Colonization and domestic violence: Strategies

Colonization and domestic violence: Strategies The correlation between colonization and domestic violence is undeniable given the plethora of scholarly and historical data. The main misconception that exists in this area relates to the belief that the violent aspects of colonization and its associated abuse lay directly at the feet of Westerners or other outside cultures and influences. Domestic violence, in its many forms, is forced upon men, women and children from many sources including people in their own society. In addition to the definitions and correlations of colonization and domestic violence, this paper also discusses the colonization, social structure and abuse of Aboriginal Peoples including the Maori tribe of New Zealand, Native Americans, and the First Nation communities of Canada as well as the diseases thrust upon the colonists by the colonizers. Also examined are the relationships between modern abuse related to colonised cultures and its possible prevention. Domestic Violence The United States Justice Department’s Office on Violence Against Women provides a definition of the various types of domestic violence: We define domestic violence as a pattern of abusive behavior in any relationship that is used by one partner to gain or maintain power and control over another intimate partner. Domestic violence can be physical, sexual, emotional, economic, or psychological actions or threats of actions that influence another person. This includes any behaviors that intimidate, manipulate, humiliate, isolate, frighten, terrorize, coerce, threaten, blame, hurt, injure, or wound someone. (2014) The types of domestic abuse include physical, sexual, emotional, economic and psychological abuse. Domestic violence is not limited to any particular race, religion, gender, age, educational or socio-economic factors. For the purpose of this paper, domestic violence is categorized as violent behavior that has been inflicted on one culture by another since colonization took place. Oftentimes the victims are the colonists who are subjected to abuse in its various forms by the colonizers but eventually that abuse transfers into abuse between members of the oppressed culture. The reasons for the abuse may disappear but the behavior can last and even accelerate through future generations. Colonization The term colonization comes from the Latin for â€Å"to inhabit†. Colonisation most often refers to an outside group moving into a previously inhabited area. Ever since man learned to travel, he has desired to conquer new lands either by developing a profitable relationship with the indigenous peoples or, more commonly, by taking over the land and other resources through a threat of force or through direct violence. Colonisation can be beneficial if it is done with respect and cooperation of the inhabitants. Some regions, especially underdeveloped regions, may benefit significantly from colonization by an outside culture. These regions may experience in an increase in world knowledge, medical care, economic growth and more. There are instances however, that show the dark side of colonization and the domestic violence with which it has often been associated. History is filled with tales of forceful colonization despite the language used to describe it – exploration, emin ent domain, settlements. More often than not when a territory is colonised without the express permission of the colonists, violence ensues. The violence may come in the form of a direct attack or through cultural oppression. The colonists may be imprisoned, raped or beaten into submission. This form of abuse lasts much longer than the life span of the abuser and abused. It is carried into future generations through culture, belief systems and trauma, often causing particular cultures to be more prone to the violence committed against their ancestors or, worse, become the abusers. Correlation between Colonisation and Domestic Violence People intent on colonizing new lands or infiltrating existing cultures typically held the strict belief that their religion, politics, education and culture were far superior to that of the indigenous people therefore it was common practice for the new settlers to impart, often forcibly, their culture and belief systems on the indigenous peoples. As a result of this effort, the indigenous peoples were required to take on the characteristics and culture of the invaders, usually due to the threat of violence. Because indigenous people were often less educated than the invading population, they were seen – and treated – as an inferior society. This is not to say that the indigenous cultures were perfect before they were infiltrated by the colonizers. Each culture has its own unique set of beliefs and circumstances. The difference may be that there is limited, if any, knowledge or documentation on the culture of these peoples before they were colonised. Colonization and Patriarchy Patriarchy, the cultural practice of revering the male gender as the head of society, including the family structure, can be directly linked to colonization and the mistreatment of the female gender. Historically speaking, cultures with a patriarchal view held little regard for the female gender which often permitted substandard treatment of females. This treatment often led to various forms of domestic violence. A patriarchal belief system is common even in the modern world although great strides have been made to protect women and children from violent males often taught to be dominant by colonizing cultures. While the majority of the invading people held a patriarchal view, that is not without exception. Many indigenous cultures are matriarchal in nature, particularly the Native American and First Nation communities of Canada. The shift in leadership from matriarchal to patriarchal often caused women to be viewed as inferior as men were taught not to respect women as they once had. As a result, women in many cultures were viewed as little more than property allowing the male population to treat the women in any way they saw fit, including a cycle of domestic violence that would remain in place for generations. According to Kanuha (2002), there are several strategies for claiming superiority over another gender or culture. The first is to convince the colonists that their ways are superior. The second strategy is to create a delineation between the colonizers and the indigenous peoples through segregation including the separation of men and women. The third strategy of colonization is to use domestic violence to control the colonists. This may include any and all forms of physical, emotional, spiritual and psychological abuse. The fourth strategy is to take control of the colonists’ economic resources including natural resources. The fifth strategy is controlling the culture and limiting outside resources of knowledge and information. In some cultures they are permitted to see only media images of women that were created by men; images that often objectified women. Another form of control is to prohibit the use of native language and education as well as to deny the colonists the opportunity to decide or vote on their own futures. While patriarchy is undeniably tied to colonization, it must be mentioned that men also suffered from these same issues. While men may have been seen as dominant, the colonists were second to the colonizers and therefore often suffered from the same abuses as women. Colonisation and Disease One form of domestic violence is to deny one appropriate health care. During the colonization of many regions of the world, indigenous peoples were exposed to and infected to new diseases brought by the colonists yet were denied adequate care. In fact, many of the colonizers were often quarantined from the recently exposed natives to protect them from diseases they brought to the region. The belief was that the natives, unable to withstand any number of exotic pathogens, were biologically inferior. It was the development of world trade routes as well as the desire to conquer new lands that encouraged Europeans to cross borders into previously unexplored territories. As a result, they infected entire cultures with disease, namely tuberculosis and small pox, two diseases responsible for killing the majority of Americans and Europeans in the 18th and 19th centuries. Additionally, the colonizers tended to bring with them newly domesticated animals which added another level of potential disease to the natives. As the mortality rate of the colonists rose, the colonizers were able to increase their presence and domination over the remaining people and their lands. Colonisation of the Maori, Native Americans and the First Communities of Canada The Aboriginal tribes of the South Pacific, particularly the Maori, have a long and violent history of being colonised by Western Europeans. The Maori were once the colonisers of New Zealand, taking over the island through force and causing the genocide of the island’s indigenous peoples. The Maori began to trade with Europe in the 1700s, bartering fish and land for beads, cloth and other items. When potential invaders attempted to invade New Zealand, the Maori embraced violence and beheaded the infiltrators. They often participated in cannibalism rituals which led to a reputation of the Maori as being brutal savages. The shift toward colonisation began when missionaries arrived in New Zealand with the hope of converting the Maori to Christianity. The missionaries traded goods for land and built New Zealand’s first church. The Maori began to trade in muskets which created an arms race between New Zealand and its neighbors. Violence escalated. Although the Maori and the missionaries tended to remain separate, many Maori began to convert to Christianity. Relationships between Britain and the Maori strengthened. Britain wanted the Maori to pledge its allegiance to the throne in exchange for a guarantee that no one would attempt to rob the Maori of their lands. While many Maori refused to link themselves to the Queen, 46 chiefs signed the Treaty of Waitangi, hoping to end the violence. While the Maori as a whole did not willingly shift to British rule, the region began to thrive from the relationship. Eventually, the British established a new capital in Aukland and the country continued to thrive. The history of the Native American tribes is well documented in most school texts. Christopher Columbus believed he had discovered a shorter route to China when he landed in the Bahamas. Columbus, eager to prove that he was a superior explorer sought only three things in his travels – to educate people about God, to gain glory for his explorations, and to gain fame and fortune from the gold, spices and other resources the trip would provide. Due to these factors, Columbus’ arrival in the Bahamas was ill fated for its people. Columbus and his crew pillaged the land and were, in essence, responsible for the deaths of nearly 60,000 inhabitants of the islands over a period of the next 30 years. Upon arriving in America, Columbus discovered that there were people living on this new land. This contact encouraged other people to travel to the New World. The infiltration of Europeans was not welcome by many of the 160 native tribes. While some tribes were friendly with each other and with the Europeans, many were not. Wars ensued. A large percentage of Native Americans were wiped out by the arrival of small pox, diminishing its population by as much as 70%. As the colonisation of the Americas continued, the Europeans began to outnumber the â€Å"savages†, forcing them into more remote areas of the country. Violence continued to escalate between the Europeans and Native Americans. Although it was the Europeans that began the barbaric practice of scalping, the act was solely attributed to the Native Americans who often retaliated in kind. The reputation of the Native Americans as uncivilized savages grew and along with it, any respect for their culture all but vanished. The legacy of the First Nation of communities mirrors that of the Native Americans and, in fact, they are in some way of the same family as their lands were stolen in the name of capitalism and racism. Throughout 100 years of violence between the Europeans and native cultures, the natives continued to be pushed back until eventually the majority of tribes were relegated to reservations. The segregation and loss of their culture created a wider gap between the cultures. Missionaries continued to attempt to colonise the natives by preaching and introducing modern ways into their culture. Domestic violence between factions continued as women were abused, men were beaten and killed. Women and children were also sold into the slave trade as sexual objects. Prevention of Domestic Violence in Colonised Territories It has been stated that the abuse and objectification of indigenous peoples carries with it a dark stain that has permeated generations. In addition to carrying that sense of shame and continued chain of abuse, each individual in the culture also carries with him a sense of being inferior. This sense of inferiority and the legacy of abuse are two of the reasons that indigenous peoples tend to have a higher rate of abuse as well as suicide. The prevention of domestic violence in colonised territories, despite the location, begins with education. In modern society it is known that abuse in any form is morally and ethically wrong as well as being illegal. Still, incidents of abuse occur every day and perpetrators are often allowed to wander free while the abused suffer. Some domestic violence treatment programmes may give special consideration to the history of trauma suffered by a particular culture, particularly those that have been colonised and show a marked increase of substance abuse or number of psychological issues. One such programme, popular in the United States is the Duluth Model in which the abuser is treated based on his history of trauma, beliefs in victimization and power over the abused as well as the shame factor. The programme has been used in the education and court systems to decrease the percentage of abuse, particularly by men. Smith (2006) states: Researchers are beginning to confirm what common sense dictates: that violence between individuals, while influenced by social and cultural variables, is more parsimoniously explained by an examination of individual characteristics, contexts, and functions of behavior. Not surprisingly, empirical research is beginning to identify shame, individual stressors such as substance abuse and trauma history, and personality characteristics as main contributors to violent behavior in intimate relationships. Smith also intimates that while there are many programmes and models that claim to have the best recipe for preventing abuse, it is not clear if one has any superior efficacy. Smith asserts that domestic violence activists and agencies will see the most success when treating the individual ascribed to the abuse. Conclusion The correlation between colonisation and domestic violence has been proven through myriad scholarly articles, texts and studies. Research has shown that the oppression of the colonists by colonisers creates deep inner turmoil that must be expressed. Since the anger, indignation and shame usually cannot be expressed directly at the abuser, the victim may turn those feelings inward which may result in depression, substance abuse, and even suicide. However, some victims will take out those feelings on others that may be weaker than they. In this case, it is often women and children that may suffer from physical, emotional, psychological, financial and verbal abuse. While many social programmes exist to combat domestic violence, they are often not designed to address the underlying trauma of the victim or the abuser. When one culture has been oppressed by another, a sense of inferiority is instilled. The oppressor intends to take what it wants from the oppressed whether it is land, money or even its own women and children. The oppressor often uses whatever means necessary to achieve his goals and will subject the oppressed to various types of violence and abuse. The oppressor may begin to believe that the violence is justified and that belief, that victim or abusive mentality may remain and perhaps even escalate throughout future generations. As women are objectified due to their cultures and perhaps beaten or raped, they tend to believe that the behavior is â€Å"normal† or perhaps even earned. Combatting those emotions and putting an end to domestic violence among the colonised cultures goes much deeper than the formulation of any law or social programme, no matter how valid. The issue must be addressed at the deepest level – the level of one’s belief system. While many pro grammes may treat only the victim or the abuser, it is imperative that both sides of the conflict be dissected and examined. The history of one’s culture can shed light on personal behavior even if the history seems far removed. Learning one’s history as well as becoming educated on healthy forms of communication and interaction are the only ways in which domestic violence can be effectively addressed. Only then is it possible to perhaps not eradicate but at least lessen the occurrences of domestic violence in these and other cultures.

Cloning is Ethically and Morally Wrong :: Argumentative Persuasive Topics

Cloning is Ethically and Morally Wrong The question shakes us all to our very souls. For humans to consider the cloning of one another forces them all to question the very concepts of right and wrong. The cloning of any species, whether they be human or non-human, is ethically and morally wrong. Scientists and ethicists alike have debated the implications of human and non-human cloning extensively since 1997 when scientists at the Roslin Institute in Scotland produced Dolly. No direct conclusions have been drawn, but compelling arguments state that cloning of both human and non-human species results in harmful physical and psychological effects on both groups. The following issues dealing with cloning and its ethical and moral implications will be addressed: cloning of human beings would result in severe psychological effects in the cloned child, and that the cloning of non-human species subjects them to unethical or moral treatment for human needs. The possible physical damage that could be done if human cloning became a reality is obvious when one looks at the sheer loss of life that occurred before the birth of Dolly. Less than ten percent of the initial transfers survive to be healthy creatures. There were 277 trial implants of nuclei. Nineteen of those 277 were deemed healthy while the others were discarded. Five of those nineteen survived, but four of them died within ten days of birth of sever abnormalities. Dolly was the only one to survive (Fact: Adler 1996). If those nuclei were human, "the cellular body count would look like sheer carnage" (Logic: Kluger 1997). Even Ian Wilmut, one of the scientists accredited with the cloning phenomenon at the Roslin Institute agrees, "the more you interfere with reproduction, the more danger there is of things going wrong" (Expert Opinion). The psychological effects of cloning are less obvious, but none the less, very plausible. In addition to physical harms, there! are worries abou t the psychological harms on cloned human children. One of those harms is the loss of identity, or sense of uniqueness and individuality. Many argue that cloning crates serious issues of identity and individuality and forces humans to consider the definition of self. Gilbert Meilaender commented on the importance of genetic uniqueness not only to the child but to the parent as well when he appeared before the National Bioethics Advisory Commission on March 13, 1997. He states that "children begin with a kind of genetic independence of [the parent].

Life in the Iron Mills

. Life is Not Merely a Coincidence â€Å"Theatre of the Absurd† is designated for plays of absurdist fiction and refers to the avant-garde theatre of a loosely associated group of dramatists such as, Beckett, Ionesco, Pinter, and Albee who first emerged during and after World War 11. The plays express the belief that â€Å"in a godless universe human existence has no meaning or purpose and therefore all communication breaks down† (Britannica Online Encyclopedia). Logical construction and argument gives way to irrational and illogical speech and to its ultimate conclusion which is silence. Absurdist theatre is often called a reaction to realism, as instead of conforming to the concept of real life, absurdist sought to provide an unmistakably unreal experience. The absurd dramatist relates to existentialism and the philosophical approach in understanding human existence and experiences. Existentialism is based on the assumption that individuals are free and responsible for their own choices and actions. Hence, people are not victims of circumstances as there is the freedom of choice. In an absurdist play, time and settings are generally ambiguous, if they are even defined at all. The characters are not meant to mimic real people, but instead are often â€Å"metaphorical or archetypal† (Britannica Online Encyclopedia). Absurdism is a form of drama that emphasizes the absurdity of human existence by employing disjointed, repetitious, and meaningless dialogue, purposeless and confusing situations, and plots that lack realistic or logical development. The guiding principle of absurdism is to look at the world without any assumption of purpose and its usefulness is it exists without prejudices or specificity. As it is equally alien to everyone, Absurdism is meant to be accessible to everyone. One of the common misconceptions of theatre of the absurd plays is that nothing makes sense. On the contrary, the characters in absurdism tend to behave in a serious way, reacting realistically to the bizarre occurrences of their environment. The protagonists of Endgame by Samuel Beckett, The Zoo Story by Edward Albee, and Rhinoceros by Eugene Ionesco are all overwhelmed by the irrational nature of their respective environments and the general effect they share is a nightmare and dreamlike atmosphere that is their existence involving the forces of hope, truth, identity, reality, alienation, meaning, and human existence; all of which are forces they are struggling against. The idea of the Endgame is taken from the game of chess where the concept designates the last, and entirely predictable, stage of a game, the end. The play portrays a universe which is nearing its end. Hamm and Clov both are the protagonists in Beckett’s one-act play, Endgame. Hamm is the chess King, paralyzed and wheelchair bound, who moves only when he makes demand for Clov to service him â€Å"get me ready, I am going to bed† (391) or â€Å"I feel a little too far to the left / Now I feel a little too far to the right† (399). Clov is his submissive Knight who staggers around erratically submitting to Hamm’s every whim. Hamm controls everything and everyone while having absolutely no control over himself or his environment. Frustration and anger dictates his existence as he sees the end all humanity seem to be moving towards is both uncertain and elusive, and he is terrified. Hamm channels his anger at God by shouting â€Å"The bastard! He doesn’t exist! † (Levy 410). The forces of a meaningless existence, reality, and Armageddon are the forces Hamm and Clov struggles against. Both are starving for identity and a healthy relationship with others but it is an impossible feat. They want to preserve their own unique identity, but it is necessary for both to relate to the outside world and nature to develop a true identity. Hamm and Clov are confined in a depressing, stagnant, bare, and dismal vacuum of their environment located partially underground, and their relationship with nature is nonexistent as Beckett reveals â€Å"nature has forgotten us / There’s no more nature† Levy 393). Since both fail to develop an identity the result is a failure to establish a healthy mature relationship with each other. Outside all seems dead, barren, and nothing occurs as Hamm states â€Å"outside of here it’s death† (393). Inside, Hamm and Clov, his caretaker is passing the time mortifying each other and toying with fears and illusions of a possible change that will never occur. Clov indicates â€Å"I can’t be punished anymore† (390) when he reflects on his life with Hamm. In return Hamm declares that he is miserable, â€Å"can there be misery—loftier than mine? † (391). Hamm is attracted to whatever light there is in the gray world and constantly asks Clov to push him under the window so he can feel the light on his face. Light is used as a symbol of hope and life which expresses many of the nuances of Hamm’s personality. Hamm is cursed with darkness and he wants Clov to share the same miserable fate so he continuously antagonizes him. The antagonist is at times Hamm as well as the environment and death. The antagonist death will ultimately prevail and win the chess game. Clov and Hamm are in the â€Å"endgame† of their life and death lurks around the corner. Endgame is the term used to describe an ending in chess where the outcome is already known. The chess endgame parallels the final stages of life. Hamm and Clov will succumb to death regardless of how the game is played. They are stuck in a perpetual loop that never allows final closure. Hamm claims he wants to be â€Å"finished† (410), but admits that he hesitates to do so. He has no answers to the basic existential questions of why he is alive, why he has to die, and why is injustice in his miserable, suffering, and empty existence. Just as death cannot arrive to seal off life, neither can Hamm or Clove escape to close the book of one existence and open another. The Zoo Story by Edward Albee is more anchored in reality than most typical works in the genre of Theatre of the Absurd. The drama is a confrontation between middle-class America and the outcasts of society, Peter and Jerry. Albee presents the setting in a simple structure in New York’s Central Park consisting of two park benches. The play never changes, and the action unfolds in a linear manner, from beginning to end. There are three overriding themes in the short one-act play. They are absurdity versus reality, alienation and loneliness, and wealth and poverty. The protagonist is Peter, a complacent publishing executive of middle age and upper-middle income. He is a conventional family man with morals, mainstream social values, and financial stability. Peter is contending with forces of loneliness, hope, identity, and meaning in his life. Marriage, his cage, and life in general has not played out the way Peter anticipates as his household is female-dominated and he is forced to comply with the desires of his wife. He desires to be freed from the cage and the zoo of his life as Albee shows Who better than a nice married man with two daughters and†¦a dog? [Peter shakes his head] No? Two dogs. [Peter shakes his head again] Hm. No dogs? [Peter shakes his head sadly] Oh, that’s a shame. But you look like an animal man. CATS? [Peter nods his head, ruefully] Cats! But, that can’t be your idea. No, sir. Your wife and daughters? [Peter nods his head] Is there anything else I should know? (549) Jerry, the antagonist is an aggressive, dysfunctional, lonely, disheveled thirty something man in search of human interaction who also yearns to be released from his cage. Jerry is in a personal conflict with his sexuality and Peter is dealing with his emasculation. The distinctions being, Jerry is a social outcast who is free spirited and morally obligated. He is a free man in respect to Peter restrained life. Jerry is in a search of meaning and his struggle is to find his purpose in life. Without the purpose he seeks his life is meaningless and he chooses death to end it all. Peter is a template of American societal male and is a caged animal. Through the serious failed conversation and misrepresentation of the act of love, Jerry begins his life experiment to see if the middle class are animals after all. The lives of both Peter and Jerry is forever altered when they encounter each other on that faithful day and The Zoo Story highlights what happens when one character enters the life of another and rapidly changes it forever. Neither character prevailed in the drama with the violent conclusion of the psychological attack by retreat by Jerry when he tries to teach Peter the nature of human existence and relationships. Rhinoceros by Eugene Ionesco explores issues of chaos while arriving at a clear message about the chaos. Despite the wild themes and constant activity in the play, a structure and a plot does move forward. Ionesco challenges the point of life and rational nature of humans and forces humanity to challenge to understand ourselves and our actions. The protagonist is Berenger, an everyman who has strong moral character and individuality. The force he has to contend with is the decision to be an individualistic or conform because the masses have succumbed. He is not so different from everyone else in many respects, however, his strength of self and individualism is highlighted when he resists the call to conformity when he says â€Å"But they won’t get me / You won’t get me! † (Levy 469). Berenger chooses to be alone and to give rationality another try. The question becomes is he being true to himself or not? Is human condition one more of rationality or irrationality? To what degree should one resist the pull to conformity, and to what degree should one capitulate to the ways of the world? The antagonist is the ruling government and Nazism and the protagonist Tom prevailed by standing for what he believes even though at times he doubts his decision. Life is full of challenges faced on a daily basis. The many circumstances of life test the human existence, identity, hope, truth, and alienation among many other. Existentialism is based on the assumption that individuals are free and responsible for their own actions and choices. Humans are not victims of circumstances as the freedom of choice is a reality. One gets to make conscious choices when faced with challenges in life. The primary difference between the Theatre of the Absurd and existentialism is that while existentialism recommends a certain type of response to the apparent failure of the human condition, the works of Beckett, Ionesco, Pinter, and Albee makes points without providing any integrated human solution. If the nature of man is partly or mostly irrational, the Theatre of the Absurd expresses the absurdity of human life in a relatable fashion. Works Cited â€Å"Electronic Encyclopedia. † Encyclopedia Britannica. Encyclopedia Britannica Online. Encyclopedia Britannica Inc. , 2011 Web. 11 Nov. 2011 . Levy, Walter. Modern Drama: Selected Plays from 1879 to the Present. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1999. Print.

Essay about Malcolm X and Gandhi - 568 Words

The famous Mahatma Gandhi and Malcolm X left behind legacies that still influence the world today. One of the major factors that impacted these two historical figures was religion. The characteristics of Hinduism definitely had an effect on Gandhi’s peaceful and nonviolent views, just like the Islamic religion guided Malcolm X’s beliefs of by any means necessary. Their religious affiliations were not only deciding factors in their lives, but also played a key part in their deaths Gandhi’s Hinduism and Malcolm X’s Islamic beliefs share some similar views and many vastly diverse ones. Both believe in one Supreme Being or one true God and in divine beings or angels that help promote the will of this Deity. This is one of the few†¦show more content†¦These churches never left much of a lasting impression and caused him to have little respect for anything representing religion until later in life (X 5). It was during his prison sentence that Malcolm X first became exposed and converted to the Islamic religion. While Gandhi stuck to one faith and Malcolm X was exposed to several, they both became much more interested in their prospective religions in their twenties. Both Gandhi and Malcolm X were murdered due to their religious affiliations and beliefs, albeit for slightly different reasons and in different ways. After one failed attempt, Gandhi was shot three times by his assassin, Nathuram Godse. Godse was a Hindu who was connected to the extremist Hindu Mahasabha group that had condemned Gandhi for his nonviolence principles and for favoring the formation of Pakistan. There is evidence that supports that Godse was acting on behalf of his leader and group. Malcolm X was also targeted and killed by a religious group, the Nation of Islam. However, this was a group he had once been a popular minister of. What drove him away from it was when he learned of the leader’s, Elijah Muhammad, shortcomings and hypocrisy. Their relationship quickly deteriorated from that point and he soon resigned his position. After renouncing Muhammad, he was marked for assassination and several attempts were made on his life. It wasn’t long before his enem ies were successful. Malcolm X was charged on stage byShow MoreRelatedAnalysis Of The Civil-Rights Movements Of Gandhi And Malcolm X879 Words   |  4 Pagesoverlooked flaw or exaggerated prejudice against a certain situation. The Important influencers include that of Dr. Martin Luther Kings non-violent protests, and their efforts for an equal and safe America, the Civil-Rights movements of the 1960s or Gandhi and Malcolm Xs peaceful protest way. All Four found a peaceful way to have a common genuine effort for change in a situation that the leaders of our country fail to deem as an extremely poor guidance for our country. Without the efforts of such leadersRead MorePhysical Appearance Says What Words Cannot: Comparing Gandhi and Malcolm X831 Words   |  4 PagesThroughout their lives, both Malcolm X and Gandhi had similar and contrasting physical traits. In many ways, how they appeared on the outside shaped the people they were on the inside. Clothing became a device of nonver bal communication. Whether they recognized that themselves or not, that’s how it was. Had they not been colored, they would not have had advocated for justice. Though their personal philosophies drove them in different ways to resolve oppression; one with violence and the otherRead MoreConstrast and Comparison of Gandhi, Malcolm X, and Martin Luther King on the Topic of Violence1049 Words   |  5 Pagessuccessfully overcome them. Some of these individuals are Gandhi, M.L. King, and Malcolm X. Mohandas Gandhi was such a pious individual and used only nonviolence (ahimsa) to gain recognition and defeat his usurpers. His first concept was known as the law of love, the force of nonviolence is infinitely more wonderful and subtle than the material forces of nature, like, for instance, electricity (Pg. 626, 2nd paragraph on column 2). Gandhi explains that spiritual love runs like electricity. InsteadRead MoreThe Importance Of Social Justice1268 Words   |  6 Pagesbetterment of society. (Wikipedia) Mohandas K. Gandhi preached about civil disobedience.   Satyagraha was the idea of nonviolent protest.   Ã¢â‚¬Å"Satyagraha is fundamentally a way of life, which guides the modes of political activism undertaken by the followers of its principle (or satyagrahis). On a personal front it involves a life committed to truth, chastity, non-attachment and hard-work.†   (n.d).   The root meaning is holding on to the truth.   Gandhi once said â€Å"When I refuse to do a thing that is repugnantRead MoreGuts, Glory, Greatness: Inspiring Stories1280 Words   |  5 PagesHaskins shows character traits of a few great people from the civil rights era including Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr., and Maya Angelou. Although Haskins is like some great contributors during the Civil Rights Movement time that doesn’t mean that he is like all great persons because the Texas Western basketball coach is not like Malcolm X because he does not chose to use violence even when provoked unl ike Malcolm X who has no problem with violence being used to achieve a common goal. Although manyRead MoreEssay Philosophies and Tactics of Dr. King and Malcolm X1492 Words   |  6 PagesLuther King and Malcolm X had an everlasting effect on the treatment of minorities in the United States. Although their philosophies and tactics differed greatly, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X helped shape the Civil Rights Movement and make the United States a better place for people regardless of their race. Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X had different beliefs and goals for the Civil Rights Movement. While Martin Luther King Jr. took a more peaceful position, Malcolm X could best beRead MoreThe Beliefs of Martin Luther King Jr. versus Malcolm X Essay1208 Words   |  5 PagesLuther King Jr. versus Malcolm X â€Å"I have a dream, that one day little black boys and black girls will join hands with little white boys and white girls and walk together as sister and brother.† (de Kay 75)†¦Martin Luther King Jr. During the past century, the United States of America has wresled with the problem of inequality between black and white people. Two influential people who helped to combat racism and the inequality of man were Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X. Martin Luther KingRead MoreAfrican American Civil Rights Movement1594 Words   |  7 Pagesunravel many factors arguing whether violence is legitimate or whether it is a mean that is necessary to a more equal nation mostly focusing on the American Civil Rights movement and the black power. The idea of non violence has stemmed off Gandhi in many forms. Gandhi once quoted â€Å"Non-violence is the greatest force at the disposal of mankind. It is mightier than the mightiest weapon of destruction devised by the ingenuity of man† and he fulfilled what he said. During the struggles of the segregationRead More Some Lead, Some Follow, Others Change the World1114 Words   |  5 Pageseffective than activist Malcolm X and was the reason for the majority of success during the Civil Rights movement. This is because Malcolm X’s cause would only slow progress during the movement, Martin Luther King Jr. had more authority, and he understood that peaceful protesting is the very genesis of redefining a nation. Malcolm X’s cause did not support any advancement in the Civil Rights movement. If anything, his efforts deterred any progress by encouraging separation. Malcolm X looked up to theRead MoreComparing Martin Luther King and Malcolm X Essay782 Words   |  4 PagesComparing Martin Luther King and Malcolm X Martin Luther King and Malcolm X are to diverse individuals with two opposite personalities but both successfully succeeded in achieving freedom and bringing equality to black Americans discriminated against for many years even after the abolishment of slavery. Martin Luther King was born in 1929, in Georgia, Atlanta. Unlike the other black people in the southern states he was different he grew up in well off family who was