Why nonviolence? MLK Jr & Malcolm X Within the civil rights movement there were two major camps regarding the most effective strategy to deal with overtly racist policies. For many years 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.
15 Comments
Alex Diaz
10/16/2014 12:39:21 pm
Three major themes that I saw in the Martin Luther King and Malcolm X articles are protests, injustice, and inequality. The reason that I choose these as the major themes is because they both brought up the problem of injustice and inequality, but they are both using different methods of protest or reaching the point in which change will be brought upon the African American community.
Kim Shaw
10/16/2014 04:33:45 pm
The first thing that stood out to me after reading both the speech and the essay is the tone that each article gave. Malcom X’s speech was strong, powerful, and intense, let’s take action, move now, quickly, and don’t hesitate. Also what I got was it can be peaceful if you want to talk in peace but at any moment it can and will turn violent. What I got from Martin Luther King’s essay was peace, let’s talk through our concerns, differences, there is a way to solve this without anyone else getting hurt. There was no threat of violence in Dr. King’s essay, it gave the turn the other cheek feeling. The other thing that came to mind was change for the betterment of black people. They both spoke of the in just and abuse that black people had suffered due to slavery, segregation, exploitation etc. They agreed that it had been going on for a long time and it is time to change. They talked about the approach to change, what needs to be done and how to do it. They both agreed that marches are away for people to come together then and now to get a change. However in order for a march to be effective the purpose must be known by the people marching to make the change and the people whose attention you are trying to get. What happens after the marches that are held today? What was the purpose of the Occupy movement? The third thing that got my attention is the government now and the government then. There is not much difference in the government. They still go through the back door most of the time. They say they are for the people but really are they? If I as involved in those marches back in those days I think I would be a little of both. I’m all for talking things through and trying to come to a solution. However if I turn the other cheek and you hit that one also then I have to defend myself. It’s easier said than done to love your enemy.
Juan Flores-Rodriguez
10/17/2014 03:07:48 pm
The comparisons between the Occupy Wall Street Movement and the Civil Rights Movement are night and day. We were ready for Occupy, I think it was time to shake things up and gets some real positive change. Unfortunately, what I saw, was a cause without a cause. Looking back to the Civil rights movements, you're right, It's hard to judge what approach towards change is best if you truly believed in the cause.
Dulce Fajardo
10/17/2014 03:49:03 pm
Yes, you're correct in the fact that the government does not improve. In fact it looks like it is only getting worse and harder for people to fight for their rights. People get arrested over protests ans such. Dr. King's nonviolent persepective is a more peaceful way and it would work but what if people still do not manage to make a change. It makes us think what else do we have to do in order to achieve anything when standing up for our rights.
sharon clark
10/20/2014 08:04:13 am
i agree the government has not improved and im sure they don't plan on making a change either. they seem to be set in there ways that improvement is not key.what a strong support system we have right?times are getting more complicated and harder i think that is one of the strategy for us to let go of what we worked so hard for.it almost feel like our best isn't good enough..but mine is forget the government...lol
Sarah salaxar
10/17/2014 06:41:42 pm
I completely agree with you that the way they describe the government at that time is what we see today. We always hear politicians making promises and assuring us a better future and more justice. However, once they're elected, their priorities change until their term is almost over. Like you said it's easier said than done, and maybe that's the problem, or it can also be I say, you vote, I turn my back until I need you again.
Juan Flores-Rodriguez
10/16/2014 04:41:12 pm
In reading these two opposing view on how to handle inequality in the United States, there are many themes that both Dr. King and Malcom X are trying to address. First of which is the exploitation of non-whites, in particular African Americans. Malcom X argues that although this country had a long history of using African American slave labor and routinely sending African American soldiers to war, African Americans are treated as second class citizens. He feels that although they sacrificed a lot for this country, African Americans were never properly compensated and accepted what was given to them. Dr. King to a large extent acknowledges this fact, and tries to explain, it could be seen as a time of “peace that was no peace” in America.
Dulce Fajardo
10/17/2014 04:56:06 pm
It's very particular for Dr. King to speak so peacefully and promote peace as a way of solving matters and moving along to protest to end all the injustice being done on the African Americans during that time. Now it's a mix of both Malcolm X and MLK's views because even though the people want to act peacefully, assemble peacefully, the government comes in with violent force and of course people try to defend themselves. It's interesting how both Malcolm X and MLK have similar points to address but they do it in different ways. Both of their approaches are understandable and knowledgeable though.
Sarah Salazar
10/17/2014 06:36:57 pm
I agree with you when you say that solving injustice shouldn't be at the expense of being unjust. However, I think that at some point fighting back is necessary. I would love to believe that government and society could change with simple picket signs and sit-ins, but mostly it won't. As Malcolm X stated, the U.S. didn't use its bombs on Russia for fear of Russia's bombs and vice versa. In most cases that's what works and that's what creates "peace." It's not the peace we all picture, but no one dies because of the bombs.
Dulce Fajardo
10/17/2014 06:52:32 am
Three themes that stood out from Malcolm X and MLK Jr.'s were social degradation, exploitation and oppression. Both MLK Jr. and Malcolm X made various points arguing how African (Americans) were looking down upon in the late 50's, mid 60's.
Juan Flores-Rodriguez
10/17/2014 02:57:13 pm
Social degradation is an interesting theme. I often hear how things were better in the old days. I often wonder how true this is. It's somewhat of a matter of perspective. This is why when Malcom X said that it was worst in 1964 then it was in 1954, I wonder how he was measuring the increased oppression. I wonder if he would ever say that it was worst in 1954 then it was in 1854 for the average African American, honestly I don't think he would.
sharon clark
10/20/2014 07:58:45 am
i feel like social degradation is very much interesting. there comes a time where things are going to be built to be broken down so that is where social degradation takes play you have people that are jobless and looking for work but the opportunity is not there is an example of social degradation.it is a true concepts that's happen everyday, everywhere.the worst social degradation standpoint is the cops i consider them a form of government because they seem to have the power of the president or something wit the things they do and get away wit. smh
Sarah Salazar
10/17/2014 06:27:34 pm
Three major themes in both of these speeches were injustice, resistance, and a better future. Both Martin Luther King Jr and Malcolm X described the injustices in society that Black society was facing during their time. MLK Jr. uses the example of Plessy v Fergusson. He talks about how instead of the outcome being "separate but equal" it is "separate without the slightest intention to abide by equal." MLK also describes how during slavery Black society lost faith in themselves and were content with the "place they were assigned" and that made the white men happy which in some way brought racial peace. However, now that the Black man wants to have to place they deserve, the white man is not allowing it, and the racial peace has turned to racial violence. His method for addressing these injustices were nonviolent because he thought the befriending the enemy was better than defeating him. Malcolm X's speech was completely different. Even the title "the ballot or the bullet" suggests for some violence. Malcolm X's strategy was action on all fronts by whatever means necessary. If at some point violence was necessary, it's ok because violence was used against him and other Black men too. In his mind, you should fight back however you're being fought at. In many ways I agree most with Malcolm X's approach because if someone has a gun, and all you have is a knife, your opponent will win because his weapon is more destructive. However, MLK's idea that violence creates more complicated problems is true. I'd say that MLK's tactics are nicer and sound prettier to me, but Malcom X's tactics made more sense and were probably more effective.
sharon clark
10/20/2014 07:50:40 am
the three major themes that stood out to me was at the church in new york Adam Clayton takes part in the political struggles to try and bring about rights to the black people in this country.the second theme was fighting for the civil rights of black people in this country lastly being deeply involved in the school boycotts to eliminate segregated education. Malcolm x was responding to the victims of Americanism. victims of democracy basically a hypocrite disguise.you had white people trying to invade the so called "negro community"also setting a year for just white political crook...give me a break!the white politicians basically is selling us blacks false promises, building up our hopes, and then tearing them down.he enforced not to let anybody tell what odds you are against as well i feel like Malcolm was trying to create an equal chance for the people. now MLk Jr. refers to the crisis is in race relations dominates the arena of american life.the crisis has been precipitated by two factors: the determined resistance of reactionary elements in the south to the Supreme Courts decisions outlawing segregation in the public schools, and the radical change in the negro' eval of himself. their rationale for there chosen strategy was after the emancipation in 1863 the negro still confronted oppression and inequality.while the army of occupation remained in the south and reconstruction ruled, he had a brief period of eminence and political power. Malcolm was quickly overwhelmed by majority whites.this is where a new slavery step in to play during the Plessy v. Ferguson decision. "separate but equal "came about as an supreme court doctrine as well as a result Plessy doctrine plunged the Negro into the exploitation where bleakness and nagging happened.i would probably take the same stand in trying to change what wrong and unjust to right.i would expect a positive and just outcome in changing things.
Sorasak Prasertsri
10/23/2014 07:55:56 am
Leave a Reply. |
POSCI 1 Students
This blog is for COA POSCI 1 students. ArchivesCategories |
RSS Feed