Change It’s What’s for Dinner …

That was a slogan for a commercial many years back. Chicken, it’s what’s for dinner, yes? I don’t know. I don’t remember. I just remember it being a commercial for a grocery product, that they wanted served up for dinner; ‘it’s what’s for dinner?’ was their marketing slogan.

Change though, that’s something that is hard to serve up. People want change, so they will say. They want to make the world a better place, however, change that’s evolution. Isn’t it? And evolution takes time, a lot of time; thousands upon thousands of years, going into a billion years of man’s existence. There has to be an origin of something though that people know about, so that they can measure, whether or not something, that thing, that they see needs changing actually went from being one way to that of another way. If there’s no measurement and if there is no prior knowledge of something’s existence, then how do they know if they have consciously made a change, a social change that all of that society adopted, because they all agreed it was good?

From the time humans made their debut on this earth, man has undergone evolutionary changes. From man’s physical appearance, man’s mating rituals, the tools man invents to make man’s tasks (which can be used to measure technical knowledge) they have to do to survive a bit easier; from living alone in a cave with a woman, to seeking out others to share in life with, that in the beginning archaeologists called them tribes. They’ve changed the name now to something else — apparently tribes is an offensive category or something. I don’t know. I don’t see the offense in it though so …

They were tribal families that had come together to live, because man is a migrant, social animal. They were free peoples. They adopted ritualistic traditions, that were shared and a value was placed on those traditions throughout the tribe, which developed their culture, that became unique to them.

As evolution moves forward there were those that splintered off from  the first unit and formed tribes of their own. They either left of their own volition or they were exiled, because they opted for change in the traditional ways in which the tribe conducted itself or they broke a rule that had been agreed upon — even if my speculations are not correct, change happened and more tribal units were formed in the distant lands from the first. Man is mobile and man migrates to new parts of the world; from before and since, the time mankind made their debut on this earth, evolution ensued.

Which came first God or Government?

The answer to that question depends on what authority you ask. That is one of many mysteries and secrets of man, that has been left to speculation among those who study the ancient civilizations. There might have been some sort of definitive answer if language had been a part of an earlier evolutionary event in development of us as a species.

However, they did draw pictures and they did so on cave walls. It’s similar to that of today when people might write on a park bench or a bathroom wall, or where ever, the words, “I was here.” They wanted the future man to know, there was someone on this planet before them and they left for them, for us, the story of their lives, in the only way they knew how. Those pictures are referred to today as, hieroglyphics.

As those people died away and evolution continued, the pictures (aka hieroglyphics) on the cave walls were used by the High Priest (aka Pharaoh) who professed to be the only ones that had the knowledge to interpret them and understand their meaning. Somewhere on the evolutionary line of man’s changes, they went from being a free peoples, to that of developing tribal counselors, a chief warrior, a medical chief and the High Priest, became their ruler.

Many of their traditions were developed so as to appease God, or depending on the tribe’s belief as a whole, Gods. And of course they did this, because the High Priest told them this is what God would have them to do, and he should know. Because the High Priest, it was believed that he was the High Priest to begin with, because he possessed vasts amount of knowledge, that no one else knew. They hadn’t evolved yet in their collective knowledge to think,  know, or believe any different; have we yet?

So what does this have to do with the 1960s?

In my opinion, this has everything to do with the 60s. Thousands upon thousands of years of traditions and value placed on those traditions handed down, over and over again as time moved forward, from one civilization to another, mankind makes changes. Depending on the region that people grew up in, they will have different traditions, from those of another region of the world. Those traditions make up the culture of the collective group, within that region.

And this is America, home of most every family from around the world; out of many, one country. In Christ’s era, He tried to unite seven kingdoms into one, with His influence. (Book of Mathew; a house divided can not stand) America united different families from around the world and out of its (wars) growing pains, they became one, named Americans, family … not by blood, but by soil.

This country is made up of 250 years of traditions and culture, not derived of politics and yet politics seems to be the catalyst for some major changes over the years. People owning people, wasn’t political, it was cultural within thousands of years of practice by many civilizations around the globe, prior to anyone migrating the North America continent.

However, which came first, the traditions with its value from the people or the government and its institutions and its influence on the culture? Because understanding that, we would understand its creation as people owning others, was a culture practice of global origins with each different society, its own reasoning as to the tradition, not unique to America, as its politics might have one to believe.

Approximately 450 years ago people from around the world began migrating to the North America continent and from that migration, 189 years later, a new country called America resulted. Among the people’s belongings to travel with them as they migrated from their lands, they brought with them their culture derived of their traditions handed down to them from their ancestral origins, as well.

(It isn’t wrong, until someone tells you it’s wrong and even then, that might not be enough to convince people that change is necessary and even then, not everyone will agree)

Commonalty was something that had to develop and that took time for a shared history to become a part of their culture. Some of the commonalty was derived by certain principle philosophies of life, in how they were understood and delivered to the people by men who were respected. And out of that respect, adopted by the collective of peoples residing (here) in one place, that came to it from other places from around the world.

One of those principles, “All men are created equal”. However, not everyone will agree. They didn’t all agree with it when it was officially written and adopted. Nor did they all agree with it (many years later) in the 1960s. And there is evident by peoples actions, not everyone has agreed with that yet, but it is possible, the future peoples of America, maybe will adopt that principle as a whole. As evolution takes time, thousands of years worth of time. If change wasn’t possible, we’d all be gathering at our town squares for a ritualistic sacrifice to appease God or the Gods as was the tradition of ancient civilizations.

The 60s though, was a turn-a-key moment in time for the U.S., for many changes, and those that believed ‘all men are created equal’ gave evolution, social evolution a bit of a push for a collective change in ideas within its society.

Roots for this change began with an organization in the Northern part of the U.S., The Congress of Racial Equality (CORE), founded in 1942, in the city of Chicago to address the civil rights issue. In all essence the movement for the modern civil rights era began in the North in the 1940s. By 1961 though, CORE had broadened its reach from the North on into the Southern parts of America.

After WWII, African American soldiers who had defended their country with honor returned home to the same social barriers that had been there before the war, and a great push to end segregation began. Civil right demonstrations took place in the North and South. Although there were no legal barriers in the North, they faced discrimination, with the South being riddled with legal barriers to opportunities of liberty.

To understand these barriers, legal or otherwise one must first understand the differences between State (law) powers and Federal (law) powers and the people living within. For this blog post, I am going to assume the reader already has this understanding of how the United States works.

To have an understanding of the culture climate of the people within, there are polling opinion statistics to help us figure this out. However, I am going to replace a word that appears within the questions of these polls, because I believe the word is disingenuous in its use. Many people within the social make-up of the U.S. realized a wrong that needed to be made right; the surveys conducted show the progression of movement toward that end.

Gallup Poll, (AIPO) September, 1964, “Have you heard of read about the (civil rights) demonstrations in several northern cities? 91% Yes 9% No. Based on personal interviews with a national adult sample of 1,600 [USGALLUP.64-698.R14A]
Dataset: USAIPO1964-0698
Data provided by The Roper Center for Public Opinion Research

From that we can pretty much conclude that the awareness campaign brought about by CORE in 1942, the majority of people by 1964 knew and had formulated their opinion on one of the core principles of the founding of America, ‘all men are created equal’. The civil rights movement sparked greater movements toward a culture shift in customs and ideas, however, it was clear in the beginning part of the 70s, there was more work to be done. But alas, I get ahead of myself.

To see impact we must double back to the sentiment of society in the previous generation. While there were many issues around integration, education was the second most predominate, led by employment opportunities. (indicated by NORC report published 1967 polls of African Americans)

Question posed by the NORC (National Opinion Research Center of the University of Chicago) 1942, 1956, 1963 — “Do you think all students should go to the same schools, or separate schools?” Between North and South in 1942 not one in three approved of integrated schools, in 1956 in the North it had become a majority view, while in the South, one in fifty favored integration. Continuation of the trend that by 1963, two-thirds of all Americans approved of school integration, even in the South. (PAUL B. SHEATSLEY – 1966)

Utilizing demonstrations, protests and community leaders speaking out in public forums, eventually, the gap was bridged between the people in the United States and those that make the laws. In doing so, maybe, just maybe those laws will influence the people, that have yet to agree with the words of Thomas Jefferson’s, “All men are created equal”.

###

Rewritten: 2025-07