Nonviolence

In Ta-Nehisi Coates informative article, "Nonviolence As Compliance", and Martin Luther King Jr.'s heart felt speech, "Letter From Birmingham Jail", they both talk about how unjust society has become towards that off colored people. In doing so they treat blacks in the worst way by beating them, calling them out of their names, still being segregated and a whole lot more to the point that black people are just fed up and are trying to make a change. The government wants the black community to calm down and not start any violence but as both King and Coates was saying, how can anybody be calm and not be mad at they way they are treating them? Both authors would agree that the black community needs to speak up on the problem at hands rather than sit back and allow the white community to feel like its okay when its not. So in doing so they must come at them in order to see and understand where they are coming from and how important this issue is to them. However Martin Luther King Jr. suggests that they come at them but not for the intentions of violence, but instead to negotiate with them first to see what they are going to say about it. And if they respond saying "They will make some changes" then turn around and don't make any then thats a problem, because then your going against your word. But according to Coates he would not do this because he feels like they've had their chance to make a change, so there won't be any negotiating since they didn't negotiate with them. Also Coates and King would agree that a law that is unjust to a person's right is okay to speak on it since it does involve that of peoples individual rights.

Coates and King

Coates and King would absolutely agree that black people not treated equally. We not only saw that back in Kings day when everything was segregated but also now with police profiling black males.

King fought for black rights and equality and what is going on now is not equality. I think that Coates and King would agree that anger plays a role in this and I would also agree with that. Along with anger I think they would also both agree that there is violence in social moments, even movements not based on race. It doesn't necessarily always happen to one side or the other. Violence can begin on either side.

I do think they see the same solution, true equality. People can have the same rights but still be judged or treated differently based on the color of their skin or their religion. WE need to end this and overcome this.

MLK vs Coates <------

Martin Luther King and Coates will definitely agree that black lives are mistreated at a higher proportional level than white people.  Both individuals support the civil rights movement to help black lives. However, the way they represent and show the message, differs.


MLK preached being non-violent his entire career and was respected as such. He genuinely believed spreading his message while not physically harming others was the correct way to go. MLK supported activies such as sit-ins at stores and boycotting bus stations  Coates, in the other hand, could not care less about being non-violent. He calls out how being non-violent only benefits those who don't support to civil rights movement such as the government and police. According to Coates, being violent would not be a bad thing to get your message out; for example, the Baltimore looting activities because of protesting were justified. Martin Luther King is the polar opposite of what Coates is trying to say in his message.


I would applaud MLK for being an important figure for human rights and being an individual black people could look up to. I would remind MLK how intelligent and articulate he was; something that is unanimous whether you support the civil rights movement or not. I would definitely ask him what he thinks about the Black Lives Matter movement and whether it's beneficial or not for the community.

As for Coates, I would tell him to stop being so biased against the police enforcement community. The majority of policemen know what they are doing. And there is no point in being violent because of a justified cop murder; who are you going to be violent to? Looting and destroying the city of Baltimore does not solve anything. I would definitely spend more time talking to MLK and asking how he would lead today's movements.

Social Movements

In the reading "I Don't Know What to Do With Good White People", the attitudes of white people towards racism is being criticized. The author does recognize the efforts of white people against those who would be racist against blacks, but suggests that it isn't enough effort or that they expect some kind of reward from it when they shouldn't. Furthermore the actions of apparently "good white people", especially cops, are seen as not good enough. Several deaths of black people by the hands of cops were analyzed and although every one claimed that it was an accident or that they had good intentions, they should still be condemned for their assumptions that racism had no effect whatsoever, because although it is possible that such a thing is the case, it is not always and a hard look should be taken at the situations they have found themselves in. Even after criticism, however, there is praise given to white people because they are on the right track. They just need to make the right decisions for the right reasons. Subsequently, the reading called "Small Change: Why the Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted", is a criticism of the thoughts of blacks themselves and how their movement was or was not aided by social media. The criticism is that people believe social media is what really keeps a movement alive and going, but that isn't exactly true because movements were kept alive in a time when social media did not exist. The reasoning behind this is because the original starters of the movement had personal connections and it eventually spread across the nation. Alternately, social media can be a useful tool because you are connected to people you normally would never meet, but these connections are not personal and therefore do not hold together as strongly as personal connections.

Good People Big World

In the two readings, “I Don’t Know What to Do with Good White People” by Brit Bennett and “Small Change: Why The Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted” by Malcolm Galdwell, they both  discuss the social activism in today’s society compared to how it used to be. Galdwell focuses om social media and how it has “reinvented” social acitivism. He describes how people that clain to be activist aren’t actually activist unless they are physically doing something about it, not just sitting behind a screen and using internet tools to project your voice. Galdwell the kinds of people that are sitting behind a computer, while I agree with him to some extent I believe that it is important for people to speak up for things that they believe in even if it is just on the internet. I agree with him in that true activist are out there doing protest, and physically doing things to make a change but you can’t expect everyone to take that kind of initiative because some people truly don’t care enough which is sad. At least by being on the internet they’re still using their voice in some type of way. On the other hand, Bennett talks about “good white people,” and their intentions. She explains at the beginning of good white people being school teachers, or people that have helped her in some type of way. She also describes the kind of “good white people,” that only do good things so they can be acknowledged for it. I do agree that that’s how some people are about doing good things in the world, and if you do something good you don’t necessarily need to let everyone know because it’s just like, “okay good job, do you want a cookie for being a decent human being?” However I also think that that isn’t the intentions for everyone and some people just want to be a part of the movement and work towards creating more equality in all aspects. Not all white people do nice things just to get rewarded for it, I think that is a very subjective idea. Overall, in both readings I see things that I agree with and disagree with to some extent. 

Good White People & Small Change

In the two articles, Small Change: Why The Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted, by Malcolm Gladwell and, I Don't Know What To Do With Good White People, by Brit Bennette, each author brought about different attitudes concerning activism. Gladwell criticizes a type of activism that branches off of the traditional form, and we can call this "social activism." He believes that this is less effective in getting things accomplished because it's based around weak ties. However, Gladwell praises that new ideas thrive off of acquaintances and people who have a higher likelihood of a differing opinion than your own. Bennettte criticizes how certain supposedly "good" white people are more concerned about how others see them rather than actually preforming a good action. In reality this makes them more selfish than gracious. Bennette shows an example of this through the use of FaceBook. These "good" white people would delete racist persons all while flaunting their "goodness" to the world, expecting a pat on the back from everyone. There's not much Bennette praises, but she does note that some actions of these "good" white people are actually very decent and humble. It's just a matter of if they expect to be rewarded or not, because to anticipate reward is not the right or good reason for doing the action in the first place.  

Good White People & Small Change

In the two readings, “I Don’t Know What to Do with Good White People” by Brit Bennett and “Small Change: Why The Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted” by Malcolm Galdwell, they both talk about how acts of activism have changed by comparing society with and without technology and media. In “I Don’t Know What to Do with Good White People,” Bennett criticizes that white people do small acts of kindness towards African Americans on Facebook by making aware they they deleted racists people and think they are doing good, but really they are just trying to be viewed as a good white person for doing that. That since they are white they want to be praised for doing that “good” deed. They like having that sense of self-achievement. Also that people including herself automatically assume that white people are being racists all the time when someone is, or think, is being rude to them but they really aren’t. In the other reading, Galdwell criticizes that not all social media can be used as a benefit. He compares it to the sit-in incidents that occurred in the 1960’s because the turnout was tremendous and all of that occurred without social media. Although, he does agree with it somewhat. It can be used for good, but only with participation with motivation. It has to be easy and doable enough for many people to participate in it. I agree that social media can be used for good advertisement for activism because in society today pretty much everyone I know has a Twitter or Facebook and it will be seen by many. There will be no stop to what social media can do. I also agree with Bennett that white people will always do things just to get praise for doing nice things for African Americans because of the recent and continuing scrutiny towards them by police and others.