Sit down
and fight for your rights: The power of peaceful protests-
By Fraser Brown
Throughout the history of America, to fight for ones rights
has meant two different actions, either to take direct action by violence and
force, or to protest in a non- confrontational way. The reason for this blog is
not to suggest that one is better than the other, both have their pros and
cons, however with direct action it is easy to see how affective it can be, but
there is a subtle quality with peaceful protest that show not only the power
peaceful actions can have in gaining rights but also the power of the impact it
can have on the public.
To start, we should take a look at the protests in the 1960s
and what combination of effect they had on the Civil Rights movement in the
years to come. On the 1st February, 1960, four students in North
Carolina walked into a Woolworth store in Greensboro and sat down in the lunch
counter and were refused service, but remained anyway. Now the question is why this
is so significant. The reason being is that what come showed a great example of
the power people hold. The next following day, the sit-ins continued, each day
adding more and more people joined the protest, with over three hundred
protesters by the fifth day1. Concluding with a massive boycott and
resulting in a change in segregation laws for in these establishments. What is
most significant about this is the simplicity of this act in retrospect and the
impact it had on a larger scale. The fact that, in a matter of days, the four
original protesters were able to inspire a large group of people shows the
effect that peaceful protest can have on society. After this, more and more
students all over North Carolina, as shown in a news article a week after
explaining the impact of the sit-ins, causing some stores to close2.
It is important to remember that there is no right way or
wrong way to protest, only violent action, which considering the time was
justified and nonviolent resistance. I am in no way saying that peaceful
protest is more appropriate or better than direct action, appropriately stated
by Charles Evers “Non-Violence won’t work in Mississippi... if a white man
shoots a Negro in Mississippi, we will shoot back”3. Sometimes violence is
the only option to further a movement, but it’s the message that peaceful
protest gets across to a public viewing. With violence people see both sides fighting
with each other so there is nothing shocking about it, but when one side is
calm and collected and the other side is the aggressor, it creates a striking
image that can be extremely impactful to the public. This might have made
people more sympathetic to the movement as well, due to the fact that even when
the protesters are treated wrongly, they continuing with their protest without
retaliating. In conclusion, throughout American history, a peaceful protest has
been viewed as a simple way to get a message across, however I believe that a
peaceful protest is more than this, it is an effective way to not only get a message across to the majority, but also a
way of getting the majority to support your message.
2 :in reference to a news paper article on Wednesday, 10th February 1960 archived From
3Umoja, Akinyele. Omowale (2013)
We Will Shoot Back: Armed Resistance in the Mississippi Freedom Movement, NYU
Press, pg.126
No comments:
Post a Comment