Author: pkelly23

Throughout the semester, we have been analyzing the events of 1968. With all that has happened, I cannot help but draw similarities to our current year of 2020. I think these two years are similar because of a few events from each. 1968 is remembered by the Civil Rights Movement, the United States Presidential election, and the Vietnam War. These three main events were so important and polarizing that it forced people to pick a side. You could not remain neutral for any of these topics because people’s lives were on the line. Citizens had no choice but to form an opinion and defend it. Did you support the civil rights movement? Which political candidate do you side with? Is the Vietnam War just? These are all questions that people had to answer and much of the population disagreed on them. For this reason, 68’ was a time where our country felt extremely divided and filled with tension. 

In a way, 2020 has been defined by three main factors too – a Presidential Election, the Black Lives Matter movement, and the COVID-19 Pandemic. This year was one of the most publicly followed elections in the history of the United States and certainly divided people between different political parties. With the emergence of social media, people were able to voice their differing opinions on a platform like never before. Secondly, the Black Lives Matter movement was sparked primarily from the murder of Goerge Floyd in May. When videos and details of his murder were released, the country erupted in protests and unrest. Millions of people came together to protest systematic racism. During this time, merely standing on the side, while others protested was no longer acceptable for combatting racism. Lastly, above all the other events from 2020, we have been living in the midst of a global pandemic. This unforeseen event that has life or death implications can be compared to the effect that the Vietnam war had on the United States in 1968. The subject matter between the two events is loosely related, but they are certainly similar in the sense that they demanded the attention of the American people. Different people hold different views of the virus, creating tension and divide amongst each other. Throughout this year, people have been forced to choose where they stand on certain topics, and this has created a culture where you need to defend and voice your opinions. With all this said, I do not think it would be entirely crazy to think that there may be a class 50 years from now that focuses on the events of 2020, just as we have done this semester with 1968. 

What is Revolutionary Suicide? In our continued discussion of the late 1960s, this term holds much significance. One way to define this phrase is going against the current system, even though you know that it may seriously harm or even kill you. This is something that can be observed in many of the leaders from this time. People knew that going against the government and attempting to spark change carried a risk that there would be people who did not agree with them and would try to suppress their voice. The important thing to note is that this threat did not deter some of the great leaders from this time, such as Martin Luther King, Huey Newton, Robert Kennedy, and countless other people who lost their life. They were willing to give everything that they had, including their life, for the cause. 

Another way to look at this term of revolutionary suicide is that revolution itself was causing society to self-destruct. In this interpretation, it is not the person whose life is at risk, but rather society in general. The leaders of this time were not happy with what was happening and they wanted to create systematic change in whatever way they could. If this meant that they had to go after society by challenging the government, police, and other high standing people, then they were willing to do that. They wanted society to change, whether that was through reform or completely changing everything. 

Either definition of revolutionary suicide reflects the desperate nature from the radicals of this time. They were willing to do whatever it took to create change, whether that meant giving up their own life or challenging how our entire society works. I think it shows that desperate times lead to drastic measures. The drastic measures are remembered as historic events, such as the events that we saw during this short time. 

One of the topics that we discussed in class is why do we use fiction to depict extreme times of violence and duress in history? The two books that we discussed were Mojo Mickybo, which reflected the violence of the Troubles in Belfast and The Boy in the Striped Pajamas, which reflects the extreme violence of the Holocaust. Why do we need to come up with stories like these to explain events in history that are already regarded as tragic and catastrophic?

I believe the answer to this question is that by making up these stories, it makes the tragedy real for its readers. For members of the younger generation, the Troubles and other events that occurred decades ago are very hard to relate to on a personal level. Yes, we can recognize struggles of the time and realize how terrible it was, but to a certain extent there is not enough of a personal effect on us to understand the true pain of the time. 

These stories allow people to feel that personal effect. Through reading, we develop a relationship with the characters. We begin to understand their life, thoughts, and emotions, which creates a genuine bond and connection. In Mojo Mickybo, we develop a relationship with the two boys and come to care for them and their friendship throughout the story. This connection makes it even more painful when Mickeybo’s father is shot in the back of the head and killed. Mickeybo’s friendship with Mojo is ended and him and his mother are now left to fend for themselves. This story is sad and although we know it is fiction, it still shines a light on the true pain of the time. The violence of The Troubles in general was not like a Hollywood movie, where killing is always justified and romanticized. The same can be said about the Boy in the Striped Pajamas, when both boys are mercilessly killed, leaving their families shattered. Stories like Mojo Mickeybo and The Boy in the Striped Pajamas shows how violence is often heartless and tears families, friendships, and lives apart. It affects the innocent just as much as those directly involved. This isn’t the story people want to hear, but it is the truth and that is why fictional stories like these hold value. It forces people to acknowledge the true pain and suffering from the time, instead of only looking at the Hollywood version. 

Over the past week’s discussions, a question was proposed regarding the importance of a central leader during times of serious change, like the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s. Dr. Martin Luther King is the person that everybody thinks of when they talk about this time. He was always the one delivering the speeches, marching in the front of the pack, and pushing the people of the movement further to continue to demand change. For this reason, Martin Luther King will forever be remembered as one of the most important people in the history of the United States. The question that I pose now is, who will be remembered from our generation? Who is our central leader? 

There is no definitive answer to this question, but if I had to theorize about some of the most notable faces of the Black Lives Matters movement, one person that inevitably comes to mind is Collin Kaepernick. Although he has not spent much time in the public eye within the past few years, I still believe that his story is something that will be remembered and even compared to some of the actions of the leaders from 68. Looking back, we view the leaders of this time as heroes and show immense amounts of respect and gratitude for their passion towards the Civil Rights Movement, but I am sure that during the 60s they were not treated the same way. I believe that the same will be said for Collin Kaepernick. He first took a knee in 2016 and was met with fierce criticism, but he did not waiver in his actions. His situation got so bad that he ended up losing his job and hasn’t played another game in the NFL since. Now, four years later, players across all professional sports are taking a knee to show their support of the BLM movement. This idea was conceived by somebody who met extreme criticism for his actions, but he persisted and will now be remembered as a leader of our time and this movement. 

As class discussions and required readings continue in this class, I am continually drawn back to the significance of media portrayal in 1968. Much of the protest, violence, and conflict at the time was framed in such a way that had a substantial impact on the American population’s view towards these issues. For example, in reading the book Voices of the Chicago Eight, it became clear early on that the defendants wanted to use their platform of a trial that garnered huge media attention as a stage to voice their opinions on the issues of the time. This is one example but throughout 68, the coverage of media was pivotal in the attempt to create meaningful change. A speech or a protest didn’t mean much if that message did not have the ability to reach a wide amount of people. This made events that would have that ability to reach people so much more important because those involved knew that this was their opportunity to send a message out on a huge scale.

Nowadays, the issue of getting your message out to a big population is no longer the problem. Anybody can send a tweet or post something online that massive amounts of people will be able to see immediately. I believe the new challenge that our generation faces is sifting through that avalanche of information and interpret how all of that functions together. We all know that you can’t believe everything that you hear or see on the Internet, which makes it difficult when you’re trying to acquire knowledge of a topic. It can also make it difficult when you were trying to convey a message over the Internet because your story can be warped and spit back in so many different ways that the original message becomes obsolete. The trick nowadays is more about finding and distributing quality information, as opposed to 68, where simply trying to get your message out was the challenge. 

Though the challenges of both generations differ, the general idea stays the same – media portrayal to the population holds extreme value. It does not matter if you are doing the righteous act in the whole world, if you’re not getting media attention or if it’s not the right kind of attention then the message you were trying to send is not going to come across clearly. It’s interesting to observe how details may change over time, but fundamental ideas such as this continue to hold their value from decade to decade.