The civil rights movement in the United States actually started well before the 1950s. Early activists like Frederick Douglass worked very hard for the passage of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution in 1868 which gave freed slaves American citizenship and the Fifteenth Amendment in 1870 which granted voting rights to black males. So long before the Watchtower Society was founded, there were individuals who knew racism in any form was wrong and worked against it. Another leading voice was W.E.B. Dubois whose book The Souls of Black Folk, published in 1903, condemned racism in no uncertain terms. So there is neither reason nor excuse for the racism that Charles Russell or Joseph Rutherford taught and tolerated. So-called "worldly" men were way ahead of them.
The WTS likes to pretend it was some kind of pioneer of civil rights and color-blind points of view in the United States and South Africa. Nothing could be further from the truth. It upheld the status quo until it was safe to join the growing chorus of civil rights supporters. But even then its endorsement of civil rights could best be termed as "tepid". And long after the hated Jim Crow laws in the American South were repealed, the Society maintained racially segregated congregations and circuits. Furthermore, Witnesses were expressly forbidden to lend aid or support to civil rights workers or legislation when the movement was in full ferment during the 1950s and 1960s.
Indeed, even in the 1990s the WTS remained aloof. When black American men staged the "Million Man March" on 16 October 1995 in Washington D.C., the organization was none too pleased when some Witnesses participated. They were told that such participation violated Christian neutrality. Never mind that the aim of the march was to energize black American men into seriously handling their responsibilities toward their families as husbands, fathers, uncles, brothers, and grandfathers. The Society didn't want those issues to be addressed, preferring its sugar-coated "Father Knows Best" psychology and approach to family issues.
In short, the organization's stance on ethnic issues is nothing to brag about or to be proud of. Far from acting with true Christian bravery and unity, it followed the path of least resistance until it became safe and/or convenient to do otherwise. But such actions and attitudes are part and parcel of its history of dealing with other great social issues of our times.
Quendi
