Last night, I stayed up rather late, working on creating a strong introduction that removed over theorizing and making sure it was “all me.” Currently, I’m looking over my assertions to make sure that they work together and that I can answer them. Further, I want to make sure that in writing my thesis, I am not giving myself too much to chew on.
- The early twentieth century marked an important shift in the use of legislative power for racist purposes.
- Garvey’s self-fashioning as the leader of a movement concurrently bound his black politics to surveillance.
- The 1920s marked not only a change in black politics but changing attitudes towards criminal activity.
There are some obvious overlap between these claims, which is good! So now looking over the thesis paragraph, we get this:
…I contend, the early twentieth century marked an important shift in the use of legislative power for racist purposes, where Garvey’s self-fashioning as the leader of a movement concurrently bound his politics to surveillance. As evident in its prosecution of Jack Johnson under the Mann Act, the intelligence agency moved from investigating and enforcing the law to extending the boundaries of their mandate toward extralegal racist prosecutions, marking the changing attitudes of what constituted criminal activity.
I had previously struggled with where to place my statement, usually burying it after pages of going through theory. Often offering the road map for the article even further into the article. Now, after the statement above and some clarifying sentences, I move directly into the map and the rationale for my sources, which I will talk about next time..