Nonviolent Resistance Luther King Summary

Reflecting on What You Know:

Reasons for violent behavior on a personal level are mostly unnecessary and impulsive. Many people fight because of personal conflicts which can be solved in a peaceful way. For instance, my brother’s classmate has punched his face due to my brother has used his eraser without telling him, and this fight can definitely be avoided if my brother’s classmate gave my brother a few seconds to explain. Similarly, reasons for violent behaviors on a national level can sometimes be solved peacefully as well because they are not always necessary. During the war time, people fought for land, discrimination, and revenge, which are all unnecessary reasons that they can either solve from a compromise, or change the false
beliefs of themselves. However, violence can be justified when there is no peaceful solutions available for a conflict or problem. For example, it was reasonable for the U.S colonies to go to war with Britain because Britain kept abusing the colonists and refused to compromise.

Thinking Critically about This Reading:

According to King, this type of freedom is negative because “to accept passively an unjust system is to cooperate with that system.” In other words, the oppressed people are indirectly helping the oppressors enforce their abuses when they choose to give up their rights as human beings.

Questions for Study and Discussion:
King’s thesis is “Nonviolent resistance makes it possible for the Negro to remain in the South and struggle for his rights”, which means that the oppressed people should fight for their rights through nonviolent resistance.
By classifying the three types of resistance to oppression, King naturally presents the disadvantages of the resistance of violence and acquiescence as well as the advantages of nonviolence resistance. The classification makes the thesis more reasonable and understandable because it offers an analysis and explanation for each type. Also, it strengthens the advantages of nonviolent resistance by comparing and contrast it with the resistance of violence and acquiescence.
King discusses the three types of resistance to oppression in this order because it will be more logical and convincing when he writes from the two extreme solutions (one negative extreme and one “positive” extreme) to the neutral and most acceptable solution. Not only this organization allows King’s thesis statement to be developed more naturally and smoothly, but also the audiences are more willing to accept his central argument with a better understanding about his logic. Overall, King uses a logical order to rank these three types of resistance to
oppression.
King’s organizational pattern helps him build his argument and support his thesis by strengthening his central argument through compare and contrast. If King does not talk about the resistance of violence and acquiescence before the nonviolence resistance, the audiences will have a weaker sense about the comparison between the nonviolent resistance and these two. Also, King presents a clear logic that “people should fight for their rights through nonviolent resistance because the other two do not work out.” This logic can makes his thesis sound more reasonable, and the audiences can follow it easily and smoothly. However, if King does not follow this organization, not only his logic will not be as distinct, but also his thesis cannot be well-developed.