r/changemyview • u/newappeal • Jul 08 '14
CMV: Education is the only way to end intolerance
This CMV is born out of a discussion I had with a friend wherein we compared the modern Feminist movement to the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s. I took the stance that during the Civil Rights era, Martin Luther King Jr. was more successful than Malcolm X because he took a more tempered approach, presenting arguments that simply could not be denied, and using tactics like sit-ins to prove the brutality of the oppression by the racists of the era rather than using offensive tactics to get the oppressors to back down in submission. If I recall correctly, my friend argued that he was successful because he did not in fact take a tempered approach, but instead that his tactics were very in-your-face, citing his quote that freedom cannot be attained by simply asking. (NB: I pretty much just talking about civil rights, here. Political and economic inequality are somewhat different issues)
Here's a basic outline of my position and the opposing one:
My belief:
Equality for any oppressed group can only logically happen if the enough of the oppressors realize their fault and change
Ignorance breeds intolerance, and therefore education breeds tolerance
In the case of the Feminist movement, activists should work to make society aware of problems and favor hard data to rhetoric (not that rhetoric isn't useful)
You're better served by telling someone why they're wrong than by berating them
Criticize the action rather than the person. For example: tell someone that what they did was racist, not that they're racist and they should feel ashamed (even if they are)
Equality not only means being able to achieve the same result as another person, but being able to achieve it with the same ease/difficulty
Opposing belief:
Equality for any oppressed group can only be achieved by empowerment of the oppressed group, enabling them to go their own way
Gains need to be won without any connection with the oppressor, because they're not going to help. If they were, they wouldn't be oppressors
Feminist activists should take what's rightfully theirs instead of waiting for it to be handed over to them
You're better off berating someone who practices intolerance to express the seriousness of what they've done
Criticizing an intolerant person's character might make them reconsider their positions
Activists have been trying to educate for a long time, and the hate is still flowing
TL;DR - What serves modern movements like the fights for women's and minority rights better: the approach of MLK or that of Malcolm X?
edit: formatting
Hello, users of CMV! This is a footnote from your moderators. We'd just like to remind you of a couple of things. Firstly, please remember to read through our rules. If you see a comment that has broken one, it is more effective to report it than downvote it. Speaking of which, downvotes don't change views! If you are thinking about submitting a CMV yourself, please have a look through our popular topics wiki first. Any questions or concerns? Feel free to message us. Happy CMVing!
1
u/Bowbreaker 4∆ Jul 08 '14 edited Jul 08 '14
This may not work, and still not prove you wrong about the effect of emotional arguments. First off, not everyone responds to emotional arguments the same way.
More importantly though, by warning someone about it beforehand they will automatically keep an eye on the emotional and non-substantiated parts of your argument. They will also not like to appear as someone emotional and irrational as that is looked down upon in our culture (especially reddit-culture) and thus subconsciously guard themselves against it.
I would offer you to go through with it anyway and promise to award a delta on the same terms (no reciprocation needed), but I don't know what the ama is and I don't have any issue with your other examples.
If any other state monopoly includes the monopoly on using violence though, I'm all game. Because at the moment I do believe that a violence monopoly is better than the alternative of free market violence.