Why nonviolence? (Week 4)

1/26/2015

Within the civil rights movement there were two major camps regarding the most effective strategy to deal with overtly racist policies, people and communities. For many year Martin Luther King, Jr. sat at one pole of the nonviolence question while Malcolm X sat on the other. While one would profess the importance of humility and forgiveness of those that wrong us the other believed in self defense by any means necessary.

In addition to your regular reading for the blog post this week I would like you to read Malcolm X (Ballot or the Bullet speech) and Martin Luther King Jr. (Nonviolence and Racial Justice). Answer the following questions in your post. Be sure to respond to another student.

What were three major themes that stood out to you as you read the material? Describe the conditions in society that both MLK Jr. and Malcolm X were responding to in their speech/essay.
Explain their rationale for their chosen strategy to address racist and classist oppression in the United States.
What strategy would you employ if you were subjected to the conditions highlighted by Martin & Malcolm? What would be your rationale?

20 Comments

Gabriela Hernandez

1/22/2015 11:14:20 am

Reading "The Ballot or the Bullet" and "Non Violence and Racial Justice " both of these readings bring up good points and have different perspectives. Malcolm X talks about "not anti white but anti exploitation, anti degradation and anti oppression. His strategy he uses is looking at civil rights from a different angle. He says "the only way to get involved in the struggle is to give it a new interpretation, a way it will enable us to come into it is to take part in it. He talks about segregation and how they can't take whats already yours or else it would be considered to be criminals because its against the law. As for Martin Luther King he talks about seperate but equal. "Seperate without the slightest intention to abide by the equal." His approach and strategy is nonviolent resistance. I also agree with the three points he made " 1st this is not a method for coward it does not resist, 2nd is that non violent resistance does not seek to defeat or humiliate the opponent. Third characteristic of this method is that the attack is directed against forces of evil rather than against persons who are caught in those forces."

Jessica Jaime

1/29/2015 11:45:16 am

The three major themes that stood out to me after reading “The Ballot or the Bullet" and "Non Violence and Racial Justice” was that both readings have different ways on achieving and sustaining peace and change from racist people, communities and policies. Malcom X makes it very clear that the government and the state have no representation for African American’s; it’s just smoked mirrors with piped American dream nightmare. Stating that “You and I in America are faced not with a segregationist conspiracy, were faces with a government conspiracy.” The same government that you lay down your lives for to go fight who have deprived African Americans to vote, decent housing, decent education, economic opportunities. Malcom X wanted to expand the civil-rights struggle to a higher level to the level of human rights. Where Martin Luther King Jr. focuses on “separate but equal” and the alternative way to violence is nonviolent resistance. To rise up against racial injustice and forgive those who don’t know any better. I’m torn between the two and I’m not sure which strategy I personally would employ because I’m the type of person that wears her heart on your sleeve but I don’t believe that violence is the answer. If something is wrong or injustice I have to speak up because no one should be treated anything less with respect, understanding and love. I would have to choose Martin Luther King Jr. who does not want to defeat or humiliate the opponent but win his friendship and understanding. To focus and attack against the forces of evil rather than the persons who are caught in those forces. I have always tried to be the bigger person and forgive people for their wrong doings but I never forget what was done. You can’t erase what has happened but how can you know that it won’t happen to you again?

Makamae D.R Heinz

2/1/2015 03:09:07 pm

I feel your whole part on having your heart on your sleeve. I also believe that you can forgive and forget. I see what you mean by not going with any type of violence. I feel it will not prove a point. It to me from what I have seen makes things worse. We sure can not erase what has happen but remember. We have to speak our minds and use our words not weapons.

Andre Mouton

1/29/2015 05:48:47 pm

In the writing by Malcolm X the theme the ballet or the bullet at that time was a powerful statement because it was in the height of the civil rights movement where segregation was prevalent and racism was being exposed in various parts of the government. The techniques and tactics that the politicians did in the south and the north are still being used today. Malcolm X chose to die and spoke about being ready to die if you fight, In those days most leaders were being watched and even killed by the government and police brutality and political tactics kept blacks from becoming powerful in communities they outnumbered whites in. Malcolm X was exposing the hidden KKK and white America’s racism by facing it head on speaking about fighting back with the same violence that was being used against blacks. As for the ballot way of fighting where black were being blocked by whites in many situations pretty much like it is today. Although I like Malcolm’s zeal and energy it would not have worked and still won’t work today based on the way the system is designed. I’m not big on the theme guerrilla warfare because with the U.S. military and its allies blacks would have been smashed and too many people would have been killed.
Martin Luther King Jr’s non-violence approach in my opinion is the more effective one because like Malcolm exposing evil is the right thing to do but addressing it with good places you above the oppressor in a spiritual realm and builds better allies from within a domestic and international community. Agape love is a winning recipient although their will be casualties and loss of life but as with Gandhi he was a success with the non-violence method , I feel non-violence can be achieved but not without violence the oppressor will strike with violence but if there is strategy and persistence good people will rise to the top and that is when good leadership can help direct people on how to organize and vote and go to polls and build white, brown, and yellow allies to vote out politicians and prejudice’s that place laws and road blocks in front of people of color or class.

Marcos Guzman

1/31/2015 12:36:32 pm

Andre, I feel you really hit the nail on the head with the first couple of sentences. I feel that black oppression was finally being exposed and it was exposed to a point where it could no longer be covered up. Most of the injustices towards blacks were swiped under the rug yet both Dr.King and Brother X at the same time brought it to light. This point in the game became a turning point for blacks to take a stand.

Melissa Strah

2/1/2015 03:54:30 pm

Andre you make many valid points. Especially about the tactics that politician currently use back then and in our present time. I would agree with you on the non-violence approach, but I also understand where a person my get so frustrated that they would feel that violence would be the way to address an issue.

Marcos Guzman

1/30/2015 10:58:06 am

What were three major themes that stood out to you as you read the material?

One major theme that stood out was how Malcolm X defined “Equality” in “Ballot or the Bullet”. He described equality as the death of a black man be reciprocal that to a white man. He uses the idea of what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

Second major theme presented in “Ballot or the Bullet” was unity. Malcolm X stated that every black man had to put their differences aside and work to solve the common problem that inflicted all blacks. He stated that regardless of differences blacks are all on the same boat and will all catch the same hell from the same man (white man).

Third major theme presented in “Nonviolence and Racial Justice” by M.L.K was resistance. He felt that the resistance towards segregation was key and saw it play out once before through Gandhi. He believed that from violence nothing good came out so Resistance was key to win this war against oppression.

Describe the conditions in society that both MLK Jr. and Malcolm X were responding to in their speech/essay.

Malcolm X responds to economic, racial and social events towards the black man as injustices.

Economic: Didn’t want blacks to depend on white man for jobs he didn’t believe that it was fair that blacks were the economic foundation of this country with nothing to show for it. “Your and my mother and father, who didn't work an eight-hour shift, but worked from "can't see" in the morning until "can't see" at night, and worked for nothing, making the white man rich, making Uncle Sam rich. This is our investment. This is our contribution, our blood.”
Racial: Due to their race the equality was not present, for the black man inequality on the other hand was very evident. Malcolm X explains how Europeans emigrate from Europe to the United States they are considered American. He describes as anything that comes of the boat with blue eyes in considered American; Irish, Italian or Polish. Yet, he states that blacks have been in the country for some time yet they are not seen as Americans.
Social: Malcolm X explains how blacks are not wanted in certain social circles and how they have to make their own society beautiful. He believes this is possible by removing evil vices from their society. In spreading the gospel of Black Nationalism it is to make the black man re-evaluate himself and where he stands in society.

Martin Luther King Jr responds to the oppression and inequality the black man suffers. He states that even after the emancipation of 1863 the black man still faces inequalities such as after the ruling of Plessy v Ferguson separate but equal came integrated in society.

Part 1 of 2

Marcos Guzman

1/30/2015 10:59:21 am

Explain their rationale for their chosen strategy to address racist and classist oppression in the United States.

Malcolm X:
Brother X rationale for choosing the strategy of taking a physical stance against the white man was because he didn’t want the younger generation of black children to grow up and be ashamed of the current generation not taking a stance against these injustices. He continues to explain in detail, how he does not promote the black man to go out and be violent. Yet he wants the black man to answer to nonviolence with nonviolence and violence with the equal response. It is equality and responsibility of the black man to protect himself in the same violent manner he is approached and should not be responsible for his actions.

Martin Luther King Jr:
Dr. King rationale for choosing the strategy of nonviolence to respond to the oppression of the black man was inspired by Gandhi who freed the country of India in the same manner from British control. He felt that violence does not solve social problems. It nearly creates new and more complicated ones down the road.

What strategy would you employ if you were subjected to the conditions highlighted by Martin & Malcolm? What would be your rationale?

Both Malcom X and MLK were dealing with the same conditions. They did have different approaches towards the problems facing blacks in society ultimately one felt violence was the answer the other felt the opposite choosing peaceful resistance. My rationale in this situation would be taking Malcolm X approach. Violence is the answer because if one continues to be put down and oppressed and the government permits it. It is ones right to take a stand and protect themselves and take what is rightfully theirs. I don’t feel that I should be grateful to have rights given to me that are rightfully mine at birth.

masrie brown

1/30/2015 11:33:40 am

The belief of treating people right, but it is a waste time trying to treat somebody right who doesn't know how to return the treatment(from Malcolm).

Andre Mouton

2/1/2015 08:27:48 am

Marcos, I feel if Malcolm X’s way could have succeeded I would go with it,but in my opinion I feel it could not have because Blacks only are 10% of the population and women account for over half of them, to form a military withing the U.S. would take extensive resources. Martin Luther King Jr.'s way did work to a certain extent, look at the 1964 civil rights act. Also look at the accomplishments that Daisy Bates and other civil rights leader have made.

marie brown

1/30/2015 11:24:22 am

The very thing about racism is that it exists in individuals, groups, and institutions. At the individual level, racism is about a particular person’s attitudes and behaviors. At the group level racism is about collective attitudes and behaviors. Throughout the time of slavery the African American was treated in inhuman fashion. MLK believed that living under these conditions, many (as he would have said) Negroes lost faith in themselves. And he begin to accept the place that was given to him, a sort of racial peace existed. Because the will power of Negro American to win freedom from every kind of oppression, coming from the same deep longing for freedom that arouse oppressed people . MLK belief the word of Christ inspire him to see that the walk in Montgomery will be walking and never get weary, because “they know that there will be a great camp meeting in the promised land of freedom and justice.” And that was His method of nonviolent resistance and if they used the method it would take the inhumanity to the daybreak of freedom and justice. Malcolm X believe that he was nonviolence with those who are nonviolent with him. But if they are violent with him, they would receive to same thing back. Malcolm believe that white racism had to be embarked upon with force. He went with non-violent if everybody was non-violent, but that didn’t make the Ku Klux Klan non-violent. When MLK died and was no longer here to encourage the people, the words of Malcom X started to make sense .

amal pujol

1/30/2015 01:21:29 pm

The three major themes that stood out to me as I read the material were: seeking justice by going thru the legislative process and a system of laws such as the courts or UN, seeking justice by trying to reach an understanding and mutual friendship or respect for each other, and seeking justice by any means necessary including violence if provoked with violence. Both MLK Jr. and Malcolm X were living during a period where segregation and racism were very high. Black people were still deprived, degraded and evil killed in the fight for their rights. The racial tension was very high.
I do feel both men believed in some sort of legal action but just on different levels. I believe Malcolm X. felt that there was no way action could happen in the US courts because the system was being run by the oppressors. He stated, “Senators from the southern States violate the rights they give people to vote”. He felt that the issue was not a civil right issue but was seeking the vote from the UN. He felt that this was a violation of human rights, rights that were given by God and wanted the oppressor’s held accountable of human rights violation. He felt that it was silly to ask for something that was yours and his rational for use of violence was that why would you meet violence with non violence. He felt that the approach of violence had been tried for to long with no success. He was after Black Nationalism where blacks should have control of the politics in their community and should define their own measures.
MLK Jr. on the other felt that violence was not the answer but rather the door to a lifetime of hate. He felt that nonviolence resistance was more affective as his goal was not to defect or humiliate the opponent but to win friendship and understanding. He didn’t want to attack the oppressor but the forces of evil instead. MLK was speaking from a Christian view of practicing agape or love of the opponent not for his ways but because God loves him. This method of resistance was based on the view that God was on the side of justice and would redeem them. If I were subjected to the conditions of both men I would employ a little bit of both methods. I see points in not seeking justice from the oppressor as well as standing up in self-defense if I am met with violence. However, I feel that beating someone’s intellect is more effective than there physical. It is better to change the way someone thinks and show him or her a better way than to result to the same wrong doing as them.

Jordan Leopold

2/1/2015 04:00:21 pm

Amal, I definitely understand your take on violent reliatory action if faced with it yourself. However, part of the nonviolent approach was to bring light upon the issue and to show that Blacks, and other oppressed demographics who practiced this, were not at fault for this matter. It was to show the nation that they were victims, not villians - which is typically the narrative played by mainstream media. A great example of this was depicted in the movie Selma, which just came out.

Corissa R.

1/30/2015 03:59:36 pm

The major theme that stood out to me after reading both pieces was freedom, but in particular how to go about achieving freedom. Malcolm X in his “The Ballot or the Bullet,” speech make it clear that inaction, in the sense of peacefulness should and will no longer be an option. He urges African Americans to fight (in the figurative and the literal sense) for what is rightfully theirs and, and what has been withheld from them since slavery, he also stresses the importance of deciding which representative to choose from and thinking about how that political leader will affect change in African American communities. Both Malcolm X and Martin Luther King Jr. spoke about the time of colonization and how America fought and won its freedom from oppression from the British. Both MLK and Malcolm new that a change had to come. However, their approach was completely different, which Malcolm took the more physically and “radical” approach, Martin was advocating for the non-violence approach. MLK stressed the non-violence approach because he believed that they only way to fight against the hate that was directed toward the African American community was through love, he saw how this approach worked for Gandhi, so he was really preaching the non-violent route. Malcolm X was not going in the same direction with this preaching because he saw how that didn’t work; even after all of the marches and the songs, it still was not enough. Both leaders had their own way of fighting for the freedoms of African Americans

Gabriela Hernandez

1/31/2015 09:11:54 am

Corissa,
I really liked your response, I definitely agree with you when you said that "Both leaders had their own way of fighting for the freedoms of African Americans. I think that's very true and very interesting I think they both are very smart and determined when it comes to fighting for freedom for African Americans. Martin Luther kings approach was all about non violence but more about love and approaching things peacefully. I also think they both have a very different approach for that which is very good because they both have a different perspective but at the end of the day they are both determined for freedom.In my opinion I really like MLK's approach but at the same time I understand why Malcolm's approach was different because he said that it didn't work so he tried things a different way.

Jordan Leopold

1/31/2015 02:37:55 pm

There major themes that existed within both texts were: (1) self-identification and self-empowerment within African-American individuals, breaking from the subservient attitude (MLK) and conformity to the “white conscience” (Malcolm X); (2) resistance towards the oppressors, Malcolm believed in resistance through the form of nonviolent AND retaliatory violence, on the other end, Martin Luther King believed in absolute nonviolent and peaceful resistance in an magnanimous fashion; (3) and both illustrated the era and conditions they were currently in by reflecting backwards to the day of the speech/essay. Both bodies of work are incredible and express truly revolutionary mindsets that distinguished both men and propelled them to become the greats that they are then and today. Dr. King's rationale for using nonviolent strategies to combat classist and racist oppression was that hate only cultivates more hate, propelling that form of destruction around the world even more. So his aim was too enlighten and impress upon the oppressors their need to understand that their actions are injustice morally wrong - all through the ethics of love. Malcolm’s rationale to combat the oppressors by means of retaliatory violence is due the belief that if one is "within the law, within your legal rights, within your moral rights, in accord with justice” then you should die for what you believe in and let your death be equal and reciprocal. Both are powerful means of resistance, however I know Dr. King’s implementation of his five points method use of nonviolence is much more powerful as it doesn’t contribute to the problem that is, violence. I do believe in retaliation in some moments, mostly on individual and necessary cases, but I think in the larger context it is needed to defeat the oppressors through agape, loving while asking for nothing in return.

amal pujol

2/1/2015 03:05:43 pm

Hi Jordan,
I like how you point out the theme of self identification and self empowerment. Malcolm X pointed out in Ballot or The Bullet that it's important to know who the oppressors are and determine what your relationship is in regards to them. I agree that Malcolm X did feel as if violence was appropriate as part of the resistance but he specified that violence is only just when it is in self defense or when you are met with violence. I do agree with you that Dr. Kings approach does seem to be more thought out but I feel that there are instances where you may need to response I'm violence, such as in self defense.

Makamae D.R Heinz

2/1/2015 03:05:32 pm

There were a few major themes that stood out to me in the readings. In :Nonviolence and Racial Justice", the section where he talks about the meaning of love was real deep. I like how he mentioned the meaning of love listed in the Greek New Testament. Eros, Philia, and Agape. Eros means romantic love while Philia means intimate and affection and Agape means the opposite of the other two. It means that there is no affection or sentiments with the love. He explains if we use that meaning of love towards people that we love them not because of who they are, or what they are about, because God loves them and so should we. I also like the part about an alternative to violence. The points that he chose are so true and I understand exactly what he means and how it would be a excellent alternative we all should use instead of violence. It shows how what he talks about years ago is going on today. How he states that we should not be filled with hate and bitterness against each other because when we do that and retaliate we are making it worse and more hate will become. I see this all around the world with War and more how this is true. There is no solution to the violence when we need to stop the hate.
In The reading from Malcolm X, he also speaks real deep and it stood out when he spoke on how he is not an American. The fact that being born in America does not make you American because if this was true than why would we need the legislation and face civil rights filibustering. That was really deep what he said and had me thinking.
I would go with the nonviolence strategy like Dr. King talked about. I believe in doing other things that can help instead of violence. I do not think anyone gets anywhere with violence.

Jessica Jaime

2/1/2015 03:26:48 pm

Hi Makamae,
I agree with the point that you made that there is no solution to violence when we really just need to stop all the hate. It's true and I wish people would be more willing to open their mind and be more open minded. Also, Malcolm X's part saying that being born in America does not make you American.. I agree because many of use are still faced with class oppression and until the people and the government address these under lying bold issues nothing will change.

Melissa Strah

2/1/2015 03:43:41 pm

In both of the readings I felt that they were both trying to get their points across of how the Black people would never be equal, but were expressed in two completely different manners. In the reading "Ballot or the Bullet" Malcolm X had so much truth about Uncle Sam and the way Politicians were back then. In fact I do believe that politics are similar in many ways presently. Malcolm X expresses the only way that the Black people would have freedom by violence in a form of protecting themselves. He wants the people to be ready to die and not to be afraid to stand up for themselves. He lays out the facts about how the White men will always have the upper economically never giving the Black people the ability to ever succeed. Martin Luther King Jr. explains that after Plessy v Ferguson there is much inequality. He explains that much can be solved by non violence and love. Nothing good would ever come out from violence.
The strategy the I would approach would be to take the ideas of protecting myself as an individual from Malcolm X , but with a non-violence approach by MLK.

Why nonviolence? (Week 4)

Leave a Reply.

POSCI 3335

Archives

Categories

THE BEAUTY

OF BLACK

CREATION

ABOUT US

JOURNALS

SUBMISSIONS

Why nonviolence? (Week 4)

Leave a Reply.

POSCI 3335

Archives

Categories

THE BEAUTYOF BLACKCREATION

ABOUT USJOURNALS​​SUBMISSIONS

THE BEAUTY

OF BLACK

CREATION

ABOUT US

JOURNALS

SUBMISSIONS