When Malcolm X spoke in 1964 about the “Ballot or the Bullet,” he was speaking in response to a culture of oppression created by the white majority and imposed upon his people. He encouraged African Americans to use the democratic system to their advantage to make social change in the direction of equality. However if this failed, he stressed the need for violence to remain on the table as a viable tactic for an oppressed minority to resort to if all other options fail.
I got the idea for this post after reading a different one in which the author commended the modern African American community for choosing the ballot over the bullet in 2008 and voting for Barack Obama. I found this to be bizarre and demeaning, as the presumption that today’s African American population is volatile and packing violence as a form of political expression is uncalled for. However, my disagreement bred a new stream of thought. What exactly would constitute the ‘bullet’ today? By and large, there are no civil rights issues alive in America that are so fragile as to incite a forceful revolution among the oppressed group. Marriage equality is considered by some to be a civil right, but there have been no major threats regarding the issue.
The main point at which we hear about threats of violence these days is when some radical on either side of the spectrum feels threatened by an administration change or election result. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota made the remark that “people in Minnesota [should be] armed and dangerous on this issue of the energy tax because we need to fight back. Thomas Jefferson told us 'having a revolution every now and then is a good thing,'” This kind of melodrama is reactionary and inflammatory, and definitely not to be taken as seriously.
There's a difference between systematic oppression
of ethnic minorities and an energy tax, lady.
Fundamentally, speakers like Bachmann would probably like to compare their message to that of Malcolm X. “We tried the whole democracy thing,” they might both argue. “It didn’t work out in our favor, so now we’re going to have to bust down some doors to get what we want.” This essentially has no place in a democracy now, as it is a direct refutation of the principle of popular choice. However, in the case of Malcolm X, this dissent was debatably more justified since it pertained to a civil right. Does anything these days qualify for a call to bring the bullet in the game? Or has the era of justifiable violent social change come to an end?
Interesting post!
ReplyDeleteI agree that some have trivialized civil rights protests today. It seems like the magnitude of the civil rights movement isn't respected anymore. When people like Michelle Bachmann compare their perceived misfortune of having an energy tax to the discrimination and hate that African Americans faced in the 1960's it makes the civil rights movement seem less important.
Here is an interesting huffpost article comparing the Tea Party movement to the civil rights movement.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joan-e-dowlin/the-tea-party-movement-vs_b_551100.html
When we were discussing Malcolm X during section, our GSI Nev explained that Malcolm felt that because African Americans weren't viewed as citizens/equals/people by the current government, violence must be used. From her explanations, I found myself agreeing with Malcolm. Hey, what would I do if others did not view me as a legitimate person that deserved the same rights? How trapped, isolated, and powerless would I feel? How far would I go to make my self known? Trying to internalize Malcolm's perspective made it a bit easier to see where he was coming from.
ReplyDeleteHowever, when I read this post about Bachmann and other radical threats of violence, I saw myself being so shocked. How could someone use violence as a threat to others? So quickly I understood Malcolm and then I didn't. I'm not sure where that line is. How much injustice is enough injustice to provoke violence. Is violence ever an answer? Is it ever okay to harm others to get what you want or may rightfully deserve. Is this a problem of dirty hands? I really don't know, but your post has posed a lot of thought provoking questions for me.