Earth's surface consists of rigid plates that are constantly shifting and jostling one another. Plate movements are the surface expressions of motions in the mantle—the thick shell of rock that lies between Earth's crust and its metallic core. Although the hot rock of the mantle is a solid, under the tremendous pressure of the crust and overlying rock of the mantle, it flows like a viscous liquid. The mantle's motions, analogous to those in a pot of boiling water, cool the mantle by carrying hot material to the surface and returning cooler material to the depths. When the edge of one plate bends under another and its cooler material is consumed in the mantle, volcanic activity occurs as molten lava rises from the downgoing plate and erupts through the overlying one.

    Most volcanoes occur at plate boundaries. However, certain "misplaced" volcanoes far from plate edges result from a second, independent mechanism that cools the deep interior of Earth. Because of its proximity to Earth's core, the rock at the base of the mantle is much hotter than rock in the upper mantle. The hotter the mantle rock is, the less it resists flowing. Reservoirs of this hot rock collect in the base of the mantle. When a reservoir is sufficiently large, a sphere of this hot rock forces its way up through the upper mantle to Earth's surface, creating a broad bulge in the topography. The "mantle plume" thus formed, once established, continues to channel hot material from the mantle base until the reservoir is emptied. The surface mark of an established plume is a hot spot—an isolated region of volcanoes and uplifted terrain located far from the edge of a surface plate. Because the source of a hot spot remains fixed while a surface plate moves over it, over a long period of time an active plume creates a chain of volcanoes or volcanic islands, a track marking the position of the plume relative to the moving plate. The natural history of the Hawaiian island chain clearly shows the movement of the Pacific plate over a fixed plume.

    Some historians contend that conditions in the United States during the Second World War gave rise to a dynamic wartime alliance between trade unions and the African American community, an alliance that advanced the cause of civil rights. They conclude that the postwar demise of this vital alliance constituted a lost opportunity for the civil rights movement that followed the war. Other scholars, however, have portrayed organized labor as defending all along the relatively privileged position of White workers relative to African American workers. Clearly, these two perspectives are not easily reconcilable, but the historical reality is not reducible to one or the other. Unions faced a choice between either maintaining the prewar status quo or promoting a more inclusive approach that sought for all members the right to participate in the internal affairs of unions, access to skilled and high-paying positions within the occupational hierarchy, and protection against management's arbitrary authority in the workplace. While union representatives often voiced this inclusive ideal, in practice unions far more often favored entrenched interests. The accelerating development of the civil rights movement following the Second World War exacerbated the unions' dilemma, forcing trade unionists to confront contradictions in their own practices.

    In a 1918 editorial, W.E.B. Du Bois advised African Americans to stop agitating for equality and to proclaim their solidarity with White Americans for the duration of the First World War. The editorial surprised many African Americans who viewed Du Bois as an uncompromising African American leader and a chief opponent of the accommodationist tactics urged by Booker, T.Washington. In fact, however, Du Bois often shifted positions along the continuum between Washington and confrontationists such as William Trotter. In 1895, when Washington called on African Americans to concentrate on improving their communities instead of opposing discrimination and agitating for political rights, Du Bois praised Washington's speech. In 1903, however, Du Bois aligned himself with Trotter, Washington's militant opponent, less for ideological reasons than because Trotter had described to him Washington's efforts to silence those in the African American press who opposed Washington's positions.reflected not a change in his long-term goals but rather a pragmatic response in the face of social pressure: government officials had threatened African American journalists with censorship if they continued to voice grievances. Furthermore, Du Bois believed that African Americans' contributions to past war efforts had brought them some legal and political advances. Du Bois' accommodationism did not last, however. Upon learning of systematic discrimination experienced by African Americans in the military, he called on them to "return fighting" from the war.