From the late 1950s to the late 1960s civil for blacks in remained a burning topic in media and everyday life. Two of the most influential to the movement were Martin Luther King Jr., a preacher from Atlanta, and Malcolm X, an ex-convict from Lansing, Michigan. King, during this era, was most well-known for quite literally preaching for non-violent civil disobedience to create social change. Conversely, X vouched for a violent revolution, a sort of fight fire with fire for the time. For the 1960s however, the ideals of king would be much more advantageous to the cause of the African Americans; in that they had little to no respect towards them from whites and violence would only cause more disrespect, the violent protests would also end …show more content…
"...SCLC's Operation Bread Basket... increased the income of the negro community by more than two million dollars annually..." (Doc. F) Because buying power is one of the main proponents to respect, the boycotts under King's non-violent protests increased the amount of respect, linearly increasing the effectivity of the movement. "...in winning our freedom we will, appeal to your heart and conscience so that we will win you in the process." (Doc. H) King realized the lack of equal views for blacks as human beings, he wanted to change that with the movement by playing to the white's sympathy "... the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood..." This was king's dream of the level of respect between blacks and whites, to be able to set down and eat together with a mutual respect. The nonviolence of the movement created a new respect due to the endurance of the African …show more content…
Violent protest can "...go to the point of murdering the hater, but it doesn't murder hate." The result of the Nonviolent protests under king both saved the hater and lessened thee hate."... in purely practical as well as moral terms, the American Negro has no alternative to non-violence." (Doc L) This was true, and the non-violent approach was much more well accepted by the white majority at the time. " This is non-violence at the peak of its power, when it cuts into the profit margin of a business..." (Doc. F) The non-violent protesters knew exactly what to do, exactly what would work, and exactly what would come out of it. This was a luxury that their violent counterparts did not have and is another reason as to why non-violence made more sense for the time