Would the civil rights / human rights movement have ever existed if there had not been slavery in the US?

Question

I read an answer where a poster claimed that slavery and oppression in the democracy of the United States is responsible for the Civil Rights movement.

Many countries in the Americas had slavery. Australia had a large population of people of color and slavery. Only in the United States did slavery and oppression result in a "civil rights revolution".

Is that true, does the civil rights/human rights movement have its foundation in slavery and oppression in the United States and if so, why?

Answer 1

The idea of Civil and Human Rights does not have its origins in the United States. I recommend you focus your research for its pre US origins on the following:

c. 1750 B.C.E. -Code of Hammurabi, Babylonia

c. 1200 - c. 300 B.C.E. -Old Testament

c. 551 - c. 479 B.C.E. - Confucius - "Do unto others what you wish to do unto yourself."

c. 40 - 100 C.E. -New Testament

644 - 656 C.E. -Koran (original text)

1215 -Magna Carta, England

1400 -Code of Nezahualcoyotl, Aztec

1648 - Treaty of Westphalia, Europe

1689 - English Bill of Rights, England

Answer 2

Why, because Blacks didn't have the same rights
as the White people in the country, and they got
sick of it and did something about it.

The poster was right.

Many STATES in America had slavery. Not Americas,
and not countries, It's States are United, one Country.

I thought at one time Blacks from America couldn't
live in Australia for longer then 1 year. The Civil Rights
Movement would have helped them alot to.
To think, it was their land, their country.

I think If Martin Luther King hadn't been killed he
would have worked to make Civil Rights a World Movement.

Answer 3

Actually the civil rights movement had its necessity created in the aftermath of the civil war known as reconstruction. The harsh treatment of the defeated Southern Patriots by the kind and loving Liberals from the North created many feelings of animosity. As the Liberals never get their own hads dirty but use other people or other peoples money to get their way the defeated south saw the sudden elevation of the former slave to voter as the scape goat. This animosity led them to take out their feelings on the former slaves because they were a weak and easy target. As it grew over time the cause of the animosity was forgotten and only the hatred remained. So no Slavery was not responsible for the civil rights movement, harsh treatment of the former slaves was the cause of it.

Answer 4

There is, and has been a strong civil/human rights movement in Australia. Such movements are the result of oppression. If noone was denied civil rights, there would be no need to create a movement to get them. Every nation has a civil rights movement.

Answer 5

It is not exactly racist to say that. I don't understand what Feb. 29th and ignoring it has to do with one another? The way you have written it sounds like you are upset that Feb. 29th is Black History Day.... I don't think it should be ignored, but I don't think people should continually dwell on it and use it for a crutch in the manner that it is often used. Bill Cosby has much great advice to give on the subject

Answer 6

Probably not. The Confederate States were particularly nasty after the civil war.

Having separate water fountains for blacks and whites and all that other kind of nonsense sure didn't serve any purpose. Only to agitate the blacks

Answer 7

i disagree.

the civil rights movements were needed because it was american law for quite a number of generations that black people were officially 3/5ths of a person.

read the dred-scott supreme court decision or about it to see what i'm talking about.

also, the usa was one of the last nations to lose the institution of slavery...

Answer 8

I believe there would be. The treatment of not only slaves, but other minorities(Irish and Italian), indentured servants, child worker shops. Yes, there would have been.

Answer 9

There was never Slavery in Australia you IDIOT