Which was the more effective civil rights strategy, civic action or government legislation?

See below.

Explanation:

One is determined by the other. Civic action, from the 50's through the 60's, which was often meant with acts of extreme violence, led to the Civil Rights Act of 1964. So they are linked and one is dependent on the other.

Given that it is very difficult to isolate any one as being more or less effective than another. Civil rights action was targeted to be as effective as possible economically and politically. Leaders such as Martin Luther King emphasized the need for peaceful means of protest. So pressure group activity such as marches, demonstrations and lobbying politicians was combined with economic boycotts which hit the white economy in the south.

The greater the media coverage and outrage at the continued abuse of civil rights then the greater the pressure on the federal government to pass appropriate legislation. So how successful ahs this legislation been?

The Civil Rights Act in 1964 was followed by the Voting Rights Act in 1965, outlawing discriminatory practices in voting which was still commonplace in the south.

Passing legislation is one thing but making it effective is another. Minority groups have had to continue to fight in the courts to overcome discrimination and harassment. In 2000 the Presidential election came down to a few voting wards in Florida. Those primarily African-American suffered disenfranchisement, Chad machines that didn't work and road blocks. This, in effect, put Bush Jnr in the White House.

during both period congress passed law restricting the civil liberties of american citizen that meet with the overall public support is the one statement that explain the rate scare of the 1920 and 1950 is very similar