Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.
As leaders of British Womens Suffrage Movement and American Civil Rights Movement respectively, both Emmeline Pankhurst and Martin Luther King Jr. played a significant role. Due to different historical backgrounds and personal experiences, differences occurred while similarities also existed between them when they were fighting for rights. Considering the methods they used and the influences they had in the process of the movements, we believe that Martin Luther King Jr. was a more effective leader.
Both Emmeline and King targeted at fighting for the rights of the minor groups they were in. However, Emmeline had a specific goal of gaining womens suffrage while King had a broader goal to achieve desegregation for the African Americans. In Britain, women started appealing for suffrage as they realized that theyd paid the same tax while they didnt have the same voting rights as men. According to Purvis, Emmeline was convinced that gaining voting rights in parliament was decisive for women to be equally treated (Purvis, 2003). The Black, on the other hand, were completely segregated from the White after the implementation of Jim Crow. Thus, unlike Emmeline, King had to fight for rights for the black community from basic ones like equally using the public transportation to higher ones like having equal voting rights.
When they first participated in the two movements, both Emmeline and King used non-violent methods. However, after years of fruitless peaceful struggle, Emmeline believed that women need to find new ways of breathing life into womens suffrage campaign (Purvis, 2013). As a result, she adopted the new militant tactics her daughter Christabel had initialed (Purvis, 2003).
With the new method, the Suffrage movement was moved forward. Millicent Fawcett (1906) said that the Suffragettes achievements in one year were more than ours in 12 years. Whereas King insisted on nonviolence. The article of Constitutional Rights Foundation pointed out that when King heard the teachings of Mahatma Gandhi, he saw immediately the similarity with the teachings of Jesus Christ and after he studied what Gandhi had done, he felt it possible to use nonviolence through the campaigns (2017). Believing that using violence would lead to a dead end and show the weakness of the black community (Constitutional Rights Foundation, 2017), King never changed his principle, and under his leadership, nonviolence made its way through several big campaigns such as Montgomery Bus Boycott and the Birmingham Campaign.
Since both Emmeline and King were fighting for rights of the minority and challenging the existing regulations, it was inevitable that they would violate some laws, being sentenced to prison during the process of the two movements. But the reasons for their imprisonment were quite different. With regard to Emmeline, she was arrested for her aggressive behaviors. According to Purvis, she led a deputation to parliament, and then she was arrested and charged with obstruction (2003). Besides, She also smashed the windows and set the fire. Nevertheless, King was arrested for his nonviolent demonstrations and participation in desegregation movements such as his involvement in the Birmingham campaign.
Both Emmeline and King made a good use of media. As newspaper has been widely used all the time, both Emmeline and King took advantage of it to expand publicity. While during the Civil Rights Movement, because as early as 1958, over 83% of American households owned television sets (Stirling and Kittross, cited in Morris 1999), television helped King to attract more public attention and also encouraged more African Americans to take part in the civil rights movement.
Emmeline died in the age of 69 and King died in the age of 39. To a large extent, their death were both influenced by the two movements. Emmeline died of illness resulted from years of struggles. She suffered a lot of physical destruction during Women Suffrage Movement such as hunger strike and force-feeding. Whats more, Purvis (2003) pointed out that Emmelines health exacerbated right after her daughters, Sylvias scandal which completely prevented her from entering Parliament. While as for King, his success in this movement aroused much resentment from some white people. As a result, he was assassinated on the balcony of the Lorraine Motel after a nonviolent movement in Memphis in 1968.
If we only focus on the results of the two movements, it was clear that Emmeline was more effective because she did achieve her goal to win the voting rights for women, but King didnt achieve his aim of breaking segregation for black people. However, if we consider their leadership during the process of the two movements, we think that King was a more effective leader. Emmeline chose to use violence to fight for their rights. Its a fact that their militant behaviors did attract much publicity. But meanwhile they brought many critics on female image. Actually, womens contribution to the WW`accounted more for their final success. Yet King did achieve substantial victory and bring more positive influence with his nonviolent method. For example, the Constitutional Rights Foundation (2017) stated in their report that the Birmingham movement spurred President Kennedy (and later President Lyndon Johnson) to push for the landmark 1964 Civil Rights Act . In addition, Morris (1999) stated that Kings leadership attracted much international attention on the Civil Rights Movement.
In order to gain the voting rights for women, Emmeline Pankhurst adopted violent methods and meantime fully utilized newspaper to expand publicity. With the aim of achieving equality for black people, Martin Luther King Jr. stuck to nonviolent methods, and used newspaper as well as television to attract public attention and appeal more black people to get involved in this movement. They were both successful leaders, both of whom gave much momentum to these two movements and sacrificed a lot. King presented the later generations the feasibility of peaceful methods which won not only great success, but also respect and a long-lasting influence.
References
- Constitutional Rights Foundation (2017). Martin Luther King and the Philosophy of Nonviolence. Bill of Rights in Action, [online] Volume 32(4), p.1-5. Available at: https://www.crf-usa.org/bill-of-Action/archives [Accessed 29 Nov. 2019].
- Fawcett, M. (1906) in resource from Anna.
- Morris, A. (1999). A RETROSPECTIVE ON THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT: Political and Intellectual Landmarks. Annu. Rev. Social. 25, pp. 517-539.
- Purvis, J. (2003). Emmeline Pankhurst: a biographical interpretation. Women’s History Review, 12(1), pp. 73-102.
Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.