The Protest Theories of Socrates, Dr. King, and Malcolm Among the three philosophers, Socrates, Dr. King and Malcolm X, Malcolm X's protest position seems to be the most effective. Malcolm His arguments, however, are different from those of Socrates who argues that persuasion is the effective means of protesting, while Dr. King argues that non-violent direct actions are the effective means of protesting. For Socrates, persuasion overcomes fear among individuals and eliminates injustices in society by using words and reason to promote change. Dr. King proposed that nonviolent direct actions create manufactured tensions and push negotiations to promote positive peace. Malcom Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay This paper will aim to highlight each part in depth with critical points to support my position. The first part will concern Socrates who claims that persuasion is the effective means of protesting. The second part will cover Dr. King's argument that nonviolent actions are the effective means of protesting. Finally, the third part will be about Malcom X who suggested that any means necessary is the effective means to protest. I argue that the most effective means of protesting is Malcolm According to Socrates, persuasion overcomes fear among individuals. and eliminates injustices in society: “all other actions threaten the existence of law and order.” Therefore, persuasion is the only means of protesting against an unjust law in the state because it is the only legitimate and just means of fighting injustices to promote social change. The use of reason does not alone preserve the existence of the state, but begins to demonstrate the power of speech and reason as an alternative to the power of physical force. If there is ever a just state with just laws and just leaders, citizens and leaders must be educated to make decisions based on reason and not physical force. By taking direct physical actions against the state, such as breaking the law, you demonstrate the power of physical force which is unacceptable because it teaches nothing other than instilling fear in people. Because if there were to be true respect for the law and truly just laws, then reason should be applied at all times. Socrates argues that breaking the law even when the law is unjust is not right but bad. Socrates also argues that breaking the law will threaten the existence of the state by promoting its mass destruction. By breaking the law you will not set a good example for others and you will not be respectful of the State. Furthermore, Socrates argues that the state is responsible for one's life. States contribute to the educational life of individuals by instilling values and principles in individuals to become better people in life. For Dr. King, nonviolent direct action creates a constructive tension that promotes growth and positive peace. Here Dr. King argues that by experiencing harassment from oppressors, this could lead to negotiations to further develop and derive possible solutions to help correct an unjust law as nonviolent action does not create newtensions but rather brings to life those currently existing. appealing to the conscience of the people of the State. Nonviolence not only creates constructive tension, but also challenges oppressors to reevaluate the situation at hand. This means that showing a thirst for equality between opposing opinions is an expected method. He was also promoting this means of protest that showed respect for things that didn't actually show the same to him and his supporters. Dr. King and his supporters refused to obey unjust laws but willingly accepted the consequences of violating unjust laws. Simple persuasion contributes to negative peace while nonviolence according to King promotes positive peace. By instilling negative peace, you are allowing right order to prevail instead of justice. By promoting negative peace, you are paving the way for stability instead of focusing on the values and virtues of human beings. However, positive peace accepts and preaches justice at all times, refusing to compromise the values and virtues of individuals. For persuasion to be effective, people must be willing to listen and understand with the utmost patience and understanding. However, in cases where racism and prejudice are present, people may not be ready to listen and pay attention to the opinions of others. Mere persuasion does not address the underlying causes of justice. King argues that violent actions promote the degradation of people and treat the person as less than they are. Violent actions are disrespectful to others who do not respect the rights of others and humanity.Dr. King argues that violent actions do not promote love and understanding. Dr. King was known for preaching justice and not war, so much so that the nonviolent resister not only refuses to shoot his opponent but also refuses to hate him. I believe that cutting the chain of hatred can only be achieved by projecting the ethic of love and understanding at the center of our lives. For King, the power of God has worked within us and will not cause us to develop hatred for others. When there is nonviolence, all means of hatred will be extinguished and love will be instilled which will make people obey the laws, but violent actions will not. Dr. King believed that God will work through us when we use the weapon of nonviolent love. Malcolm X also argues that any means necessary is the most effective means of protesting. It states that one should be able to arouse some sort of fear and demonstrate power over those who will hold you down. He believed that if you do not prove yourself to be a righteous and powerful person, you will bring about a change in your situation as your oppressors will continue to see you as weak. By applying all necessary means, it will bring about change faster as you will no longer wait for others to make decisions for you regarding your destiny, but rather you will take the situation into your own hands with strength to change it as you wish. eliminate any unjust laws that may arise against them. Malcom Furthermore, every means necessary also speaks the language of the oppressor. With this, the oppressor will have no heart but rather will listen and pay attention to the language used to oppress him. Malcolm Any means necessary demonstrate that you are a person who knows your rights. Mere persuasion is ineffective according to Malcolm X because it does not have any kind of action or strength to protest. He argues that by applying persuasion.

Topic > The Protest Theories of Socrates, Dr. King, and Malcolm Among the three philosophers, Socrates, Dr. King and Malcolm X, Malcolm X's protest position seems to be the most effective. Malcolm His arguments, however, are different from those of Socrates who argues that persuasion is the effective means of protesting, while Dr. King argues that non-violent direct actions are the effective means of protesting. For Socrates, persuasion overcomes fear among individuals and eliminates injustices in society by using words and reason to promote change. Dr. King proposed that nonviolent direct actions create manufactured tensions and push negotiations to promote positive peace. Malcom Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay This paper will aim to highlight each part in depth with critical points to support my position. The first part will concern Socrates who claims that persuasion is the effective means of protesting. The second part will cover Dr. King's argument that nonviolent actions are the effective means of protesting. Finally, the third part will be about Malcom X who suggested that any means necessary is the effective means to protest. I argue that the most effective means of protesting is Malcolm According to Socrates, persuasion overcomes fear among individuals. and eliminates injustices in society: “all other actions threaten the existence of law and order.” Therefore, persuasion is the only means of protesting against an unjust law in the state because it is the only legitimate and just means of fighting injustices to promote social change. The use of reason does not alone preserve the existence of the state, but begins to demonstrate the power of speech and reason as an alternative to the power of physical force. If there is ever a just state with just laws and just leaders, citizens and leaders must be educated to make decisions based on reason and not physical force. By taking direct physical actions against the state, such as breaking the law, you demonstrate the power of physical force which is unacceptable because it teaches nothing other than instilling fear in people. Because if there were to be true respect for the law and truly just laws, then reason should be applied at all times. Socrates argues that breaking the law even when the law is unjust is not right but bad. Socrates also argues that breaking the law will threaten the existence of the state by promoting its mass destruction. By breaking the law you will not set a good example for others and you will not be respectful of the State. Furthermore, Socrates argues that the state is responsible for one's life. States contribute to the educational life of individuals by instilling values and principles in individuals to become better people in life. For Dr. King, nonviolent direct action creates a constructive tension that promotes growth and positive peace. Here Dr. King argues that by experiencing harassment from oppressors, this could lead to negotiations to further develop and derive possible solutions to help correct an unjust law as nonviolent action does not create newtensions but rather brings to life those currently existing. appealing to the conscience of the people of the State. Nonviolence not only creates constructive tension, but also challenges oppressors to reevaluate the situation at hand. This means that showing a thirst for equality between opposing opinions is an expected method. He was also promoting this means of protest that showed respect for things that didn't actually show the same to him and his supporters. Dr. King and his supporters refused to obey unjust laws but willingly accepted the consequences of violating unjust laws. Simple persuasion contributes to negative peace while nonviolence according to King promotes positive peace. By instilling negative peace, you are allowing right order to prevail instead of justice. By promoting negative peace, you are paving the way for stability instead of focusing on the values and virtues of human beings. However, positive peace accepts and preaches justice at all times, refusing to compromise the values and virtues of individuals. For persuasion to be effective, people must be willing to listen and understand with the utmost patience and understanding. However, in cases where racism and prejudice are present, people may not be ready to listen and pay attention to the opinions of others. Mere persuasion does not address the underlying causes of justice. King argues that violent actions promote the degradation of people and treat the person as less than they are. Violent actions are disrespectful to others who do not respect the rights of others and humanity.Dr. King argues that violent actions do not promote love and understanding. Dr. King was known for preaching justice and not war, so much so that the nonviolent resister not only refuses to shoot his opponent but also refuses to hate him. I believe that cutting the chain of hatred can only be achieved by projecting the ethic of love and understanding at the center of our lives. For King, the power of God has worked within us and will not cause us to develop hatred for others. When there is nonviolence, all means of hatred will be extinguished and love will be instilled which will make people obey the laws, but violent actions will not. Dr. King believed that God will work through us when we use the weapon of nonviolent love. Malcolm X also argues that any means necessary is the most effective means of protesting. It states that one should be able to arouse some sort of fear and demonstrate power over those who will hold you down. He believed that if you do not prove yourself to be a righteous and powerful person, you will bring about a change in your situation as your oppressors will continue to see you as weak. By applying all necessary means, it will bring about change faster as you will no longer wait for others to make decisions for you regarding your destiny, but rather you will take the situation into your own hands with strength to change it as you wish. eliminate any unjust laws that may arise against them. Malcom Furthermore, every means necessary also speaks the language of the oppressor. With this, the oppressor will have no heart but rather will listen and pay attention to the language used to oppress him. Malcolm Any means necessary demonstrate that you are a person who knows your rights. Mere persuasion is ineffective according to Malcolm X because it does not have any kind of action or strength to protest. He argues that by applying persuasion.