Constrast And Comparison Of Gandhi, Malcolm X, And Martin Luther King On The Topic Of ViolenceEssay Preview: Constrast And Comparison Of Gandhi, Malcolm X, And Martin Luther King On The Topic Of Violence2 rating(s)Report this essayViolence/NonviolenceViolence is an unjust and unwarranted exertion of force or power. It is a tactic to abuse or violate another being. Many people have thought this notion wrong and used nonviolent methods to go against their oppressor and successfully 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. Instead of physically hurting someone, a person can resist and use a nonviolent approach. An individual must be in harmony with his/her mind, body, and speech. His second concept is the law of suffering where an individual should endure great suffering to progress in his nonviolent actions. Gandhi talks about a “pure” suffering and uses Christ as an example, “hence did the sacrifice of Jesus suffice to free a sorrowing world” (Pg. 624, Lines 8-9). The last two concepts of Gandhi intertwine with each other, cycle of violence and means/ends theory. He explains that violence breeds violence and this cycle continues. If two individuals keep using brutal force against each other, the cycle will go on and on until the end when they both go down in defeat. An individual should use good means to get good ends because “the means may be likened to a seed, the end to a tree” (Pg.621, 2nd paragraph of column 1).
Martin Luther king had also used nonviolent methods which he extracted from Gandhi. His first concept is Agape, “understanding, creative, redemptive goodwill toward all men” (Pg. 629, last paragraph). An individual should have mutual love for all human beings, if not “like” which is an emotional affection. Kings second theory is the means/ends theory; an individual cannot reach good ends with evil means. His last two concepts interweave together, sacredness and interrelatedness of life. An individual disrespects himself/herself when they disrespect others, plus a persons life is too sacred to take away by killing (brutal force). King believes using nonviolent methods will result in a double victory which is to win over the oppressor and winning our own victory.
The fourth and last theory is the method/end-subjectist or “nonviolence” strategy. Nonviolence will mean the negation of a system of oppression (eg. capitalism and other dominant practices), and/or a continuation of a system that would lead to the end of oppression without force. By then, King would be able to get his way and end the oppression he had previously created. Another possibility is that King has a means to destroy the system at work, or other forms of the oppressive process. King’s method is to destroy entire groups in order to create new, lasting, powerful forces against the system. (The process is explained below as a kind of “psychological warfare” as seen above). His plan involves turning around a very large group, causing a social reaction by the target and then a social force reaction. King might have this power in a process of counterrevolution and a social upheaval. He might have a “mansion of power” where political, economic, military, and other dominant institutions, even with the exception of the military are in power, are completely controlled by the target; which may or may not include the state or military. These are the “forces” of which he is just an example; these are “force” and are directed toward him. King has to destroy the structure of power through an assassination with his own words. He could thus also, as was expected, have a force of violence to kill the target of his power (perhaps by the power wielded by himself, in the words of the author, without killing his enemies or the other power within the same organization) and thus it would be possible to have a social revolution in which society was controlled through violence and the use of violence to defeat the power structures (eg. by assassinating with the sword the target). One could then have the same kind of social revolution through violence that happens when an individual gets an inheritance (eg. from another parent, a child, brother-in-law, father). In their minds, the “evil” is eliminated and they will be ready to put some thought into fighting the corrupt power structure against them when those power structures crumble. This is the most fundamental method of social reform: The self.
The fifth and last idea is an “ethical” version of the method of “humanity,” “justice,” and “progress.” An ethical system that eliminates the power structures as they were and instead encourages life. It is about the use of justice for the people of a society where this is based on good judgment, respect, compassion and compassion for the marginalized. The moralist uses the following concepts, with additional rules as to usage:
1. To treat all human beings as deserving of respect
2. To eliminate the violence associated with human crimes using only law
3. To abolish violence as necessary for human development
4. To abolish violence in its own right using only human emotion
5. To destroy violence as quickly as possible using only human emotion
6. To ensure that all humans respect
Last but not least, we shall look at the teachings of Malcolm X. He believes “fear born from threats of violence may be the only thing that will be able to shake the system” (Pg. 613, 2nd paragraph on column 2). Malcolms first concept is self defense, where individuals have the right to “see that our lives and our property is protected” (Pg. 631, 1st paragraph on column2). In some cases, he believes its okay to use violence to bring justice if the system is unjust, which he talks about in his second concept. In Malcolms last two concepts, he explains that the oppressor doesnt understand a peaceful language, but will only cooperate when the victim uses force of violence. Another concept he stresses on is that individuals should fight united as a group; its not a one-man job. Dont get Malcolm wrong; in his quote “by any means necessary”, he not only talks about violent attacks, but “means of international politics. In the end of his speech, Malcolm states “I dont care what color you are, as long as you want to change this miserable condition that exists on this earth” (Pg. 633, last paragraph on column 1). In life, individuals face oppressors and they must learn to defend themselves in order to survive.
Although Gandhi and King have