Which is more effective non-violence or violence?
There were four college students that were standing up for segregation rights so they went to the local dinner and was not served food. Other people that saw this begin to stop coming to the diner because the racism that was taking place at the diner. These students from A&T a historically black college. This was called the “Sit in” in Greensborough, North Carolina. Their protest was to sit in at a segregated Diner. The Greensborough four said the waiter said: “they can’t be served and you're going to get yourself in a lot of trouble.” Franklin Mccain stated “ I was too angry to be scared. We're not going to leave until you serve us.” This is a primary example of a peaceful protest. There have been numerous debates about what is more effective violence or non-violence. I am on the non-violence side. Notable figures like Malcolm X and Martin Luther King has also had their opinion about what is the most effective way to bring change in the world.
Multiple activists in the world have different views of what is the most effective to bring change. Malcolm X believed an eye for an eye, to not be weak and not sit there and take mistreatment. Malcolm X wanted black people to stand up for each other when they were being mistreated. In this quote Malcolm X believes that there will be a clash between “The oppressed and the oppressors”. This quote shows that Malcolm X believes violence is the most effective way to bring change and not to talk it out you have to take freedom by force and not just sitting there and trying to bargain with your freedom.“Nobody can give you freedom. Nobody can give you equality or justice or anything. If you're a man, you take it.”...” Malcolm’s dream was different from Martin’s, Malcolm saw that there will be fights between blacks and whites and some altercation. When he says taking it it's referring to taking it with force and not just reasoning with the person taking your freedom it's by force. Some say this method was really effective and gathered a lot of people together but it also turned a majority against Malcolm. The same thing that worked against Malcolm helped Martin Luther King. The non-violence factor gave Martin more people because it gave more people an idea of how black people were being treated and lead more people to join the movement.
Martin Luther King took the non-violence approach which seemed more popular because it got not only blacks on board but also white people also. A death in a non-violence protest was believe it or not it was beneficial for the protest because people questioned why are people getting beaten and killed and they are protesting peacefully. This quote Martin is choosing love instead of causing more hate which he realizes will only cause more problems because the whites were in power so if Martin’s protester fought with force they would lose because of how little power they have. “I have decided to stick with love. Hate is too great a burden to bear.” The Selma marches were organized by nonviolent activists to demonstrate the desire of African-American citizens to exercise their constitutional right to vote, in defiance of segregationist repression, and were part of a broader voting rights movement underway in Selma and the best technique was to not fight back. The Selma-to-Montgomery marchers fought for the right to vote, President Lyndon Johnson addressed a joint session of Congress, calling for federal voting rights legislation to protect African Americans from barriers that prevented them from voting. Although the process of the non-violence march took some years it did influence a change. It is hard for some to look at all the deaths that transpired and actual say change is coming from people keep getting killed but there’s a price for freedom and Martin Luther King believed that and unfortunately died for it.
The freedom ride was organized in 1961 by the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE), a civil rights group committed to direct, non-violent action. More than a decade earlier, the U.S. There strategy was to protest till the other side would fight them and be so angry. This is like a boxer in a fight, the boxer is willing to get hit until the other person is tired then the boxer tht was getting hit makes his move “We felt we could count on the racists of the South to create a crisis so that the federal government would be compelled to enforce the law.” They wanted to change the law by being the ones taking the punishment.
In conclusion, there are many debates that non-violence and violence which one is more likely to bring change. Change is always a process and non-violence is the most effective but it always comes with a price.
Comments
No comments have been posted yet.
Log in to post a comment.