In the recent months, Black Lives Matter has become a more pressing movement, but is it still a civil protest or is the friction becoming a catalyst for machine's combustion?
While Thoreau may agree with the basic premise of the movement, he most likely would not be entirely on board with how this movement is solving the issue of racism, as the issue is being solved relatively slowly. The protest group (primarily consisting of black people- who would've guessed?) has been attempting to spread the truth about racism in order to end it, similar to the ongoing "Say No to Drugs" movement. The issue of racism (or any harmful issue) is purely like a machine, as Thoreau states, as the only way to stop the machine is to damage it from the inside, either taking out parts or having the friction of the machine slowly erode itself away. Thoreau would rather see an honest white man (or any other stereotypical racist man for that matter) stand up and strongly advocate for the Black Lives Matter movement (this would be like taking out a gear in the machine of racism, the seemingly "perpetual" mechanism immediately stops working), instead of seeing the victims of the issue attempting to escape from the grasps of injustice. Similar to the topic of abolishing slavery, Thoreau states that if "one Honest man, in the State of Massachusetts, ceasing to hold staves, were actually to withdraw from this copartnership, and be locked upon the county jail therefor, it would be the abolition of slavery in America" (Thoreau 1023).
I really like the perspective in which you wrote this post. You weren't too critical for either viewpoint but left the reader thinking to themselves. The way you used Thoreau's "machine" really contributed to your argument in that shows why the BLM is like the friction to the government. It might help if there weren't so many parentheses. Instead you could have just put those extra clarifications as their own idea. Great post.
ReplyDelete