Why Is Martin Luther King's Non-Violent Protest

During the 1950's through the 1960's the civil rights movement was taken place in America. This movement was lead by Martin Luther King Jr. Although, what King did was amazing, I am astonished in how he achieved it. King was able to bring equality to the African American Community through non-violent protests. For a long time in my life I thought to get what you want in life you had to be behind the gun and not in front of it. But now, I see that violence only creates violence and true change comes from non-violence. I am writing this paper to argue that Martin Luther King's non-violent protest are more successful than violent protest. To start off, Martin Luther King had every right to protest. The reason I say this is because the social contract was broken. A social contract is something everyone in a society agrees on because it benefits them too. It is an agreement that sacrifices some freedoms for security. But in the 1950's African Americans were not receiving security;therefore, they were not receiving all of the benefits of the contract. Thus, any rational man would not follow the contract if they were not receiving the benefits. So it is right

King took advantage of the fact non-violent protest have a large variety of supporters. They are from all walks of life. They vary in age,race, and gender. King had young college and high school students doing sit ins, while older females would do bus boycotts. Another advantage for non-violent protest is it puts the government in a tough spot. It makes it extremely difficult for the government to interfere with the protest without it backfiring on them. Martin Luther King showed the rest of the world the way African Americans were treated down south by exposing the unlawful treatment they went through. All the way from a simple door greeter to the police. He was truly tired of being humiliated. Saying “justice too long delayed is justice