn Out in Spokane and The Nation

Our protests are not diverse. Think of these examples:

Civil Rights Movement (1960s -1970s)
Vietnam War Protests (1960s -1970s)
Environmental Movements (1970s – present)
Indigenous Rights
LGBTQ+ Rights
Black Lives Matter (2010s – present)
Protest Anti-Semitism
Protest Anti-Muslim
Open Housing
Homeless Rights
Economic and Labor Protests
Anti-Trump Protests
Women’s March

How do we all work together? When people leave the meetings and rallies they return to their homogeneous communities. Check out the following links for things that can be done in-between the significant emotional events of major protests.

198 Methods of Nonviolent Action:

Pass this out at every march, rally and meeting you attend

Practitioners of nonviolent struggle have an entire arsenal of “nonviolent weapons” at their disposal. Listed below are 198 of them, classified into three broad categories: nonviolent protest and persuasion, noncooperation (social, economic, and political), and nonviolent intervention. A description and historical examples of each can be found in volume two of The Politics of Nonviolent Action, by Gene Sharp

Actions and Strategies

Posted on by
Reply

For full article CLICK HERE

IN TIMES OF TRUMP DISMANTLING AMERICAN GOVERNMENT 

Comprehensive Strategies to Regain Control and Protect Democratic Institutions from Systematic Dismantling

# Immediate Action Strategies

The success of these strategies depends on coordinated action across multiple sectors and sustained commitment to democratic principles. The research suggests that combining legal mechanisms, civil society action, and international support provides the most effective approach to protecting and restoring democratic institutions.

Actions and Strategies

In Times of Trump Dismantling American Government

Comprehensive Strategies to Regain Control and Protect Democratic Institutions from Systematic Dismantling

Freedom of Assembly – A Constitutional Right

# Immediate Action Strategies

## 1. Legal and Constitutional Mechanisms

– Utilize judicial review to challenge unconstitutional executive actions, as established by Marbury v. Madison [[1]]

– Leverage existing checks and balances systems to limit executive overreach [[2]]

– Employ legislative oversight tools, including:

  – Congressional hearings

  – Investigations

  – Strategic use of funding controls [[2]]

## 2. Civil Society Response

– Engage with organizations like Civil Service Strong and Partnership for Public Service that specifically work to protect civil service [[3]]

– Support watchdog organizations and legal advocacy groups like Protect Democracy [[4]]

– Mobilize grassroots movements and civil society organizations to:

  – Monitor government actions

  – Expose corruption

  – Lobby for governance reforms [[5]]

## 3. Institutional Protection Measures

### Government Workforce Protection

– Support initiatives defending civil service against political interference

– Work with unions and professional associations to protect government employees

– Document and challenge illegal terminations or restructuring [[3]]

### Democratic Process Protection

– Safeguard election integrity through:

  – Protection against voter suppression

  – Combating disinformation

  – Maintaining election infrastructure [[6]]

## 4. International Cooperation and Support

– Engage with international organizations like International IDEA and UNDP’s Democratic Governance [[7]]

– Utilize international pressure and accountability mechanisms

– Learn from other democracies’ experiences in resisting authoritarian attempts [[8]]

# Long-term Strategic Approaches

## 1. Develop a National Democracy Strategy

– Create a comprehensive plan integrating democracy protection into:

  – Economic policy

  – Social policy

  – Technology policy

  – Diplomatic relations

  – Military considerations [[9]]

## 2. Build Cross-sector Alliances

– Form coalitions between:

  – Civil society organizations

  – Legal professionals

  – Academic institutions

  – Business leaders

  – Pro-democracy politicians [[10]]

## 3. Public Education and Engagement

– Launch public awareness campaigns about democratic institutions

– Educate citizens about their rights and democratic processes

– Foster civic participation and engagement [[5]]

## 4. Media and Technology Strategy

– Support independent journalism

– Combat disinformation through fact-checking initiatives

– Engage technology companies in protecting democratic processes [[11]]

# Success Indicators from Historical Examples

Historical examples show that democratic institutions can recover from systematic dismantling attempts. Key lessons include:

1. **Post-WWII Germany and Japan**: Successful reconstruction required:

– Strong constitutional frameworks

– International support

– Economic rebuilding

– Democratic institution building [[12]]

2. **Eastern European Transitions**: Demonstrated the importance of:

– Civil society movements

– International support

– Economic reforms

– Democratic constitution development [[12]]

# Current Public Support

Recent data shows potential for successful resistance:

– High public demand for government reform (49% Democrats, 83% Republicans) [[13]]

– Strong electoral responses against anti-democratic actions

– Growing concern about institutional integrity across political spectrums [[14]]

The success of these strategies depends on coordinated action across multiple sectors and sustained commitment to democratic principles. The research suggests that combining legal mechanisms, civil society action, and international support provides the most effective approach to protecting and restoring democratic institutions.

Coalitions

Building Coalitions and Bridges

To build coalitions and bridges beyond our own special interests:

  1. Identify Common Goals: Successful coalitions often start with a clear understanding of the common goals and the necessity of collaboration. The process involves identifying the problems or goals that bring organizations together, understanding the community’s needs, and assembling a diverse group of stakeholders who can contribute to achieving the coalition’s objectives [7].
  2. Engage Diverse Stakeholders: Include those most affected by the issue and leverage their unique perspectives and resources. This diversity can lead to more comprehensive and effective solutions.
  3. Focus on Shared Interests: Cross-racial coalitions, for example, have been successful in addressing issues like voting rights and economic opportunities by focusing on shared interests or common threats [8].
  4. Utilize Frameworks: Employ frameworks like the Health Impact Pyramid to assess local assets and challenges, coordinate activities, and monitor interventions effectively [9].
  5. Promote Open Communication: Foster a culture of open dialogue and shared responsibility among coalition members to ensure all voices are heard and valued.

We Need Organizations

The Importance of Community Organizations

Addressing the question “if it doesn’t affect me directly, why should I care?”, it’s crucial to understand the broader impact of community organizations. Understanding and evaluating community organizations requires a multifaceted approach. By considering their effectiveness, transparency, coalition-building efforts, and legitimacy indicators, you can make informed decisions about which organizations to support and engage with. Remember that while an organization’s impact may not always be immediately apparent to you personally, their work often contributes to broader societal improvements that can benefit everyone in the long term.

  1. Collective Impact: Community organizations often address issues that affect society as a whole, even if not immediately apparent to individuals. Their work can lead to systemic changes that benefit everyone in the long run.
  2. Social Cohesion: These organizations play a vital role in building stronger, more connected communities, which can improve quality of life for all residents.
  3. Resource Mobilization: They often mobilize resources and volunteers to address local issues more efficiently than government agencies or individuals could alone.
  4. Advocacy: Community organizations can amplify the voices of marginalized groups and advocate for policy changes that benefit the broader community.

The Importance of Transparency in Community Organizations

In an era where organizations may operate virtually or from home offices, developing transparency is crucial:

  1. Embrace Digital Tools: Organizations should leverage digital technologies to enhance transparency and accountability. This includes using platforms that allow for real-time data sharing and communication, which can help in making informed decisions and fostering trust among stakeholders [10].
  2. Implement Data Transparency Practices: Ensure clear and open handling of data, helping stakeholders understand how their information is collected, used, and shared [11].
  3. Utilize Blockchain for Immutable Records: Consider using blockchain technology to create decentralized and immutable records, enhancing transparency and reducing the risk of fraud [12].
  4. Balance Transparency with Privacy: While transparency is important, it must be balanced with privacy concerns. Organizations should ensure that sensitive information is protected and that transparency does not lead to unintended data exposure [13].

What If!
What if nobody sees what you do?
What if nobody knows how you feel?
What if nobody cares that you care?
What if nobody does what you do?
What if nobody reads what you write?
What if nobody thinks the way you do?
Will you still be who you are?

Rodney Coates

Which Side Are You On?

By Florence Reece
This song emerged during the Harlan County War, a
series of coal miner strikes in Kentucky. Florence Reece was the wife of a union organizer and her song became the anthem for the labor movement and was widely covered by artists like Pete Seeger.

I Care What You Think

We know that you all cannot support nonviolent revolution in the same way and we are not asking you to. But before we ever start we need to know who will support nonviolent revolution and at what level. Are you an Actor, Ally or Accomplice? Click this link. After you have figured out what it is you are willing to do please fill out and submit the What Will You Do Survey.

We need to build a movement! Not another organization. We need to support active organizations that we already have.

Be aware of the gatekeepers (pimps, preachers and prostitutes), they will want to stop you, slow you down, and turn this movement around. Some earn their income from our plight. Their behavior might get you killed.

Develop Effective Action Groups

Reflections on 50 Years of Social Action Groups in Spokane

These reflections and critiques offer insight into the challenges and nuances of organizing for social and political change, especially in a community with unique demographic and cultural dynamics like Spokane’s. I’ll break down some of the key themes and ideas that emerge from my observations, followed by an analysis of the different organizational meeting styles I have observed.

Observations on Spokane’s Social Justice Landscape

1. The Challenge of Unity in Diversity

I would like to highlight a critical stumbling block: the diversity of backgrounds and experiences among African Americans in Spokane, combined with open housing policies that have dispersed the community geographically. This dispersal creates physical and cultural barriers to organizing. Efforts at building unity often falter because of a lack of shared experiences or common interests.

The “myth of unity” is especially powerful. True solidarity often requires honest critique and the ability to challenge one another constructively. However the fear of disrupting fragile social bonds can prevent this, leaving communities stagnant or divided. Recognizing this tension is a crucial first step toward addressing it.

2. Opposition’s Strategic Plans

The opposition’s strategy of fostering disunity by perpetuating myths of unity and relying on ineffective slogans such as “each one teach one” resonates. While the latter sounds appealing, it does not scale quickly enough to make the kind of sweeping change necessary in the face of systemic opposition.

Calling for methods to teach larger groups and work collaboratively rather than individually is vital. Scaling up requires intentional, structured approaches that balance grassroots engagement with broader, unified strategies.

3. The Power of Small, Scalable Actions

Starting with small groups (5-10 people) that reach consensus and funnel ideas up to larger groups (20-40 people) is practical and reflects effective organizing models. This approach mirrors successful strategies used in community organizing and union movements. The key is ensuring that these small groups do not become isolated or self-contained but instead feed into a larger, cohesive effort.

Use independent media to disseminate ideas and strategies. In the digital age, leveraging social media, podcasts, and other platforms can amplify these messages far beyond the immediate community.

Critique of Organizational Meeting Styles

1. Small Groups That Just Complain

These groups are common in grassroots organizing and often act as pressure valves for frustration. While they may provide a sense of camaraderie and shared grievance, they rarely lead to action or change. The key to transforming these groups is introducing structure, goal-setting, and accountability.

2. Small Groups That Take Effective Action But Fail to Scale

These groups are the backbone of many movements, as they are action-oriented and often achieve measurable results. However, they can become insular and overly reliant on the comfort of their small size. To scale up, these groups must develop strategies for outreach, recruitment, and leadership development. Succession planning is also critical to prevent burnout and stagnation.

3. Large, Established Groups with Gatekeeping Leadership

Larger organizations with entrenched leadership may have the appearance of strength, but their top-heavy structure often stifles grassroots participation and innovation. Additionally, their focus on appearances (e.g., press conferences, grand speeches) can overshadow actual community engagement. Breaking down these gatekeeping tendencies requires fostering a culture of transparency, shared decision-making, and accountability within these organizations.

4. A Model Town Hall Meeting

I want to note a successful Democratic meeting – a state legislative town hall I recently attended which stands out as a shining example of effective organization and engagement. Its success can be attributed to several factors:

  • Preparation: From the panel’s shared experiences and unified goals to logistical details like sign-ins, cards for questions, and microphones for audience participation, every aspect of the event was thoughtfully planned.
  • Inclusivity: The setup allowed for both written and verbal questions, ensuring that all voices were heard, including those less comfortable speaking publicly.
  • Follow-Up: Collecting contact information and ensuring unanswered questions were addressed later demonstrated respect for participants’ concerns and a commitment to accountability.
  • Engagement: The inclusion of a younger, passionate panel member brought fresh energy and perspectives, which is often key to inspiring broader participation.

This model could serve as a blueprint for other events, fostering trust, transparency, and community buy-in.

Key Takeaways and Recommendations

1. Build Bridges Across Diverse Experiences

To overcome the challenge of disunity, focus on identifying shared goals and emphasizing common interests rather than differences. This could involve hosting listening sessions or cultural exchanges to deepen understanding among community members.

2. Scale Effectively

  • Start with small groups but ensure they are networked into a larger movement. Use representatives to connect these groups and share their findings.
  • Embrace digital tools to communicate and scale your efforts. Social media campaigns, live-streamed events, and online forums can bring dispersed communities together.

3. Cultivate Leadership and Prevent Gatekeeping

Develop leadership training programs to empower new voices and prevent the monopolization of power by a few individuals. Encourage established organizations to adopt more democratic, participatory structures.

4. Learn from the Model Town Hall

The thoughtful, inclusive approach of the town hall meeting I attended is replicable. Key elements to incorporate into future events include:

  • Advance planning and logistics
  • Opportunities for direct and written participation
  • Transparent follow-up processes
  • A mix of seasoned and fresh voices to ensure both experience and innovation

5. Use Independent Media Strategically

Leverage independent media to broadcast successes, share strategies, and counteract misinformation. Platforms like blogs, YouTube channels, and podcasts can amplify voices that mainstream media often overlooks.

Conclusion

I hope these reflections capture the complexity of organizing for social justice in a fragmented community. The challenges outlined—disunity, ineffective strategies, and entrenched gatekeeping—are significant but not insurmountable. By building on effective models like the town hall meeting and prioritizing scalable, inclusive approaches, there is real potential to create lasting change.

If any of this information here at 4comculture.com is useful to you, pass it on to friends and community leaders in order that they might learn.

BLACKS VS WHITES 1925 to 2025

The Good Old Days! What the F@%#! are the MAGA folks thinking? Make America Great Again?

The phrase “the good old days” typically refers to a nostalgic longing for a past time that individuals perceive as better or simpler than the present. However, the meaning and implications of this phrase can vary significantly depending on the context and the speaker’s perspective: personal memories, cultural context, privilege and exclusion, selective memory, dissatisfaction with modernity. The Good Old Days

timeline: the Last 100 Years

To compare the last century, let’s break this down into key categories: cost of living, wages, population, culture (movies, slang, toys, hairstyles, clothing), and the experiences of marginalized groups highlighting changes over time and providing context for marginalized communities where relevant.

1. Cost of Living and Housing

  • 1925: The average cost of a home in the U.S. was around $6,000. Rent was about $20–$60 per month, depending on location. The cost of living was significantly lower, but wages were also much smaller [1].
  • 2025: The median home price in the U.S. is now over $400,000, with rent averaging $1,700 per month. Housing costs have skyrocketed, making homeownership increasingly difficult for younger generations.

Marginalized Communities:

In 1925, Black Americans and other marginalized groups faced systemic barriers to homeownership due to redlining and discriminatory lending practices. These inequities persist today, with racial wealth gaps making it harder for marginalized groups to afford homes.

2. Minimum Wage and Wages

  • 1925: There was no federal minimum wage in the U.S. until 1938, when it was set at $0.25/hour. Many workers, especially women and minorities, earned far less in informal or agricultural jobs.
  • 2025: The federal minimum wage is $7.25/hour, though many states have higher rates. However, adjusted for inflation, wages have stagnated since the 1970s, meaning purchasing power has barely increased.

Marginalized Communities:

Historically, women, immigrants, and Black workers were often excluded from wage protections. Today, these groups are still overrepresented in low-wage industries, such as service and caregiving jobs, where wage growth has been slow.

3. World Population

  • 1925: The global population was approximately 2 billion.
  • 2025: The world population is now over 8 billion, with significant growth in Asia and Africa.

Marginalized Communities:

Population growth has brought challenges like resource scarcity and climate change, which disproportionately affect marginalized communities in developing nations.

4. Movies and Entertainment

  • 1925: Silent films dominated, with stars like Charlie Chaplin and Clara Bow. A movie ticket cost $0.25–$0.50. Popular films included The Gold Rush (1925).
  • 2025: Movie tickets now average $10–$15. Streaming services dominate entertainment, but blockbuster films like Avatar: The Way of Water (2022) still draw crowds.

Marginalized Communities:

In 1925, Hollywood largely excluded Black actors and other minorities, relegating them to stereotypical roles. Today, representation has improved, but disparities remain in opportunities and pay.

5. Toys and Games

  • 1925: Popular toys included teddy bears, yo-yos, and tin soldiers. These were simple and often handmade.
  • 2025: Toys are now high-tech, with video games, drones, and AI-powered gadgets dominating the market.

Marginalized Communities:

In the 1920s, toys often reflected societal norms, with few options representing diverse cultures. Today, there’s a growing push for inclusive toys, such as dolls with different skin tones and abilities.

6. Slang Terms

  • 1925: Popular slang included terms like “bee’s knees” (something great) and “cat’s pajamas” (something stylish).
  • 2025: Modern slang is heavily influenced by internet culture, with terms like “slay” (to succeed) and “vibe” (a mood or feeling).

Marginalized Communities:

Slang has often originated in marginalized communities, particularly Black and LGBTQ+ cultures, before being adopted by mainstream society.

7. Hairstyles and Clothing

  • 1925: Women embraced the bob haircut and flapper dresses, symbolizing liberation. Men wore tailored suits and hats.
  • 2025: Hairstyles are diverse, with natural hair movements celebrating Black hair textures. Clothing trends are casual, with athleisure dominating.

Marginalized Communities:

In the 1920s, Black women faced pressure to conform to Eurocentric beauty standards. Today, natural hair movements challenge these norms, promoting acceptance of diverse styles.

8. Marginalized Communities: Then and Now

  • 1925: Segregation, lack of voting rights, and systemic discrimination defined the experiences of many marginalized groups. Women had just gained the right to vote in 1920, but opportunities were limited.
  • 2025: While progress has been made, systemic inequities persist. Wage gaps, housing discrimination, and underrepresentation in media and politics continue to affect marginalized groups.

Black and White

Population Trends Over the Last 100 Years

  1. Early 20th Century (1920s-1950s):
  • In the early 20th century, the U.S. population was overwhelmingly white, with white Americans making up approximately 90% of the population. Immigration policies, such as the Immigration Act of 1924, heavily restricted non-European immigration, reinforcing this demographic dominance.
  • People of color, including African Americans, Native Americans, and smaller populations of Asian and Hispanic Americans, made up a much smaller percentage of the population.
  1. Mid-20th Century (1960s-1980s):
  • The Civil Rights Movement and changes in immigration laws, such as the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, began to reshape the racial makeup of the U.S. population.
  • The African American population grew steadily, while immigration from Latin America and Asia increased significantly, diversifying the population further.
  1. Late 20th Century (1990s-2000s):
  • By the 1990s, the percentage of white Americans began to decline as immigration surged and birth rates among people of color outpaced those of white Americans.
  • The Hispanic/Latino population, in particular, grew rapidly, becoming the largest minority group in the U.S.

Current Trends and Projections

  1. Current Demographics:
  • As of the 2020 Census, non-Hispanic white Americans made up about 57.8% of the population, a significant decline from the 1960s when they accounted for over 85% [1].
  • People of color, including Hispanic/Latino, Black, Asian, and multiracial individuals, now make up a growing share of the population. For example, children of color became the majority of U.S. youth by 2020 [2].
  1. Future Projections:
  • The U.S. Census Bureau projects that by 2045, non-Hispanic white Americans will fall below 50% of the total population, making the U.S. a “majority-minority” nation[3].
  • This shift is driven by higher birth rates among people of color and the aging of the white population. Generation Z is expected to be the last generation with a white majority, while Generation Alpha (born after 2010) will grow up in a majority-minority society [3].

Key Factors Driving These Changes

Immigration from Latin America, Asia, and Africa has been a major driver of population growth among people of color since the mid-20th century. Birth rates among Hispanic and Black populations have historically been higher than those of white Americans, contributing to the demographic shift. The white population is aging rapidly, with lower birth rates and higher mortality rates compared to other racial and ethnic groups.

The strongman leaders, oligarchs and White Christian nationalists have declared war on Blacks. The only way we will survive is to build coalitions. What are your thoughts on the demographics above?

Over the last century, the U.S. has transitioned from a predominantly white nation to one of increasing racial and ethnic diversity. This trend is expected to continue, with people of color projected to outnumber white Americans by 2045. The only way Black people will survive is to build a broad coalition with people of color, lower economic communities and the internationally disenfranchised.

Guide to Critical Thinking

Thinking Critically with Community Organizing

Guide to Critical Thinking Worksheet

Choices Now: Tyranny or Revolution?

Think Outside Silos: Win Elections

“Reactionary”: Labels Are Not Inclusive