In Lost Revolutions, Pete Daniel maintains that, in the post-World War II South, a number of promising transformations arose in the South, some of which succeeded and some of which were lost. Describe this argument and state which "revolution" was most successful, being careful to explain why.
Jeffrey A. Turner in Sitting In and Speaking Out argues that southern student activism in the 1960s was, in some ways, similar to that which transpired across the United States in that decade - but that southern student activism had distinctive origins and played out differently and produced different consequences than in the rest of the United States. First, describe this argument. Second, state whether you find it persuasive or not, being careful to explain why.
If you have read either of these books, please let me know and I will be willing to negotiate on price