who was elected to lead the montgomery bus boycott
Montgomery bus boycott Between Parks' arrest and trial, Nixon organized a meeting of local ministers at Martin Luther King Jr.'s church. Though Nixon could not attend the meeting because of his work schedule, he arranged that no election of a leader for the proposed boycott would take place until his return. When he returned, he caucused with Ralph Abernathy and Rev. E.N. French to name the association to lead the boycott to the city (they selected the "Montgomery Improvement Association", "MIA"), and they selected King (Nixon's choice) to lead the boycott. Nixon wanted King to lead the boycott because the young minister was new to Montgomery and the city fathers had not had time to intimidate him. At a subsequent, larger meeting of ministers, Nixon's agenda was threatened by the clergymen's reluctance to support the campaign. Nixon was indignant, pointing out that their poor congregations worked to put money into the collection plates so these ministers could live well, and when those congregations needed the clergy to stand up for them, those comfortable ministers refused to do so. Nixon threatened to reveal the ministers' cowardice to the black community, and King spoke up, denying he was afraid to support the boycott. King agreed to lead the MIA, and Nixon was elected its treasurer.
Hock Lee bus riots While the Hock Lee incident has conventionally been portrayed be one of communist subversion, other sources suggest that the students and workers' involvements in the Hock Lee incident were also due to anxieties felt by these two groups as a result of the conditions of colonial society. The Hock Lee bus workers' strikes can also be seen as one of the catalysts for the modernisation of the bus transportation industry in Singapore. The Hock Lee workers' strikes as well as other similar transportation workers' strikes resulted in the nationalisation of the Singapore transportation industry, specifically the Chinese owned bus companies. Shortly after the Hock Lee workers' strikes, the Singapore Traction Company strikes occurred which motivated the Hawkins Report of 1956. The Hawkins Report called for the reformation of the transportation industry in Singapore through a consolidation of the Chinese bus companies.[53] The Hawkins report advocated for a single entity to control transportation.[54] The report was an evident reaction to the operational challenges, poor administration and labour discontent that was evident in many of the bus companies.[55] In 1970, RP Wilson[56] was appointed to look into the reorganisation of public transportation in Singapore which resulted in the establishment of the government-led Singapore Transport Advisory Board in 1970, which sought to not only nationalise the bus companies but also to create a more efficient transportation system.[57] To many of the workers, these strikes helped them to gain a 'Singaporean' consciousness outside of colonialism.[58] The strikes and the workers' sentiments however were quickly put out. Part of Singapore's modernisation project was to expand its tourism sector and an efficient transportation system was important for this growth.[59] This did not leave room for any form of activism that would disrupt Singapore's necessary path towards modernity and economic development.