King believed that non-violence was the key to any disagreement and problem. Being non-violent was the resolution to problems that were similar to segregation and unfairness. In Document H, by King, he stated, “We will meet you physical force with soul force. We will not hate you,but we cannot in all good conscience obey your unjust laws.Do to us what you will and we will still love you.” What was said by King was that the white violence would be on the same level as the blacks non-violence; and anything that the whites did to them- beat, kill and torture- the blacks would still love them, because that is the right thing to do. Also in Document J, by King in a speech, stated,”This is the ultimate weakness of violence: It multiples evil and violence in the universe.” which he was right about, violence only creates more violence. For example when parents tell their children, “If he/she hits you, you hit them back”, and only causes the situation to get worst. Malcolm’s philosophy on violence was argued with, He stated in Document I’”And it you want to know what his language is,study his history.His language is is blood,his language is brutality”. His point was correct but could be argued with. Martin Luther King clapped back and proclaimed in Document L,”.. for in the event or a violence revolution,we would be sorely outnumbered.And when it was all …show more content…
Malcolm X aimed for the same results, but the way he decided to to go through the obstacles did not make sense during this time frame. Both men wanted blacks to be not be discriminated and treated unfairly due to the color of their skin, and both men had different ways they wanted to accomplish this goal. In the end, Martin was successful and managed to get what blacks needed, to be equal to the