In order to affect change, citizens performed various forms of protests. Essentially, these protests were divided between two categories; violent and non-violent. Often, leaders like Martin Luther King promoted passive resistance. An example of this is the Nashville sit ins. In this form of protest, blacks would simply sit at a white lunch counter. When they were taunted and hit, they did not fight back, nor flee.The philosophy behind this idea is that protesting with violence would actually further damage the violent reputation that blacks have already held for so many years. Yet others would argue that it is because of this subordinate behavior that they were still discriminated against in the South. Furthermore, non violent tactics did not attract the attention of the media. Consequently, other Civil Rights leaders like Malcolm X, resorted to violence in order to get the point across. The Watts Riot was the largest and most costly uprising of urban protesters during the Civil Rights era. Various other violent incidents occurred in which civil rights activists were murdered or held captive by groups like the Ku Klux Klan. To me, it seems that the nonviolent tactics resulted in change more so than violence. Although sometimes violent behavior arose from the passive protests, less people were hurt or killed in the end, and I think that is what makes passive resistance a better tactic.
On Violence and Nonviolence http://mshistorynow.mdah.state.ms.us/articles/62/the-civil-rights-movement-in-mississippi-on-violence-and-nonviolence
Watts Riots http://crdl.usg.edu/events/watts_riots/?Welcome
Nashville Sit Ins http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/nashville_sit_ins.htm
No comments:
Post a Comment