MLK takes the non-violent civil disobediance stand much like other political activists before him had in india, south africa, and other countries around the world. He stated that laws should be broken if they were unjust but no one should be harmed. He was working for equal rights much like the black panthers were. However, the black panthers took a more radical and modern stance of "by any means nessisary." This stance followed the rebelion of anti-imperialists throughout history and was not against the use of force in any way. The goal was the same for both parties but the means were on complete opposite ends of the spectrum
MLK and the civil rights movement calls for nonviolent civil disobedience claming that "an unjust law is no law at all" and that the tension caused by these activities will create the dialouge that forces confrontation to the issue leading to an increased conciousness and positive change. MLK declared for steps to a nonviolent campaign inwhich the civil rights movement followed: research, negotiation, self-purification and direct action. The direct action (aka civil disobedience) was the last possible option. The Black Panther Party, possessing a platform of social justice issues originally struggling only for the rights of Blacks and maturing on to struggling for all oppressed peoples. The Black Panther Party used mitilatiralistic action as well as social h=justice through literature, culture, and community action. They argued that they must take their rights and freedom as they are not freely given when they are controlled by an oppressing class. MLK agreed with that, “We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed.” That is where The BPP and MLK and the civil rights movement agreed: the American system is oppressive and must be revolutioized through action of some kind because the otherways are not working against such a capitalistic beast.
The black panthers believed that MLK was settling and was soft with his demands. While MLK believed in peaceful relationships with the whites and the black panthers wanted something completely different. The Black panthers believed that they were not welcome in this country so they wanted to separate themselves from the whites completely. THey wanted to live in a society where the blacks were in control of their own lives.
I totally agree with my guy. On my mama he right. If laws are unjust toward a certain race or creed of people, and if that law isn't abandoned or abolished, it should be dealt with in the most appropriate way. In this, and many other cases, a PEACEFUL protest was the most apprpriate way to handle these inequalities, and like always, it got out of hand. I also agree with the Black Panthers in this case. The opressor is steadily, politely knocking on the door, asking for peace and equality. If blacks just keep constantly, peacefully and politely asking, and these reasonable requests aren't being met, KICK THE DAM DOOR DOWN. And this is somewhat of the approach that the Black Panthers took; "By any means necessary."
Mlk talk about the non-vilonet civil disobediance stuff. Whle the black panthers were walking around with guns on their shoulders, they didnt think they were welcomed into the country and wanted to change that by "any means necessary." Alls they wanted to do were to be their own person, controlled by nobody...thats all i got to say.
MLK says that the nonviolent civil disobedience movement was to break the false laws to get to the real laws because any law that is delayed has been denied. And that by waiting, it's not getting the community anywhere. The Black Panther Party uses mitilatiralistic action to prove their point to take their freedom from the oppressing class. They wanted to overthrow white institutions and create their own for a new start. But MLK and the Black Panthers are similar because they wanted to expand their point of views to educate the society to upbring a new and better revolution.
MLK is said to be one of the best protest leaders. I believe that this is true do to the fact that he praticed civil disobediance. Unlike the black panther party. The black panther party and MlK both believed in black power, non-sergated social activites, equal rights for all.
While in the Birmingham Jail, MLK wrote that his Black community should take a nonviolent campaign action for civil rights. They should determine whether injustices exist, negotiate, have self-purification, and then direct action. In the Black Panther platform, it's all about wants and beliefs. MLK seems to be directing actions towards the government, demanding rights for Blacks.
In MLK's "Letter from Birmingham Jail," King advocates for non-violent civil disobedience. He explains the various steps of a nonviolent campaign, and he states that African Americans can no longer "wait" for their freedom. King regards everyone who lives in the United States as equals. He says that "whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly." King doesn't elevate his race by putting down other races, instead, he advocates that everyone is equal. King even wants the "white moderate" to support African Americans in their fight for their overdue justice and freedom.
When King talks of non-violent civil disobedience, he talks about breaking "unjust laws." "Unjust laws" are laws which "degrade human personality" and are laws that is "out of harmony with the natural law." King believes that oppressed people will not remain oppressed forever. King wants equality and justice for everyone who lives in America, and he feels that direct action needs to be taken because it is necessary for changes to occur.
In the Black Panther Platform, although the Black Panthers also call for immediate action towards the issue of blacks being victims of injustice and segregation like MLK, the Black Panther Platform differs by calling for "Black Power." Instead of advocating that everyone in the U.S. should be equal and should have justice, the Black Panthers wanted to separate blacks from their white counterparts. The Black Panthers wanted to give blacks their rights through violence, instead of through non-violent civil-disobedience like MLK.
In conlusion, although MLK and the Black Panthers both advocated for black rights, their ways of achieving these rights differ in that MLK opted for non-violent disobedience, and he supported the idea that EVERYONE was equal, while the Black Panthers would fight for justice "through any means," and they advocated "Black power."
Martin Luther King and the Black Panthers were similar in the reasons that they wanted justice, equal rights, and desegregation for Blacks. Although their aim are the same, the differ on how to approach it. MLK advocated non violent civil disobebience against unjust laws, laws that degrade one kind of people from another. MLK wanted equalities for everyone, not just only blacks or whites. His approach to the civil rights movement is peaceful and non violent. MLK visioned of a diverse America where citizens may live equally. The Black Panthers took a different action towards fighting for blacks' rights. They were more forceful. The Black Panthers wanted separation from the white. They believed in doing anything "by any means necessary" to give blacks rights.
MLK adopts the non-violent civil disobediance route instead of using violence to stand up for his rights. HE is taking he route just like Gandhi did, non-violent. MLK said that "an njust law is no law at all" meaning that if the law they should be broken but in a way that nobody should be hurt in the process. The Black PAnthers took an entirly diffrent wasy of it they chose to settle things with violence. They would take a stand by any means necessary. They wanted to seperate themselfs from the white completly because they thought that they were not welcolmed at all. They wanted to be in control and have nobody else be in controll of them.
MLK was non-violent,which was totally opposite of the Black Panther,who carried around guns and were violent.Both wanted the same thing,but used different methods.I think MLK's way was better!!
MLK promoted nonviolence civil disobediance. Like the black panthers he wanted rights, but he believed that all these goals should not be achieved through violence. MLK wanted to follow the four steps of a nonviolent campaign, which were establishing where the injustices were, negotiation, self purification and direct action. MLK believed that the black panthers were filled with hatred, they just wanted to blame someone, and they had lost faith in America. MLK thought that they should abandon their violent ways and turn to nonviolence. MLK wanted the blacks and which to work together. The black panthers however believed that the black community should almost be isolated from the white people. They wanted their money to circulate within their groups and be employed by people in their community. They wanted equal rights, but they believed that it should be done through what ever means necessary, even if that included violence.
MLK's Letter from Birmingham Jail is similar and different from the Black Panther platform for several reasons. Both concepts have the same purpose, they plead for equality. MLK takes a different way of showing that his country has been unjust. He talks about where he is (jail) and why he's there (racial inequality). He mentions God and the future and the unfairness that the Negro has had to live with. He asks for a negotiation which has for a long time been delayed. While the Black Panther platform also wants to negotiate they take a different path. The BP group wants freedom, a job like the white man, a decent place to live in, they want an opportunity to be in the military and overall they no longer want to be opressed. They don't write this in a letter format, instead it is platform of all the things they have been deprived of because of their race.
Telethia Rogers Mlk was a peaceful protester of segregation, though he believed that without forecul direct actons civil rights would not be attained which coinsides with the Black Panther platform. MLk stood up to civil disobediance which was justified by unjust laws which makes two wrongs though he was willing to follow some to an extent.On the other hand the Black Panthers just disregarded the whole idea of following these unjust lawws by creating a system of their own. More so the Black Panthers wanted to correct the injustices of racisem.
The Black Panthers advocated “Black Power.” They wanted to overthrow all white institution and install a whole new one because the current ones ignored the needs of the black man. They wanted an institution started by blacks and run by blacks for the blacks. They wanted to keep the money of the black man in the pocket of the black man. When King talks of non-violent civil disobedience, he talks about breaking "unjust laws." "Unjust laws" are laws which "degrade human personality" and are laws that is "out of harmony with the natural law." King believes that oppressed people will not remain oppressed forever. King wants equality and justice for everyone who lives in America, and he feels that direct action needs to be taken because it is necessary for changes to occur. MLK says that the nonviolent civil disobedience movement was to break the false laws to get to the real laws because any law that is delayed has been denied.
The Black Panthers are more extremist than King because they take an anti-white view and believe that American society is inherently racist, while King believes that racism is only a temporary problem that can be fixed, and that in the meantime, whites can be allies. The Black Panthers want immediate amnesty for all blacks in jail, while King tries to examine the meaning of "law" and "justice" more deeply, and is content to be put in prison as punishment for violating an unjust law. Lastly, King seems concentrated mainly on ending racism against blacks in southern American cities, while the Black Panthers more widely consider American imperialism (and its racist roots) all over the world.
Martin Luther King was one of the best civil rights leaders. He believed that the system at the time should change by going through a nonviolent system. Civil disobedience was used only if needed, to break unjust laws. He wanted everyone to live in unity without any sort of unjustice or racism. The Black Panthers took totally different approach. They believed in black power. Power that they use in any way necessary to end injustice. The Black Panthers wanted for the black community to seperate completely from the white americans and be able to live freely. Both the Black Panthers and MLK had the same vision: to end injustice. But both took a different approach as to how accomplish their goal.
I think Martin Luther King and the Black Panther Party have goals in mind with two major differences and one similarity which is to rid the nation of racism and give equal rights to the black race. However, the way each side wanted to achieve this goal was complete opposite. Both parties are going against the grain, the white majority and breaking laws. However, the main difference is MLK is nonviolent and peaceful while the Black panthers are more aggressive and militant.
Basically, MLK wanted to rid the nation of racism without means of violence, harm on any more people. The Black Panthers believed in the total opposite; they felt the way to get their ideas across was by "any means necessary," which included carrying guns and ammo with them at all times. Both MLK and the Black Panthers had one thing in common - to rid the U.S.A of racism, and to give the African-American people a chance at an equal and fair life, one that both felt they all deserved, as stated by the nation's creed that "all men are created equal."
MLK fought for African-Americans' rights by civil disobedience. He wanted people to non-vionlenty break unjust laws openly, lovingly, and with full knowledge and accpetance of the consequences. MLK thought that civil disobedience will create enough tension for the white moderate to have to deal with the issue of blacks' long-denied freedom and equality instead of repeatedly telling the black people to "wait". They have waited too long for freedom and equality to be 100 years late for the black man and MLK thought the best way to achieve that goal would be through civil disobedience. He did not want to overthrow the white institution like the Black Panthers but to live in peace with his white brothers.
The Black Pather's purpose was the same as MLK: to bring equality and freedom to blacks. But their methods and goals to reach that purpose were different. The Black Panthers wanted to kick out the white institution and replace their own black institution in its place. Their institution would be run by blacks for blacks. But unlike MLK's civil disobedience, the Black Panthers were going to achieve their goals through "any means necessary." They were not going to do peaceful sit-ins. They were going to use force and violence to get what they want because they've been oppressed too long and the time has come. The Black Panthers did not want to live peacefully with the whites. They wanted to dominate the whites for what the whites had done to them.
Martin Luther King letter from jail was about how he was for civil disobedience with out being violent. He wanted people to not follow the laws that were unjust and unfair.Him and the Black Panthers both believed in Civil Rights but they used violence instaed of non-violence. I agree with MLK's way of dealing with racism.
Martin Luther King Jr believed in a non violent movement unlike the Black panthers. The Black panthers want to separate the black community from other races and recirculate economics in the black community. They believe that blacks should have their own schools, daycares, business to support the black people and prevent children to be taught in a white suprimace structure and or setting. MLK on the other hand want every races to be intergrated together and to become one society of people no matter of race of religion.
In MLK's letter, he talks of the unjust laws that oppresses the black population. He also gives some examples of civil disobediance like Socrates, Boston Tea Party, and early christian. He list several grieven grievances of what had occurred. He ask the black minority to take non-violent actions against the unjust laws. The Black Panther platform, which is different from MLK's letter, list rights that they, Black Pathers, demand which Africans should have because they to are citizens of the United States. These demands are freedom to determine their own destiny, full employment, a payment of what the white people took from the blacks, nice housing, proper education which educates blacks of their place in society, refuse to fight for the U.S., stop to police brutality, freedom of a black prisoners, a trail by jury, and basic equality with whites. Eventhough both the documents were presented differently, both sought black's equal rights as a citizen of the United States.
MLK believed in civil disobedience and took a nonviolent approach to end racist laws. He believed African Americans should be included in the American society. The Black Panther Party advocated Black Power and walked around with guns and afros to show whites that they were proud of their race.
King talked about non-violent civil disobediance like what Ghandi did in India as well as the people in South Africa and other countries that were colonized throughout the world. By this he meant disobeying any and all unjust laws in a non-violent way willingly, with pride, and accepting the punishments they entitled. Both King and the Black Panthers wanted equality for blacks but the Black Panthers were not in favor of the non-violent civil disobediance. They wanted equality "by any means necessary." This entitled the use of force and weapons against the police and others they felt were oppressing them. Same goal, different means of getting to it.
King's stand on Civil Rights is very peaceful. In his letter, he builds his ethical appeal to the white leaders he is writing to. King uses his background in a higher education as well as being president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. This ethical appeal makes the readers of King's letter see him as an erudite individual, not just some radical. In contrast, the Black Panther's only speak of race. They build a line between the black and white races, making the whites who feel superior view the Black Panthers as violent revolutionaries.
MLK was a civil rights activist against racial discrimination. Much like the panther party, he wanted equal rights for the minority races of America. King believed that laws were laid down to be followed, but if a unjust one appeared then it was meant to be broken. He also believed that the time was now to take action, seeing as how his people had been waiting since the Revolution.
Much like MLK, the Black Panther Party believed in equal rights for minortiy races of America. However, they were known to be the more radical activists. They wore their afros big, black leather jackets, and,unlike the belief of MLK in nonviolent protest, carried guns and would "by any means necessary" protect themselves. Whereas MLK was known to quote from scholars and use Biblical allusions, the Panthers chose to quote from Mao.
There is one unifying belief between the two: the time is know for action to be taken. Their people have waited long enough and they weren't going to wait another 100 years.
MLK advocates civil disobedience throught the civil rights movement. he encourages sit-ins and marches to spread the ideas of the movement. while standing up for the rights of the oppressed african americans of the time, he also wants to end and "fix" ALL unjust laws, not only limiting the movement to just the unjust laws towards the african american race. although the Black Panthers also want equality for blacks, they go about it in a completly different way than MLK. while MLK encourages nonviolence, the BPP wants immediate action "by any means necessary." they are not interested in nonviolent acts or sit-ins. they carry guns and want action NOW. also, in the Black Panther Platform, all of their goals begin with "we want" and only deal with the "wants" of the black race and no other. their only concern is for the african americans. however different their methods are from one another, MLK and the BBP, both have one main goal- to bring equality to the african american race.
MLK protest is a non-violent one. He wants to break the laws using Civil Disobedience. he was for peace. He wanted Blacks to be on the level of everyone else. He used the American Dream and related it to the Black man's Dream.The Black panthers were al about force and rebilions to protest. they believed in black power. Their primary focus was the black an and his sufers. They wanted what was promised to Blacks.
OKAY... I am already well versed with this particular piece of writing from the late-great Dr. King so this should be a piece of cake. :-) No but the main difference between him and the Black Panther party was that King was totally unconfrontational. He felt nonviolent protesting was thee most effective way to gain results. Now on the other side of the spectrum, u had the black panther who openly flaunted guns to overly establish their constitutional right to "bare arms." Both were assertive and upfront with their fight for rights but the Black panthers chose a violent route ranther than a nonviolent one.
As we learned in class, there was an intense contrast between the views of Martin Luther King Jr. and the Black Panther party. While King focused on civil disobedience and peaceful means of changing the law, the Black Panther party highly disagreed with these tactics, promoting black pride. While the Black Panthers would reach their goals by any means necessary, MLK made sure that he did not take the offensive. The Black Panthers thought that if they could be as black as they could be, white people would be afraid of them, so they sported huge afros and openly toted weapons in city streets. Even though they were fighting for the same cause, MLK and the Black Panthers had very different tactics.
MLK believed that injustice anywhere was a threat to justice everywhere and that in order to make things right there was a process to go through( finding out weather there was indeed injustice occuring was the first while direct action was the last. THis process included civil disobedience when it came to direct action. MLK was all about non violence, but the black panther party on the other hand felt differently. They didn't see why all of a sudden since they were fighting for black rights that the violence had to stop. Although it wasn;t there first option they felat that the US has been using violence all throughout there history to get what they wanted. THe Black Panthers were only fighting for what they deserved and were entitled to so they went by a "by any meens nessecary" model, which was just more rebellioius then MLK civil disobediance wasys.
MLK writes the letter to the clergymen to tell them that there is completely injustice that can only be stopped by non-violent campaign that he's been putting together. There are four basic steps, which are: collection of the facts to determine whether injustices exist; negotiation; self-purification; and direct action. MLK believed that people should rise up and use a non-violent approach to stand up to the injustice government and it's laws. MLK was also working towards a more equal society between every race and not just one particular race.
On the other hand the Black Panther movement people took a more rebellious appraoch to getting black equality. The Black Panthers wanted to determine what they did themselves rather then anyone else trying to determine it for them. "We want full employment for our people", stands out to me because this is a prime eaxmple of how the Black Panthers and MLK are dissimilar. The Panthers were more about "our people" rather then everyone whereas MLK wanted everyone to be equal. They both had the idea that there was injustce within the United States but MLK was more non-violent with his approach and the Black Panthers were far more forceful to get the message across with what they wanted.
Martin Luhter King and his civil rights fight followed the historical path of non-violent civil disobedience, that of Gandhi before him. It focused on changing laws that were blatantly unconstitutional or just wrong, yet it achieved this in a less radical way. The Mongomery BUs Boycott is the classic example of MLK's goal. He and many others in the south saw the segregation of public city buses as unjust and decided to halt all African American use until things changed. It was a somewhat passive way of changing the injustices of soiety but produced the results that were wanted. The Black Panthers took the strong-arm side of civil rights to the extreme. They wore leather and afros and carried guns purely for intimidation. They wanted to scare politicial into making the changes African Americans wanted. They used the moto "By any means neccesary," exemplifying an urgency for change that didn't call for peaceful measures.
Like the other political activists, Martin Luther fells that if the law are not right with the people they should be broken. This will lessen the dealth, protest, and harm. Like Martin Luther the black panthers fought for aganist the unjust law. They both also felt the American system should be revolutionized. The Black panthers however, followed the "by any means neccessary" quote. This was to do any thing possible to fight againist the man (whites).Unlike MLK, the Black panthers fought back. They armed them selves, because they felt that if the whites didn't allow them to live together then seperation was neccessary.
MLK and the black panthers were both about getting equal rights for african-americans. However, the ways in which they went about getting them were not the same. The difference between MLK's and the black panther platforms is that MLK took the non-violent civil disobedient path to civil rights, where as the black panthers were not about non-violent procedures in taking strides towards gaining more civil rights. MLK was also about becoming equal and integrated with the white communities where was the black panthers were more about becoming equal but still seperate from the white community. The black panthers thought it was more important for african-americans to rise to power and build their own businesses etc. in their own communities.
Martin Luther King displayed great confident and courage in his attempts to stand against the discriminations of whites by non-violent movements. he knew that violent will not cure the problem of racial discriminations and that the only way was that one race must understand what the others feel. the Black Panther did follow the same ideaology was with more violent. weapons and etc. were "used" to scare the whites, i think that by doing this, the white race can now understant how the other race feel and what they go through. both articles were interesting because both "party" accomplish what they attepmted to do.
I think that MLK and the NAACP did the right thing by trying to change things the non-violent way. I also think that the Black Panthers were a little oputrageous for their actions. I believe that MLK's non-violent approach to civil rights was much more effective than the Black Panthers approach to the problem.
The letter fom Martin Luther King Jr. was similar to the Black Panther movement in that both parties wanted the stop to the oppression of the African American communities around the United States. The way they wanted this to happen was very different. King took a more rational pacific approach, through sit-ins and peaceful marches. The way the Black Panthers approached the issue was through a more radical and violent way. They carried around guns and had deep hatred for the white people, which was something King didnt have or promote.
Both MLK and the Black Panthers belived that change was need across the country was need for all oppressed people. Both belived that everyone should have equal rights. The two sides differ on how to abtain these rights. MLK thought that through civil disobediance, it will force society to accept that there are oppressed people in America and they deserve as much help as anyone. The Black Panther group belived that blacks and other oppressed people should get their freedom by "any means neccesary"
Martin Luther King's statements are similar to those of the Black Panthers because of what they both want. They both want equality for the black race. They want the government to help them in improving the black community. They are different because Martin Luther King is just justifying what he has done. He, even though he shouldn't need to, is explaining his actions to the "white man". While the Black Panthers are telling the government what they want and how they want it.
MLK and the civil rights movement take a non-violent approach known as civil disobedience. He was known for writing to inspire to stand up and help break unjust laws peacefully, willing to take the sacrifice for their actions. King took a Gaundi approach to the racial problem so that he would be a part of the solution rather than part of the problem. King was out on a non-violence campaign.
The Black Panthers on the other hand used whatever they could to do what they wanted. The Black Panthers were out for a more radical, militant approach to the proposal of King. Both groups (MLK and the SCLC, and the Black Panthers) were out to gain equality for the human race, but The Black Panthers were out to get rights "by any means nessacery" this campaign took the role as the start of a Black Revolution.
MLK means for reaching equality for every race was through non-violence and civil disobedience. He wanted people to break laws that were unjust, openly and with full knowledge of the consequences. This would cause the govenment to deal with the issues of equality that were being ignored. No matter how his followers were abused or punished they were not to retaliate with violence. His methods were influenced by the India leader Ghandi. Although MLK and the Black Panthers had similar goals, which were to have equality for the black man (panthers), and equality for all men (MLK), they had completely different means.
The Black PAnthers wanted equality by "any means neccessary." If they had to use violence then they would. Black Panthers wanted black institutions created by blacks, ran by blacks, and only for blacks that would allow the black man to keep his money in the pockets of the black man. They did not want to become a part of the white society like MLK. They were going to create their own. They knew economic freedom wouldn't come easy therefore they would have to use violence to get what they wanted
Both the Letter from the Birmingham jail and the patform for the Black panther party call for action against the injustices done to Black people by their white oppressors. Though they have the same purpose- gaining civil rights for Blacks- the two school go in different directions on the way that they want to achieve their goals and what will be the state of the Black community afterwords. Dr. King speaks to his colleagues in the Southern Christian Leadership Committee(?) that it is impossible for the blacks to continue to wait if tehy hope to achieve anything. He goes on to say that they have been patiently waiting for too long and nothing has happened. He discribes the mode of action they must take in order to gain the civil rights that are promised by the Constitution. The Black Panthers want a separate community from the whites that is financially supported by the whites becasue the slaves were promised forty acres and two mules at the end of slavery. They put out a set of guidelines by which the white man was to support their efforts on gaining their retributions. They were more separatists than the unifying King was.
King's letter from the birmingham jail is quite similar to the black panther reform becuase of the fact that it addresses and highlights the issues of the time period pretaining to blacks and any other group whos civil rights were violated. From here these two pieces urgently ask for change to occur. King and the Black Panthers, after outlining what they see as faults, state in steps what needs to be done and how it can be achieved, along with how it will affect the nation and the world. - QUENTIN M
MLK was a very important activist in the Civil Rights Movement. What he said was similar to that of the Black Panthers because they both demanded and fought for equal rights in the black community. The only difference is that MLK took a strictly non-violent position to show the demand. He used civil disobedience to get his point across. The Black Panthers preferred to walk around with a different attitude. They walked around with concealed weapons and were deliberately very violent. They demanded for what they wanted not by asking or being peaceful, but by using violence instead. So basically, both MLK and the Black Panthers asked for equality from the white man. While one did it on a non-violent stand, the others did the exact opposite.
Both MLK and the Black Panthers wanted to stop the oppression of blacks in society. MLK used methods like civil disobedience but the Panthers were much more radical. They didn't think that protests were enough and had the whole "by any means necessary" stance. The black panthers don't seem to believe in raial equality. They want all those things for blacks but what about poor white folks? MLK wanted equality for everyone.
MLK was more non violent than the Black Panthers but they had the same basic foundation of the ideas that they wanted. MLK and the black panthers were both civil disobedient but sometimes things didn't work out all the time so the Black Panthers were more violent.Both MLK and the black panthers knew that what was going on wasn't right and they had to stand up but the only difference was that MLK went about it in a non-violent way, which wasn't nessessarily the case with the Black Panthers.
The black panther platform and MLK's letter are similar b/c they both present the struggle and demands of the African american ppl. Both present the white man as someone who thinks he is superior to those of different natioalities, and by presenting their wants they expose what evils the white man has lashed upon others and how the white man has limited others. on the oher hand MLK felt that everything should be acheived in a non-violent way whereas the black panthers felt that justice only comes by violence BP felt that they had to act out in order to get what they want.MLK stayed violence free even when evil was done unto him.Both feel laws should be broken if they are unjustified.
MLK JR declared these nonviolent steps for a civil rights movements: negotiation, direct action ( civil disobedience), negotiation, and self-purification. MLKs philosophy was similar to other nonviolent activists such as Ghandi. The Black Panthers were also fighting prejudice and unjust laws, but they were more radical and were not against using physical force. Both parties have some valid points, and while id like to take the peaceful side, id be pretty pissed off if i was as opressed as Af. Americans in this era.
MLK's thoughts/beliefs were for civil disobdience and non violent breaking of laws. He wanted to equalize all people but he wanted to do it without force. The Black Panthers were the opposite. They didn't care if they had to hurt people they wanted to get their point across. They were similar by both having the same point to pursue but doing it different ways.
52 comments:
MLK takes the non-violent civil disobediance stand much like other political activists before him had in india, south africa, and other countries around the world. He stated that laws should be broken if they were unjust but no one should be harmed. He was working for equal rights much like the black panthers were. However, the black panthers took a more radical and modern stance of "by any means nessisary." This stance followed the rebelion of anti-imperialists throughout history and was not against the use of force in any way. The goal was the same for both parties but the means were on complete opposite ends of the spectrum
MLK and the civil rights movement calls for nonviolent civil disobedience claming that "an unjust law is no law at all" and that the tension caused by these activities will create the dialouge that forces confrontation to the issue leading to an increased conciousness and positive change. MLK declared for steps to a nonviolent campaign inwhich the civil rights movement followed: research, negotiation, self-purification and direct action. The direct action (aka civil disobedience) was the last possible option.
The Black Panther Party, possessing a platform of social justice issues originally struggling only for the rights of Blacks and maturing on to struggling for all oppressed peoples. The Black Panther Party used mitilatiralistic action as well as social h=justice through literature, culture, and community action. They argued that they must take their rights and freedom as they are not freely given when they are controlled by an oppressing class.
MLK agreed with that, “We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed.”
That is where The BPP and MLK and the civil rights movement agreed: the American system is oppressive and must be revolutioized through action of some kind because the otherways are not working against such a capitalistic beast.
The black panthers believed that MLK was settling and was soft with his demands. While MLK believed in peaceful relationships with the whites and the black panthers wanted something completely different. The Black panthers believed that they were not welcome in this country so they wanted to separate themselves from the whites completely. THey wanted to live in a society where the blacks were in control of their own lives.
I totally agree with my guy. On my mama he right. If laws are unjust toward a certain race or creed of people, and if that law isn't abandoned or abolished, it should be dealt with in the most appropriate way. In this, and many other cases, a PEACEFUL protest was the most apprpriate way to handle these inequalities, and like always, it got out of hand. I also agree with the Black Panthers in this case. The opressor is steadily, politely knocking on the door, asking for peace and equality. If blacks just keep constantly, peacefully and politely asking, and these reasonable requests aren't being met, KICK THE DAM DOOR DOWN. And this is somewhat of the approach that the Black Panthers took; "By any means necessary."
SRL hr. 3
Mlk talk about the non-vilonet civil disobediance stuff. Whle the black panthers were walking around with guns on their shoulders, they didnt think they were welcomed into the country and wanted to change that by "any means necessary." Alls they wanted to do were to be their own person, controlled by nobody...thats all i got to say.
MLK says that the nonviolent civil disobedience movement was to break the false laws to get to the real laws because any law that is delayed has been denied. And that by waiting, it's not getting the community anywhere. The Black Panther Party uses mitilatiralistic action to prove their point to take their freedom from the oppressing class. They wanted to overthrow white institutions and create their own for a new start.
But MLK and the Black Panthers are similar because they wanted to expand their point of views to educate the society to upbring a new and better revolution.
MLK is said to be one of the best protest leaders. I believe that this is true do to the fact that he praticed civil disobediance. Unlike the black panther party. The black panther party and MlK both believed in black power, non-sergated social activites, equal rights for all.
While in the Birmingham Jail, MLK wrote that his Black community should take a nonviolent campaign action for civil rights. They should determine whether injustices exist, negotiate, have self-purification, and then direct action. In the Black Panther platform, it's all about wants and beliefs. MLK seems to be directing actions towards the government, demanding rights for Blacks.
In MLK's "Letter from Birmingham Jail," King advocates for non-violent civil disobedience. He explains the various steps of a nonviolent campaign, and he states that African Americans can no longer "wait" for their freedom. King regards everyone who lives in the United States as equals. He says that "whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly." King doesn't elevate his race by putting down other races, instead, he advocates that everyone is equal. King even wants the "white moderate" to support African Americans in their fight for their overdue justice and freedom.
When King talks of non-violent civil disobedience, he talks about breaking "unjust laws." "Unjust laws" are laws which "degrade human personality" and are laws that is "out of harmony with the natural law." King believes that oppressed people will not remain oppressed forever. King wants equality and justice for everyone who lives in America, and he feels that direct action needs to be taken because it is necessary for changes to occur.
In the Black Panther Platform, although the Black Panthers also call for immediate action towards the issue of blacks being victims of injustice and segregation like MLK, the Black Panther Platform differs by calling for "Black Power." Instead of advocating that everyone in the U.S. should be equal and should have justice, the Black Panthers wanted to separate blacks from their white counterparts. The Black Panthers wanted to give blacks their rights through violence, instead of through non-violent civil-disobedience like MLK.
In conlusion, although MLK and the Black Panthers both advocated for black rights, their ways of achieving these rights differ in that MLK opted for non-violent disobedience, and he supported the idea that EVERYONE was equal, while the Black Panthers would fight for justice "through any means," and they advocated "Black power."
Martin Luther King and the Black Panthers were similar in the reasons that they wanted justice, equal rights, and desegregation for Blacks. Although their aim are the same, the differ on how to approach it. MLK advocated non violent civil disobebience against unjust laws, laws that degrade one kind of people from another. MLK wanted equalities for everyone, not just only blacks or whites. His approach to the civil rights movement is peaceful and non violent. MLK visioned of a diverse America where citizens may live equally. The Black Panthers took a different action towards fighting for blacks' rights. They were more forceful. The Black Panthers wanted separation from the white. They believed in doing anything "by any means necessary" to give blacks rights.
MLK adopts the non-violent civil disobediance route instead of using violence to stand up for his rights. HE is taking he route just like Gandhi did, non-violent. MLK said that "an njust law is no law at all" meaning that if the law they should be broken but in a way that nobody should be hurt in the process. The Black PAnthers took an entirly diffrent wasy of it they chose to settle things with violence. They would take a stand by any means necessary. They wanted to seperate themselfs from the white completly because they thought that they were not welcolmed at all. They wanted to be in control and have nobody else be in controll of them.
ryan mayer hr.2-2
MLK was non-violent,which was totally opposite of the Black Panther,who carried around guns and were violent.Both wanted the same thing,but used different methods.I think MLK's way was better!!
MLK promoted nonviolence civil disobediance. Like the black panthers he wanted rights, but he believed that all these goals should not be achieved through violence. MLK wanted to follow the four steps of a nonviolent campaign, which were establishing where the injustices were, negotiation, self purification and direct action. MLK believed that the black panthers were filled with hatred, they just wanted to blame someone, and they had lost faith in America. MLK thought that they should abandon their violent ways and turn to nonviolence.
MLK wanted the blacks and which to work together. The black panthers however believed that the black community should almost be isolated from the white people. They wanted their money to circulate within their groups and be employed by people in their community. They wanted equal rights, but they believed that it should be done through what ever means necessary, even if that included violence.
MLK's Letter from Birmingham Jail is similar and different from the Black Panther platform for several reasons. Both concepts have the same purpose, they plead for equality. MLK takes a different way of showing that his country has been unjust. He talks about where he is (jail) and why he's there (racial inequality). He mentions God and the future and the unfairness that the Negro has had to live with. He asks for a negotiation which has for a long time been delayed. While the Black Panther platform also wants to negotiate they take a different path. The BP group wants freedom, a job like the white man, a decent place to live in, they want an opportunity to be in the military and overall they no longer want to be opressed. They don't write this in a letter format, instead it is platform of all the things they have been deprived of because of their race.
Telethia Rogers
Mlk was a peaceful protester of segregation, though he believed that without forecul direct actons civil rights would not be attained which coinsides with the Black Panther platform. MLk stood up to civil disobediance which was justified by unjust laws which makes two wrongs though he was willing to follow some to an extent.On the other hand the Black Panthers just disregarded the whole idea of following these unjust lawws by creating a system of their own. More so the Black Panthers wanted to correct the injustices of racisem.
The Black Panthers advocated “Black Power.” They wanted to overthrow all white institution and install a whole new one because the current ones ignored the needs of the black man. They wanted an institution started by blacks and run by blacks for the blacks. They wanted to keep the money of the black man in the pocket of the black man.
When King talks of non-violent civil disobedience, he talks about breaking "unjust laws." "Unjust laws" are laws which "degrade human personality" and are laws that is "out of harmony with the natural law." King believes that oppressed people will not remain oppressed forever. King wants equality and justice for everyone who lives in America, and he feels that direct action needs to be taken because it is necessary for changes to occur. MLK says that the nonviolent civil disobedience movement was to break the false laws to get to the real laws because any law that is delayed has been denied.
The Black Panthers are more extremist than King because they take an anti-white view and believe that American society is inherently racist, while King believes that racism is only a temporary problem that can be fixed, and that in the meantime, whites can be allies. The Black Panthers want immediate amnesty for all blacks in jail, while King tries to examine the meaning of "law" and "justice" more deeply, and is content to be put in prison as punishment for violating an unjust law. Lastly, King seems concentrated mainly on ending racism against blacks in southern American cities, while the Black Panthers more widely consider American imperialism (and its racist roots) all over the world.
Martin Luther King was one of the best civil rights leaders. He believed that the system at the time should change by going through a nonviolent system. Civil disobedience was used only if needed, to break unjust laws. He wanted everyone to live in unity without any sort of unjustice or racism. The Black Panthers took totally different approach. They believed in black power. Power that they use in any way necessary to end injustice. The Black Panthers wanted for the black community to seperate completely from the white americans and be able to live freely. Both the Black Panthers and MLK had the same vision: to end injustice. But both took a different approach as to how accomplish their goal.
I think Martin Luther King and the Black Panther Party have goals in mind with two major differences and one similarity which is to rid the nation of racism and give equal rights to the black race. However, the way each side wanted to achieve this goal was complete opposite. Both parties are going against the grain, the white majority and breaking laws. However, the main difference is MLK is nonviolent and peaceful while the Black panthers are more aggressive and militant.
Basically, MLK wanted to rid the nation of racism without means of violence, harm on any more people. The Black Panthers believed in the total opposite; they felt the way to get their ideas across was by "any means necessary," which included carrying guns and ammo with them at all times.
Both MLK and the Black Panthers had one thing in common - to rid the U.S.A of racism, and to give the African-American people a chance at an equal and fair life, one that both felt they all deserved, as stated by the nation's creed that "all men are created equal."
MLK fought for African-Americans' rights by civil disobedience. He wanted people to non-vionlenty break unjust laws openly, lovingly, and with full knowledge and accpetance of the consequences. MLK thought that civil disobedience will create enough tension for the white moderate to have to deal with the issue of blacks' long-denied freedom and equality instead of repeatedly telling the black people to "wait". They have waited too long for freedom and equality to be 100 years late for the black man and MLK thought the best way to achieve that goal would be through civil disobedience. He did not want to overthrow the white institution like the Black Panthers but to live in peace with his white brothers.
The Black Pather's purpose was the same as MLK: to bring equality and freedom to blacks. But their methods and goals to reach that purpose were different. The Black Panthers wanted to kick out the white institution and replace their own black institution in its place. Their institution would be run by blacks for blacks. But unlike MLK's civil disobedience, the Black Panthers were going to achieve their goals through "any means necessary." They were not going to do peaceful sit-ins. They were going to use force and violence to get what they want because they've been oppressed too long and the time has come. The Black Panthers did not want to live peacefully with the whites. They wanted to dominate the whites for what the whites had done to them.
Martin Luther King letter from jail was about how he was for civil disobedience with out being violent. He wanted people to not follow the laws that were unjust and unfair.Him and the Black Panthers both believed in Civil Rights but they used violence instaed of non-violence. I agree with MLK's way of dealing with racism.
Martin Luther King Jr believed in a non violent movement unlike the Black panthers. The Black panthers want to separate the black community from other races and recirculate economics in the black community. They believe that blacks should have their own schools, daycares, business to support the black people and prevent children to be taught in a white suprimace structure and or setting. MLK on the other hand want every races to be intergrated together and to become one society of people no matter of race of religion.
In MLK's letter, he talks of the unjust laws that oppresses the black population. He also gives some examples of civil disobediance like Socrates, Boston Tea Party, and early christian. He list several grieven grievances of what had occurred. He ask the black minority to take non-violent actions against the unjust laws. The Black Panther platform, which is different from MLK's letter, list rights that they, Black Pathers, demand which Africans should have because they to are citizens of the United States. These demands are freedom to determine their own destiny, full employment, a payment of what the white people took from the blacks, nice housing, proper education which educates blacks of their place in society, refuse to fight for the U.S., stop to police brutality, freedom of a black prisoners, a trail by jury, and basic equality with whites. Eventhough both the documents were presented differently, both sought black's equal rights as a citizen of the United States.
MLK believed in civil disobedience and took a nonviolent approach to end racist laws. He believed African Americans should be included in the American society. The Black Panther Party advocated Black Power and walked around with guns and afros to show whites that they were proud of their race.
King talked about non-violent civil disobediance like what Ghandi did in India as well as the people in South Africa and other countries that were colonized throughout the world. By this he meant disobeying any and all unjust laws in a non-violent way willingly, with pride, and accepting the punishments they entitled. Both King and the Black Panthers wanted equality for blacks but the Black Panthers were not in favor of the non-violent civil disobediance. They wanted equality "by any means necessary." This entitled the use of force and weapons against the police and others they felt were oppressing them. Same goal, different means of getting to it.
King's stand on Civil Rights is very peaceful. In his letter, he builds his ethical appeal to the white leaders he is writing to. King uses his background in a higher education as well as being president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. This ethical appeal makes the readers of King's letter see him as an erudite individual, not just some radical. In contrast, the Black Panther's only speak of race. They build a line between the black and white races, making the whites who feel superior view the Black Panthers as violent revolutionaries.
MLK was a civil rights activist against racial discrimination. Much like the panther party, he wanted equal rights for the minority races of America. King believed that laws were laid down to be followed, but if a unjust one appeared then it was meant to be broken. He also believed that the time was now to take action, seeing as how his people had been waiting since the Revolution.
Much like MLK, the Black Panther Party believed in equal rights for minortiy races of America. However, they were known to be the more radical activists. They wore their afros big, black leather jackets, and,unlike the belief of MLK in nonviolent protest, carried guns and would "by any means necessary" protect themselves. Whereas MLK was known to quote from scholars and use Biblical allusions, the Panthers chose to quote from Mao.
There is one unifying belief between the two: the time is know for action to be taken. Their people have waited long enough and they weren't going to wait another 100 years.
MLK advocates civil disobedience throught the civil rights movement. he encourages sit-ins and marches to spread the ideas of the movement. while standing up for the rights of the oppressed african americans of the time, he also wants to end and "fix" ALL unjust laws, not only limiting the movement to just the unjust laws towards the african american race.
although the Black Panthers also want equality for blacks, they go about it in a completly different way than MLK. while MLK encourages nonviolence, the BPP wants immediate action "by any means necessary." they are not interested in nonviolent acts or sit-ins. they carry guns and want action NOW. also, in the Black Panther Platform, all of their goals begin with "we want" and only deal with the "wants" of the black race and no other. their only concern is for the african americans. however different their methods are from one another, MLK and the BBP, both have one main goal- to bring equality to the african american race.
MLK protest is a non-violent one. He wants to break the laws using Civil Disobedience. he was for peace. He wanted Blacks to be on the level of everyone else. He used the American Dream and related it to the Black man's Dream.The Black panthers were al about force and rebilions to protest. they believed in black power. Their primary focus was the black an and his sufers. They wanted what was promised to Blacks.
OKAY... I am already well versed with this particular piece of writing from the late-great Dr. King so this should be a piece of cake. :-) No but the main difference between him and the Black Panther party was that King was totally unconfrontational. He felt nonviolent protesting was thee most effective way to gain results. Now on the other side of the spectrum, u had the black panther who openly flaunted guns to overly establish their constitutional right to "bare arms." Both were assertive and upfront with their fight for rights but the Black panthers chose a violent route ranther than a nonviolent one.
As we learned in class, there was an intense contrast between the views of Martin Luther King Jr. and the Black Panther party. While King focused on civil disobedience and peaceful means of changing the law, the Black Panther party highly disagreed with these tactics, promoting black pride. While the Black Panthers would reach their goals by any means necessary, MLK made sure that he did not take the offensive. The Black Panthers thought that if they could be as black as they could be, white people would be afraid of them, so they sported huge afros and openly toted weapons in city streets. Even though they were fighting for the same cause, MLK and the Black Panthers had very different tactics.
MLK believed that injustice anywhere was a threat to justice everywhere and that in order to make things right there was a process to go through( finding out weather there was indeed injustice occuring was the first while direct action was the last. THis process included civil disobedience when it came to direct action. MLK was all about non violence, but the black panther party on the other hand felt differently. They didn't see why all of a sudden since they were fighting for black rights that the violence had to stop. Although it wasn;t there first option they felat that the US has been using violence all throughout there history to get what they wanted. THe Black Panthers were only fighting for what they deserved and were entitled to so they went by a "by any meens nessecary" model, which was just more rebellioius then MLK civil disobediance wasys.
MLK writes the letter to the clergymen to tell them that there is completely injustice that can only be stopped by non-violent campaign that he's been putting together. There are four basic steps, which are: collection of the facts to determine whether injustices exist; negotiation; self-purification; and direct action. MLK believed that people should rise up and use a non-violent approach to stand up to the injustice government and it's laws. MLK was also working towards a more equal society between every race and not just one particular race.
On the other hand the Black Panther movement people took a more rebellious appraoch to getting black equality. The Black Panthers wanted to determine what they did themselves rather then anyone else trying to determine it for them. "We want full employment for our people", stands out to me because this is a prime eaxmple of how the Black Panthers and MLK are dissimilar. The Panthers were more about "our people" rather then everyone whereas MLK wanted everyone to be equal. They both had the idea that there was injustce within the United States but MLK was more non-violent with his approach and the Black Panthers were far more forceful to get the message across with what they wanted.
Martin Luhter King and his civil rights fight followed the historical path of non-violent civil disobedience, that of Gandhi before him. It focused on changing laws that were blatantly unconstitutional or just wrong, yet it achieved this in a less radical way. The Mongomery BUs Boycott is the classic example of MLK's goal. He and many others in the south saw the segregation of public city buses as unjust and decided to halt all African American use until things changed. It was a somewhat passive way of changing the injustices of soiety but produced the results that were wanted. The Black Panthers took the strong-arm side of civil rights to the extreme. They wore leather and afros and carried guns purely for intimidation. They wanted to scare politicial into making the changes African Americans wanted. They used the moto "By any means neccesary," exemplifying an urgency for change that didn't call for peaceful measures.
Like the other political activists, Martin Luther fells that if the law are not right with the people they should be broken. This will lessen the dealth, protest, and harm. Like Martin Luther the black panthers fought for aganist the unjust law. They both also felt the American system should be revolutionized. The Black panthers however, followed the "by any means neccessary" quote. This was to do any thing possible to fight againist the man (whites).Unlike MLK, the Black panthers fought back. They armed them selves, because they felt that if the whites didn't allow them to live together then seperation was neccessary.
MLK and the black panthers were both about getting equal rights for african-americans. However, the ways in which they went about getting them were not the same. The difference between MLK's and the black panther platforms is that MLK took the non-violent civil disobedient path to civil rights, where as the black panthers were not about non-violent procedures in taking strides towards gaining more civil rights. MLK was also about becoming equal and integrated with the white communities where was the black panthers were more about becoming equal but still seperate from the white community. The black panthers thought it was more important for african-americans to rise to power and build their own businesses etc. in their own communities.
Fong of Hour 2-2
Martin Luther King displayed great confident and courage in his attempts to stand against the discriminations of whites by non-violent movements. he knew that violent will not cure the problem of racial discriminations and that the only way was that one race must understand what the others feel. the Black Panther did follow the same ideaology was with more violent. weapons and etc. were "used" to scare the whites, i think that by doing this, the white race can now understant how the other race feel and what they go through. both articles were interesting because both "party" accomplish what they attepmted to do.
I think that MLK and the NAACP did the right thing by trying to change things the non-violent way. I also think that the Black Panthers were a little oputrageous for their actions. I believe that MLK's non-violent approach to civil rights was much more effective than the Black Panthers approach to the problem.
The letter fom Martin Luther King Jr. was similar to the Black Panther movement in that both parties wanted the stop to the oppression of the African American communities around the United States. The way they wanted this to happen was very different. King took a more rational pacific approach, through sit-ins and peaceful marches. The way the Black Panthers approached the issue was through a more radical and violent way. They carried around guns and had deep hatred for the white people, which was something King didnt have or promote.
Both MLK and the Black Panthers belived that change was need across the country was need for all oppressed people. Both belived that everyone should have equal rights. The two sides differ on how to abtain these rights. MLK thought that through civil disobediance, it will force society to accept that there are oppressed people in America and they deserve as much help as anyone. The Black Panther group belived that blacks and other oppressed people should get their freedom by "any means neccesary"
Martin Luther King's statements are similar to those of the Black Panthers because of what they both want. They both want equality for the black race. They want the government to help them in improving the black community. They are different because Martin Luther King is just justifying what he has done. He, even though he shouldn't need to, is explaining his actions to the "white man". While the Black Panthers are telling the government what they want and how they want it.
MLK and the civil rights movement take a non-violent approach known as civil disobedience. He was known for writing to inspire to stand up and help break unjust laws peacefully, willing to take the sacrifice for their actions. King took a Gaundi approach to the racial problem so that he would be a part of the solution rather than part of the problem. King was out on a non-violence campaign.
The Black Panthers on the other hand used whatever they could to do what they wanted. The Black Panthers were out for a more radical, militant approach to the proposal of King. Both groups (MLK and the SCLC, and the Black Panthers) were out to gain equality for the human race, but The Black Panthers were out to get rights "by any means nessacery" this campaign took the role as the start of a Black Revolution.
MLK means for reaching equality for every race was through non-violence and civil disobedience. He wanted people to break laws that were unjust, openly and with full knowledge of the consequences. This would cause the govenment to deal with the issues of equality that were being ignored. No matter how his followers were abused or punished they were not to retaliate with violence. His methods were influenced by the India leader Ghandi. Although MLK and the Black Panthers had similar goals, which were to have equality for the black man (panthers), and equality for all men (MLK), they had completely different means.
The Black PAnthers wanted equality by "any means neccessary." If they had to use violence then they would. Black Panthers wanted black institutions created by blacks, ran by blacks, and only for blacks that would allow the black man to keep his money in the pockets of the black man. They did not want to become a part of the white society like MLK. They were going to create their own. They knew economic freedom wouldn't come easy therefore they would have to use violence to get what they wanted
Both the Letter from the Birmingham jail and the patform for the Black panther party call for action against the injustices done to Black people by their white oppressors. Though they have the same purpose- gaining civil rights for Blacks- the two school go in different directions on the way that they want to achieve their goals and what will be the state of the Black community afterwords. Dr. King speaks to his colleagues in the Southern Christian Leadership Committee(?) that it is impossible for the blacks to continue to wait if tehy hope to achieve anything. He goes on to say that they have been patiently waiting for too long and nothing has happened. He discribes the mode of action they must take in order to gain the civil rights that are promised by the Constitution.
The Black Panthers want a separate community from the whites that is financially supported by the whites becasue the slaves were promised forty acres and two mules at the end of slavery. They put out a set of guidelines by which the white man was to support their efforts on gaining their retributions. They were more separatists than the unifying King was.
King's letter from the birmingham jail is quite similar to the black panther reform becuase of the fact that it addresses and highlights the issues of the time period pretaining to blacks and any other group whos civil rights were violated. From here these two pieces urgently ask for change to occur. King and the Black Panthers, after outlining what they see as faults, state in steps what needs to be done and how it can be achieved, along with how it will affect the nation and the world. - QUENTIN M
MLK was a very important activist in the Civil Rights Movement. What he said was similar to that of the Black Panthers because they both demanded and fought for equal rights in the black community. The only difference is that MLK took a strictly non-violent position to show the demand. He used civil disobedience to get his point across. The Black Panthers preferred to walk around with a different attitude. They walked around with concealed weapons and were deliberately very violent. They demanded for what they wanted not by asking or being peaceful, but by using violence instead. So basically, both MLK and the Black Panthers asked for equality from the white man. While one did it on a non-violent stand, the others did the exact opposite.
Both MLK and the Black Panthers wanted to stop the oppression of blacks in society. MLK used methods like civil disobedience but the Panthers were much more radical. They didn't think that protests were enough and had the whole "by any means necessary" stance.
The black panthers don't seem to believe in raial equality. They want all those things for blacks but what about poor white folks? MLK wanted equality for everyone.
MLK was more non violent than the Black Panthers but they had the same basic foundation of the ideas that they wanted. MLK and the black panthers were both civil disobedient but sometimes things didn't work out all the time so the Black Panthers were more violent.Both MLK and the black panthers knew that what was going on wasn't right and they had to stand up but the only difference was that MLK went about it in a non-violent way, which wasn't nessessarily the case with the Black Panthers.
The black panther platform and MLK's letter are similar b/c they both present the struggle and demands of the African american ppl. Both present the white man as someone who thinks he is superior to those of different natioalities, and by presenting their wants they expose what evils the white man has lashed upon others and how the white man has limited others.
on the oher hand MLK felt that everything should be acheived in a non-violent way whereas the black panthers felt that justice only comes by violence BP felt that they had to act out in order to get what they want.MLK stayed violence free even when evil was done unto him.Both feel laws should be broken if they are unjustified.
MLK JR declared these nonviolent steps for a civil rights movements: negotiation, direct action ( civil disobedience), negotiation, and self-purification. MLKs philosophy was similar to other nonviolent activists such as Ghandi. The Black Panthers were also fighting prejudice and unjust laws, but they were more radical and were not against using physical force. Both parties have some valid points, and while id like to take the peaceful side, id be pretty pissed off if i was as opressed as Af. Americans in this era.
MLK's thoughts/beliefs were for civil disobdience and non violent breaking of laws. He wanted to equalize all people but he wanted to do it without force. The Black Panthers were the opposite. They didn't care if they had to hurt people they wanted to get their point across. They were similar by both having the same point to pursue but doing it different ways.
Post a Comment