Human rights are not a privilege the rights are inherited by all humans’ beings despite nationality, residency, gender, beliefs, religion, language, or any status that may describe you. Everyone is entitled to their rights, rights are all indivisible, independent and interrelated. Thomas Jefferson declaration of independence states that all men are created equal and everyone has certain unalienable rights that no man or government should violate. Including the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Jefferson makes it crystal clear that when a government fails to protect your basic right, it is only right and your duty as a society to overthrow such government. Malcom X creates a similar argument in his speech, The Ballot or the …show more content…
When a government takes away natural rights or creates a misuse of their power. The government has caused a causable reason to take action and overthrow, or in Jefferson situation, separate themselves from that particular government. The Declaration of Independence contends that although the power to rebel is a right, the nature of people dictates that people will not go ahead and practice such actions, preferring to suffer than rebel in most situations, “it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government.” In Jefferson theories the colonies, and African American people in Malcom X’s situation, are justified to abolish or separate themselves from their government. Due to people nature to not be rebalance, Malcom became the catalyst to the change. He noted that particular year was election year, 1964, "when all of the white political crooks will be right back in your and my community ... with their false promises which they don 't intend to keep". Creating an atmosphere that they no longer will turn the other cheek any longer. He acted as a warning to the politicians, if the government failed to accommodate the African American people, the politicians would make violence inevitable. Malcom warned and predicted that if their rights were not given to them, there would be protect, a march on Washington. But this march would not be like the 1963 March on Washington, which happen to be peaceful structured and integrated, the new march would be what he described as an all-black army followed by a one-way ticket. The situation was simple, “The Ballot or the Bullet” and “it 's time for Negroes to defend
In “From Notes on the State of Virginia,” Thomas Jefferson includes some proposed alterations to the Virginia Laws and discusses some differences between blacks and whites. First, he describes one of the proposed revisions regarding slavery: All slaves born after the enactment of the alteration will be freed; they will live with their parents till a certain age, then be nurtured at public disbursement and sent out of state to form their own colonies such that intermarrying and conflicts can be avoided between blacks and whites. Next, Jefferson indicates some physical differences between blacks and whites, including skin color, hair, amount of exudates secreted by kidneys and glands, level of transpiration, structure in the pulmonary organ, amount of sleep, and calmness when facing dangers. As he notes, these differences point out that blacks are inferior to whites in terms of their bodies. In addition, Jefferson also asserts that the blacks’ reasoning and imagination are much inferior to the whites’ after he observes some of the art work and writings from the blacks. As a result, based on his observation, he draws a conclusion that whites are superior to blacks in terms of both body and mind. However, Jefferson’s use of hasty generalization, begging the question, and insulting language in his analysis is a huge flaw which ruins the credibility of his argument and offenses his readers.
There are times throughout the history of the United States when its citizens have felt the need to revolt against the government. Two such cases occurred during the time of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Henry David Thoreau. Both men courageously confronted the mighty us government; both spent time in jail as a result of their defiant actions; both men stood for a belief in a better future, and both presented their dreams through non-violent protest and civil disobedience. The similarities in their course of action are undeniable, but each man used different terms on which they based their arguments. Martin Luther King Junior's appeal through the human conscience, and Henry Thoreau's excellent use of patriotism, present similar issues in very dissimilar ways.
Thoreau 's defiant tone is evident when he bluntly claims, "It does not keep the country free. It does not settle the west. It does not educate." This defiant tone builds the readers anger toward a useless government, that as Thoreau says, "is equally liable to be abused and perverted before the people can act through it." Thoreau 's main purpose for writing Civil Disobedience is to promote resistance against the current government system, so it is local that a government that does not help the people, should not have control over the people. Similarly, Malcolm X presents a resistant and mocking attitude by acknowledging, "The white man is too intelligent to let someone else come and gain control of the economy of his community. But you will let anyone come in and take control of the economy of your community, control the housing, control the education, control the jobs, control the busines-ses... No, you outta your mind." Malcolm X presents his listener with the image of a community foolish enough to be easily controlled by someone who did not have their best interest at heart. It is a proven fact that when someone is called stupid, their is anger and resentment however Malcolm 's listeners are not angry at him because he already seen
In the 1960s, the nation was faced tumultuous times. There was racial tension between the white citizens and black citizens of America. Whites could not understand why the African Americans were so upset; they had their freedom from slavery and job opportunities. However, the African American was dissatisfied with the small crumbs of God given rights that all American citizens were entitled to. Two men propelled to the forefront of the Civil Rights Movement as leaders; Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and Malcolm X. Their agenda was to seek equal rights for all Americans. But both men differ on the approaches needed to reach these goals; one believed using nonviolence was the answer while the other advocated violence Many people argue that the
Thomas Jefferson, James Monroe, and James Madison were all members of the Democratic- Republican Party. The Democratic- Republican Party had many standards for which it was built upon. These standards included the opposition of the National Bank, tariffs, Great Britain, and the Jay Treaty. They stood for a strict constitution, states rights, and they saw the importance in the yeoman farmers. All of these things went completely against everything that their opposing Federalist party stood for. However, even though their beliefs strongly differed those of the Federalists it didn’t stop Jefferson, Monroe, or Madison from adopting Federalist ideas. These ideas included: Jefferson straying from the Democratic-Republican Party’s idea of strict constitution
“On 21 February 1965, just a few weeks after his visit to Selma, Malcolm X was assassinated. King called his murder a “great tragedy” and expressed his regret that it “occurred at a time when Malcolm X was…moving toward a greater understanding of the nonviolent movement” (King, 24 February 1965). He asserted that Malcolm’s murder deprived “the world of a potentially great leader” (King, “The Nightmare of Violence”). Malcolm’s death signaled the beginning of bitter battles involving proponents of the ideological alternatives the two men
The first inception of individual rights began with the founding fathers of the United States, who had a vision in which all citizens would have the right to live in this country without being discriminated based on race, gender, religion, or sexual preference (US Constitution, 2010). These are basic human rights for which many people lost their lives to protect as this country was formed. Nonetheless, today one lives in a society in which one must fight to continue to posses those rights once again. Similar to the rest of history, when there have many examples of individual rights were not protected.
One hundred years after the Emancipation Proclamation was written, African Americans were still fighting for equal rights in every day life. The first real success of this movement did not come until the Brown vs. Board of Education decision in 1954 which was followed by many boycotts and protests. The largest of these protests, the March on Washington, was held on August 28, 1963 “for jobs and freedom” (March on Washington 11). An incredible amount of preparation went into the event to accommodate the hundreds of thousands of people attending from around the nation and to deal with any potential incidents.
Until the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., his life’s work was dedicated to the nonviolent actions of blacks to gain the freedoms they were promised in the Emancipation Proclamation of 1863 by Abraham Lincoln. He believed that “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere” (King, 1963). These injustices had become so burdensome to blacks that they were “plunged into an abyss of despair” (King, 1963). The nonviolent actions of the sit-ins, boycotts, and marches were so the “individual could rise from the bondage of myths and half-truths…to help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism” and ultimately lead to “inevitably opening the door to negotiation” (King, 1963). Not only was King’s approach effective with the older black generation, it was also successful with white people. They did not feel threatened when approached by King. White people gained a sense of empathy towards the plight of black freedom as King’s promise of nonviolence did not threaten their livelihood. Malcolm X viewed the world similarly to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., however; his beliefs to changing the status quo were slightly different from his political counterpart. Malcolm X realized that “anger could blind human vision” (X, 1965). In realizing this, X knew that in order to achieve racial freedom blacks had to “forget hypocritical politics and propaganda” (X, 1965). While Malcolm X was more so an advocate for violent forces against white people than King, X merely used force when it became necessary for defense. According to X, “I don’t go for non-violence if it also means a delayed solution. I am for violence if non-violence means we continue postponing a solution to American black man’s problem” (X, 1965). However, this le...
Justice is often misconceived as injustice, and thus some essential matters that require more legal attentions than the others are neglected; ergo, some individuals aim to change that. The principles of civil disobedience, which are advocated in both “Civil Disobedience” by Henry David Thoreau and “Letter from Birmingham Jail” by Martin Luther King Jr. to the society, is present up to this time in the U.S. for that purpose.
On November 10th, 1963 Malcolm x released a speech called “Message to the Grassroots”. He had opened up the minds of all Africans and other nationalities. During this speech he gave everyone around him the ugly truth about America. In message to the grassroots speech Malcolm states “You are ex-slaves. You didn’t come here on the “Mayflower.” You came here on a slave ship — in chains, like a horse, or a cow, or a chicken”.The purpose to saying this was to show that the white man had brought us to america by force and not by choice. Malcolm Believed that the only way to end inequality was to start a revolution.
The Negro revolution is a stagnant fight; the black revolution is a fight with one decisive winner. In this talk of revolution he also pointed out the hypocrisy of the American people on the subject of violence. How many black people will to go war for a country that hates them and do not even want them in the country, but when a white man strikes them they turned a blind eye because “peace” is the answer. “If violence is wrong in America, violence is wrong abroad”(MalcomX, Message to the Grassroots), many people would agree with this sentiment. Why condemn those who want to fight for something they believe in using violence when we as a country are doing the same thing overseas. Later in the speech, Malcolm X calls out the modern house Negros we have today in the United States. A house Negro was the slaves who stayed in the living quarter with their master and were maids and butlers and tended to the children. The latter are the filed Negros who worked in the fields and stayed in
9). When using the definition of hate speech provided in the previous paragraph it may be construed that a standard by which it is determined would also apply to various representatives of the civil rights movement as well. In his 1964 speech titled “The Ballot or the Bullet,” Malcom X challenged leaders of the movement to develop a new strategy to effect change in the country and if not two choices were left to African Americans: change the political system through the vote, or to change prevailing social conditions through revolution, “It’ll be Molotov cocktails this month, hand grenades next month, and something else next month. It’ll be ballots or it’ll be bullets. It’ll be liberty, or it will be death” (Malcom X para. 25). Many White Americans during this period might take the argument as a threat because they may have perceived such views were those of his religious beliefs and in accordance with the Nation Islam, an organization that favored African American succession and demonization of White people. However, the Supreme Court would not have viewed his speech as
As Cohen indicated within his Arguments Against Civil Disobedience, “lawful channels may exist on paper but not in fact”, a concept which embodies society’s necessity for protest (Cohen 163). Indeed, the idea that people oftentimes have no other route than boycotts and strikes is evident throughout history. Martin Luther King, Jr., who wrote “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” after being arrested for peacefully protesting segregation in Alabama in 1963, discussed how he and his fellow resistors were left with no other choice than to rebel against the current social systems of the United States. In order to force their oppressors to gain perspective on civil rights, King and his comrades were driven to protest against “the city’s white power structure [which] left the Negro community with no alternative” (King par. 5.
All of the values that we have as Americans have stemmed from the founding of our country and have evolved with the growth and expansion of our nation. In the election of 1800 Thomas Jefferson was elected, which started a period that was known as Jeffersonian Democracy. This was the term used to express the influence of Jefferson on American politicians; however it also outlines the political culture from 1800 to the late 1820’s. In the same sense Jacksonian Democracy does the same. Andrew Jackson was elected in 1828 and his influence lasted into the Mexican War through President Polk. During these early periods the United States developed and grew into what we understand it as today. American values expanded with the country and the shift from Jeffersonian to Jacksonian Democracy produced new values.