Opinion Based Assignment #3

Think about the contrast discussed in the first week between Dr. Martin Luther King’s adherence to civil disobedience and Malcolm X’s mandate of “by any means necessary.” Are any of the “radical” tactics and practices discussed in this week’s readings, for example the Clothesline project, sidewalk picketing by the pro-life movement, or “outing” acceptable? If so, which ones and why?
I do not believe in the pro-life radical tactics. Sidewalk picketing by the pro-life movement is something that sickens me so much, that I do not have words to describe it! L On Saturday mornings is when the non-profit organization Planned Parenthood does its abortions, no other days. People involved with the pro-life social movement obviously know this and stand out there every Saturday. I know people have the right to assemble in America, but whenever I am driving by my local Planned Parenthood in Tempe, AZ on a Saturday morning I just become sick. I cannot imagine being one of those girls who are going there to have an abortion. They are making one of the most difficult decisions of their lives, that will most likely leave them with either emotional or health related side effects, and they have to walk by these people. These people that do not know them, know of their current situation, or if they are even in a state to raise a child. People usually have abortions because they cannot raise a child in their current situation, so if they did have the child and were not capable of properly raising it, it could turn out to be a murderer, rapist, or thief due to lack of parental involvement. The pro-life movement is trying to make drastic decisions concerning the live of people they do not even know. All social movements are trying to make decisions about people or for people to better them, but what if these people do not want their ‘help’? What if the United States tried to force civil rights on blacks and they did not want them? Would protestors have continued this movement if the people who this movement affected did not want these rights?
However, I do kind of agree with the radical tactics of the Clothesline Project. Although some individuals may not support the project, I think it empowers the women that have been victims and may even give them some form of closure. I do not know how I feel about the shirts that would display the names of people who were rapists. I mean what if a girl said she was raped, but really just drank too much and may have consented to sex drunkenly, but she would not have if she was sober? I have heard of this sort of situation many times; some people say its still rape and others do not. What if the names of the men on some of the T-shirts were involved in this type of situation? I can see why the school’s administration said ‘no way’ and I can also see how this would anger people. I can see both sides of the argument, but cannot pick a side.
In other words, what, in your opinion, are the circumstances under which “radical” or even anarchic protest might be a valid option for a social movement to undertake? What are the political or social circumstances that make it viable for a social movement to engage in “in your face” actions. If your answer is that social movements never should engage in radical protest, why do you think that way?
I think some of the tactics used in the Civil Rights movement were radical. The sit-ins and protests were pretty intense and were caught on camera. These radical tactics were necessary because the government and some of its citizens were not recognizing other citizen’s hardships. Blacks in the Civil Rights movement were citizens who were saying they we upset, but no one wanted to listen. Protestors who were against the Vietnam were also citizens displeased with their government not listening to them. Darfurians are Arab Muslim citizens of Sudan whose government and African-Christian citizens turned against and started killing. “In your face” actions are needed when the government is not listening to its citizens and the ignored citizens lives are in danger and/or being severely affected. Even though Darfurians are not citizens of the United States, we still need to act responsibly since the U.S. is one of the most powerful countries in the world.