FAYETTEVILLE, Ark. - With the celebration of Black History Month in February, Americans look back on the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s in many ways. But a researcher at the University of Arkansas offers a startling new perspective - one that reminds us how lucky we were.

Despite the violence and passion that marked the civil rights struggle, Dr. David Chappell, professor of history, said Americans were fortunate that the conflict died down with relatively little bloodshed.

"It’s a terrible tragedy, the violence and hatred that marked the civil rights movement," Chappell said. "But put that in perspective with other social movements - the sacrifices made to abolish apartheid in South Africa, the protests in Tiananmen Square."

While 2,600 Chinese students lost their lives during the Tiananmen Square demonstrations, which lasted only a few days in 1989, Chappell says the U.S. civil rights movement claimed only a couple dozen lives despite more than a decade of conflict.

"I’m not saying we have anything to be proud of," he said. "I’m just saying it’s a mystery to be figured out - how so few lives were lost. It’s information we can perhaps use to prevent future tragedy."

Chappell - whose first book, "Inside Agitators: White Southerners in the Civil Rights Movement," won a Gustavus Myers Award in 1995 - recently received a grant from the Harry Frank Guggenheim Foundation to finance his research on violence and oppression as they relate to the civil rights movement.

In his new book, "A Stone of Hope: the Civil Rights Movement in American Cultural History," to be published next year, Chappell examines the factors that influenced people’s actions on both sides of the civil rights issue, the same factors that prevented the dispute from escalating into full-scale war.

On March 25, Chappell will present part of his research for the annual Bell McWilliams Lecture at the University of Memphis in Tennessee.

Though conflicts in political ideology spawned the civil rights movement, cultural institutions shaped its course. Religion, community support, even popular music played roles in revealing and, in some ways, diverting racial tension.

According to Chappell, black churches made tremendous contributions to the fight for civil rights, lending inspiration and resources to those involved in the struggle. "The churches protected and gave an organizational network to militant black activists, gave them a feeling of unity and connection with their community and traditions," he said.

This mixture of human rights principles with moral and spiritual philosophy bound the black community together on multiple levels, creating a strength in solidarity that white segregationists could not match.

"There were conflicts in the black community - disagreements over doctrine and strategy, personal differences - but those were muted," said Chappell. "Above all they were kept out of the public eye to a greater extent than ever before or since. The black activists presented a united front to the world."

In contrast the white segregationists met the conflict with hesitance and a haphazard commitment to their racist cause. Although devoted to the idea of racial separation, they were willing to sacrifice little of their personal time or resources defending their ideology. Relatively few white racists got personally involved in the struggle.

This natural reluctance was compounded by media coverage. Televised news reports brought scenes of violence directly into people’s homes, and many whites - including racists - viewed the situation with horror.

Though they held no sympathy for the black victims, they abhorred the violence and the way it portrayed their cause, said Chappell. This was especially true when celebrities became the victims.

One of the first forums for racial integration occurred in the popular music industry. Stars such as Frank Sinatra, Benny Goodman, Sammy Davis Jr., and Nat King Cole took advantage of the anonymity provided by radio to play with black and white musicians alike.

"These were entertainers who had no obvious political commitments," said Chappell. "They were devoted to working with talented musicians, and they considered racial barriers just a practical imposition, one that got in the way of making music."

But as word of the racial mixing got out, many black musicians - including Cole - became targets of violent assault. Reports of these incidents gave segregation a negative image.

"Even white people who were deeply committed to segregation and racism thought that beating up Nat King Cole was going too far," Chappell said. "Sooner or later they recognized that in order to keep fighting black people who stood up for their rights, this kind of ugliness, this kind of horror would engulf them."

Chappell claims that this division among whites was due in part to the strategic skill of civil rights leaders like Martin Luther King Jr. Through his nonviolent army of protesters and his eloquent orations, King exerted significant force on white Southerners.

"I think Martin Luther King took a more radical and militant stance than anybody," Chappell said. "Abolishing segregation was a revolutionary change in the social system, and many white racists were dragged kicking and screaming into that change.

"That to me is radical. Measured by reality rather than rhetoric, that’s one of the most radical accomplishments in American or world history."

Chappell thinks it is essential that people continue to study and teach about the civil rights movement.

"Although the black folks were outgunned, outnumbered, outvoted and outspent, they won," he said. "We look back and think, 'Of course: they were right, so they won.’ I’m not that kind of an optimist. I don’t think the good guys always win."

According to Chappell, that’s what makes the civil rights movement so significant and so mysterious. "It remains inspiring because a relatively powerless minority was able to triumph in the cause of justice and to do it with remarkably few casualties," he said. "I don’t know that it would ever be possible to do such a thing again."

# # #