Is Violence in Pursuit of Happiness Justified? Essay example

    In “The letter from Birmingham City Jail” by Martin Luther King Jr. and “The Ballot or the Bullet” by Malcolm X both authors discuss injustice during the Civil Rights movement. Martin Luther King Jr. got put in Birmingham city jail and made a letter to Fellow Clergymen. Telling fellow Clergymen that there were fighting for their Civil Rights with nonviolence. And examples of how people were being treated and promises were being broken.  Malcolm X Speech took place in Cory Methodist Church in Cleveland Ohio in 1964 on April 3rd. During Malcolm X’s speech he told his followers that he wanted them to realize what they have done for the country and haven't gotten nothing back. And that he need to use violence he's going to use violence if whites keep on taking degrading them. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. believed nonviolence was the key in order to gain justice and their Civil Rights the deserved because the didn't want whites thinking wrong about them. While Malcolm X believed in violence because he has seen blacks being oppress after all they have have done for the country.

Dr. King and Malcolm X strived to achieve equality for blacks under the law, more specifically, voting rights, desegregation, and more representation in government and politics. However, both men differed immensely in their tactics and strategies. For Dr. King, the negotiations could be brought about by the persistence of a nonviolent plan where, the oppressed people’s determination would overcome the will of the oppressor in the hearts and minds of the nation. He firmly believed in the principles of Mahatma Gandhi’s method of nonviolence resistance, which had been successful in driving the British out of India. For example, according to King, one of the resisters, or black mans goals is not to humiliate the opponent, (the white man) but to win his friendship and understanding. Dr. King proposed a passive resistance, based on “the conviction that the universe is on the side of justice” (“Pilgrimage to Non Violence” King, 112). He claimed the center of nonviolence is based on the principle of love, or understanding. Dr. King emphasized that the white man should not be held responsible for the minorities and blacks being oppressed. Here is where the two leaders oppose each other. Malcolm X felt social injustice and racism had endured too long, and it was

Malcolm X used violence as a way to get more black rights and to hopefully lead up to black supremacy. Dr. Martin L King Jr used non violence protesting as a way to symbol that people standing up for their rights are not wrong or barbaric, but the people who are stopping these nonviolent protests look bad because there is no physical harm being done. Malcolm X states, “This is why I say it’s the ballot or the bullet. It’s liberty or it’s death” (The Ballot or the Bullet). This describes Malcolm X warning that if black people are not allowed suffrage and other rights, then there is going to be violence and death involved to have those rights granted. Malcolm X is showing that he is not afraid to have a violent revolution if there has to be one. Dr. King however states, “We must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence. Again and again, we must ride to the majestic heights of meeting physical force with soul force” (I Have A Dream). Martin Luther King Jr is trying to persuade others that a violent protest will only hurt, not help in getting equality and that a peaceful, powerful protest will ensure smoother integration and peace. Dr. King is promoting the opposite of Malcolm X by saying peace is power whereas Malcolm X is trying to bring forth the

Malcolm X had called many to violence and many acted on it. He stated “I am for violence if non-violence means we continue postponing a solution to the American black man's problem just to avoid violence.” While Malcolm was never arrested for his cries for violence, his followers were punished when they acted on them. This is due to the followers lack of judgement from right and wrong. There were successful ways that civil rights activists could voice their protest without violence. And accomplish their goal. Martin Luther King Jr. was a prime example of peaceful assembly and used his freedom of speech to inspire many.He also made one of the largest advances in civil rights progress in United States history. If Malcolm’s followers had instead followed Martin Luther King Jr’s.peaceful protests. They would not have been arrested. Therefore public speakers who call for violence should not be arrested and remain protected under the first amendment. This is because it is the people's choice to decide their actions and if they choose to commit

King is too idealistic with his approach. When dealing with racism and oppression, one must deal with it pragmatically because it is a serious issue. Malcolm X said a person with self respect will stand up against oppression and disrespect against him/herself because if they don’t, “their children will look at them and think “shame”. Dr. King certainly would sympathize with Malcolm X’s thinking that witnessing racial discrimination and oppression and he wouldn’t wait patiently either, but he would tell Malcolm X: one thing. He believes that a self-respecting human being will die for his rights. For Malcolm, it is better for him “to rather die than let someone oppress him”. Again, the theme here is that non-violence does not distinguish the individual as a person or self-respecting human being. Non-violence doesn’t distinguish you at all. It is the stance of any means necessary that distinguishing you as someone to be reckoned with. How do you demonstrate to others that you are a person and that you have genuine self-respect? You let them know that you will do whatever it takes, even if you may die in the process, to end the oppression; “I would rather die than let you oppress

Unlike King, Malcolm X encouraged his followers to rebel against whites. Malcolm X, for the most part, believed that non-violence and integration was a trick by the whites to keep African Americans oppressed. “Don’t you run around here trying to make friends with somebody who’s depriving you of your rights” (X 1964). He was furious at white racism and encouraged his followers through his speeches to rise up and protest against their white enemies. “They’re not your friends, no, they are your enemy. Treat them like that and fight them”(X 1964). He encouraged African Americans to stand up against the white America that oppressed them.

Martin Luther King Jr. and John Robert Lewis were civil right leaders/civil rights activists around the ‘80’s, which is what everyone knows them as. However, some people didn’t know they both justified breaking the law. Martin Luther King Jr. was not only a powerful preacher, but as well an exceptional reader, as is proved in his 1963 Letter from Birmingham Jail. Of Dr. King’s argument, the central point in his letter states that there is a law higher than mankind’s law. It also states that any human law which is at odds with this much higher law is unjust. Every human being is bound to obey as what Dr. King describes as the “higher law”, which is why our laws must be in harmony with this “higher law”. However for some reason, we as mankind

Malcolm X and Dr. King faced disunity in violence during the civil rights movement. Dr. King encouraged peaceful protests, and does not see obligation in violence to get a point across. “What is needed is a strategy for change, a tactical program which will bring the Negro into the mainstream of American life as quickly as possible. So far, this has only been offered by the nonviolent movement.” (Nonviolence: The Only Road to Freedom p.g 3) Dr. King says that nobody should use self-defense if assualted during demonstration. That everyone should assume that there is a risk, and it would be contradicting to retaliate during a peaceful movement. “It is as ridiculous for a Negro to raise the question of self-defense in relation to nonviolence as it is for a soldier on the battlefield to say his is not going to take any risks. He is there because he believes that the freedom of his country is worth the risk of his life. The same is true of the nonviolent demonstrator. He sees the misery of his people so clearly that he volunteers to suffer in their behalf and put an end to their plight.” (Nonviolence: The Only Road to Freedom p.g 4) Malcolm’s attitude to violence is that anyone that is taking what belongs to you like your civil rights and freedom is a criminal. It is under your legal right to claim what is

Martin Luther King jr. justified rebellion and civil disobedience in one statement. The statements King makes can be thought of as being contradictory. He rationalized this by answering this question,““How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?" The answer lies in the fact that there are two types of laws: just and unjust. I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not

Peaceful resistance has been society's way of respectfully bringing to light grievances or injustices they believe have occurred. More often than not these grievances involve some sort of social issue, whether it be under-representation or inequality, as was the case with African Americans during the peak of the Civil Rights Movement, or something more like Constitutional Rights, such as the right to vote as women. Malcolm X and Martin Luther King Jr., in their lifetimes, both fought hard for opposite ends of the 'rebellion' spectrum, protesting racism and segregation in their own unique ways. Malcolm X preached violence, using angry, fiery rhetoric to sway the public into following him into livid retaliation. Martin Luther King Jr., on the other hand, expressed

’s idea of using nonviolence to get social justice was better than Malcolm X’s idea which was to use violence. After leading boycotts, protests, and marches MLK became a civil rights activist. Based on the article “ Civil Rights Leaders: MLK Jr. “ by Biography.com ,”King led various protests , including marches and demonstrations…. King eloquently spelled out his theory of non-violence.” Here , the text establishes that all MLK did was try to get social justice in a positive/relaxed way using no violence.

Two main black activist leaders of the early 1950's were Martin Luther King and Malcolm X. Today, both of these men would be remembered as 'great leaders'. However, these two men had totally different approaches towards meeting the same main goal. Both Martin Luther King and Malcolm X fought for civil rights; however Malcolm X also wanted to have a separate black society whereas Martin Luther "wanted the integration of white people with black people. Malcolm X believed that violence was the key to his goat whereas Martin Luther King chose to take the non‑violent approach This is one reason why some black activists rejected, the approach of Martin Luther King to civil rights.

In the pursuit of social justice and civil rights, Martin Luther King Jr., Malcolm X, and Stokely Carmichael, sought to amend a flawed system. To accomplish this task, these men entered the armory and chose to wield nonviolence as their weapon. Their goal: to combat violence with nonviolence, to fight hate with love, and to spread equality through peace. In the end they succeeded. Violence breeds violence, hate breeds hate, it is an ineffective approach and an archaic mean to resolving societies issues. Malcolm X and Carmichael were both extreme individuals but that does not make them violent. They attacked social justice and civil rights passionately and assertively, not violently. The methods used

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr’s method of tackling the civil rights pandemic of racism, consisted of sit-ins, boycotts, and marches all forms of peaceful resistance. Although Malcom X agreed with King’s beliefs regarding racism the way Malcom X attempted to get his point across was violent inciting African- Americans to fight back with their first rather than their words. History today remembers kindly the impact of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr’s approach to achieve justice that brought about true change in the free

During the early 1900s, African American rights were a topic of national discussion with no definitive solution in sight. In the wake of one of the most violent race riots in American history, one man sought to overlook racial differences and formalized rules to provide aid to those in need.