Personal Narrative: How Violence Has Changed The World

Mubarak Yarmemet 12-03-2015 U.S History Mr. Baugh Martin Luther King Jr., A non-violent man Q: Why did Martin Luther King Jr believe in nonviolence? The time period during the 1950’s and 1960’s was a very violent period of time for the United States. There was segregation of black and whites all over the United States.

Action doesn't always have to mean war or fighting. Martin Luther King was an influential public speaker. Even with all of his contributions violent protests would flood our streets. He is not the only one to die in the fighting between African Americans and whites. Without MLK, our country would still be segregated.

From the 1900’s through present day, equality and how to handle injustice situations have been hard. People all over the world struggle with being looked down upon or having rights that have been taken away because of racism, which can cause violence anywhere. In order for non-violence to be successful, the movement needs to have discipline, courage, and leadership because how you handle a situation is how you eliminate the problem. Nelson Mandela, Mohandas Gandhi, and Martin Luther King Jr have proven all of these steps to be true.

Malcolm X for example strived for the same thing as Dr. King, freedom. The difference is , is that although Malcolm X didn’t persuade or want violence , he didn’t care to stop it either. He believed in self defense for all African Americans and that self- preservation comes first. He says , "I don't mean go out and get violent; but at the same time you should never be nonviolent unless you run into some nonviolence. I'm nonviolent with those who are nonviolent with me. But when you drop that violence on me, then you've made me go insane, and I'm not responsible for what I do." People would look on this and make assumptions that every black leader or person strives to violence so why should Martin Luther King be any different. As proven by his speeches, points/views , belief, and demonstrations, he is/was a positive rebel that was heroic because he helped America’s

The 1960's was a time of great civil strife, even though the nonviolence approach won out and became the best way to handle the problems, there was different ideas. Mainly there was the idea of healing the economic health of the black communities by doing nonviolent marches and boycotts. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. said " ...by refusing to purchase the prducts from companies which do not hire Negroes in meaningful numbers ... increased the income of the Nergo community by more the two million dollars annually..." This statement from Dr. King proves that nonviolent prostest does help communities that needed the extra money. While that might seem the answer to the problem there was another way to slove the problem and Malcolm X had the solution.

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

Violence is not the answer for resolving your problems. Violence can be saved in abounding ways, but they can also end in tragic manners. Violence can cause wounds, injuries, and as well deaths. Consequently, many suffer in pain as you carry the burden of having killed someone.

What has America come to? Although the articles, “We’re No.1(1)!” written by Thomas Friedman, and the article “Violence is Who We Are,” by Steven Crichley, have different overall subjects, they have a similar arguments. The world isn’t as great as it used to be, we are lacking good leadership, and we happily invite wrong doings into our lives.

If one man never steps forward to show all the others that change is possible, nothing will ever change. When you look back at history of the American civil rights movement, Malcolm X and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. are still often two of the first names even someone of today’s society may think of. They were, and still are, some of the most influential men to ever live. As young African-American men living during a time of harsh global, but most importantly, national racism and prejudice; teaching effective techniques to achieve peace and equality to others was extremely difficult for Dr. King and Malcolm X.

To begin with, nonviolent protests have been successful, Martin Luther King, gained the support of some of the whites  by using the non-violent methods of Gandhi. Unfortunately, some people did not see it that way and decided to take action. For example, Bloody Sunday

Since the dawn of mankind, there has been a struggle for power that has engulfed our race in a never ending conflict. Whether it has been a war or an internal conflict, our race has often chosen violence and death over peaceful resolutions. However, this is definitely not the case for some of the most important figures in the history of our race. Mahatmas Ghandi, the key figure of Indian independence from the United Kingdom, implored his people and followers to refrain from ever committing acts of violence in the name of life and liberty. Martin Luther King, Jr., the Civil Rights crusader from the 1960s, fought for the civil rights of all African Americans without ever imposing violence on any of his opponents. Of course civil disobedience

Change wouldn’t have come to America, India, or South Africa without these non violent heroes. There’s a saying, “Violence is not the answer,” and it’s not. Violence can only lead to more violence. If someone hits someone, that normally doesn’t make that person like them, and violence within a society works in the same fashion. Regardless of who started the conflict, people will always want revenge and the last laugh. An example of this is shown with John Brown. John Brown was a white abolitionist in the 1800's. He believed the only way to stop slavery was through violence. He had a few successes but one day he, along with a couple of his followers, initiated a raid on a pro-slavery arsenal. Brown and some of his followers were caught and hanged. Despite the fact he was fighting for a just cause, and the conflict wasn’t started by abolitionists, he was still in the end killed. John Brown didn’t start the violence that came from slave owners killing and torturing their slaves, but by answering with violence he ended up suffering for it along with his followers. His movement was effective but didn’t inspire the big change that peaceful movements usually trigger. Peaceful protests make individuals think, they think about why a group of people are protesting against a situation and if they might just be right. While violence makes individuals want to act and

Martin Luther King Jr dedicated his life fighting to end discrimination against African-American men, women, and children. Martin did not believe in violence at all and would use kindness and love as opposed to violence and hate, this would help set the tone of his iconic movement to end racism. Martin was able to prove that a world without violence can be successful. He would be able to establish equal voting rights between the black and white people, and establish that all nations must treat all people equal no matter their skin color.

Peaceful resistance to laws positively impact a free society. The civil activist leaders that fought for our rights, put up with a lot to get us to where we are currently at now, and we have been taking it for granted. Boycotts, and sit ins are great examples of a non-violent approach to keep the harm away from our people. Today's youth are reversing this approach. They rather have destroy things like cars, windows, break into stores just to get their point across, which is not by any means acceptable. Although we do need a voices heard, there is always a way to go about things. I am not saying that destroying property can be justified but when our voices are NOT being heard, what else are we supposed to do. We can't sit around and wait for

Peaceful resistance to laws positively impacts a free society. Rather than having violent movements and harming citizens, it is better to peacefully resist. Once a violence is used, the resistance to the law becomes nulled. People tend to not follow a violence protester. Once a violent riot starts, chaos is everywhere. People forget what they are truly fighting for. They unconsciously run away with the fear of getting harmed and dare not to go back. A peaceful resistance on the other hand leads citizens to join and support. People are able to see what they are fighting for and their real intentions. They are able to stand and cause no problem to people passing by as they are showing their support through silent voices. Many famous activists and leaders are for nonviolence. Mahatma Gandhi, a primary leader of India’s independence