This is an online journal for Mr. Lucero's English classes. Students should leave their responses to weekly prompts as comments. Their responses will be graded twice a month.
Tuesday, April 30, 2013
English III Journal (If We Must Die)
For what reason does McKay say even a doomed resistance is worthwhile? Is reacting to violence violently stupidity or intelligence?
My belief is that Claude McKay felt the African Americans during his time period were oppressed and doing nothing for it. His poem is like a letter of morale-boosting stimulation for the African American culture to rise up and have pride for their struggles.
McKay wrote his poem during the Harlem Renaissance to help fellow African Americans embrace their culture and help put a stop to the white man putting them down like hogs, as he says in his poem. Is his doomed resistance worthwhile? In his view, it was a calling to end a bad situation, but in my view, it's a poem flowing with pride past the brim, which creates the bad situation.
Whether I believe McKay's resistance is sheer stupidity or intelligence is too high and too low a scale to choose from; I feel that it's a combination of dying for pride and knowing it's right for them. I wouldn't die to prevent oppression, but rather embrace the oppression, because that's my view on how to deal with situations. My Religion may have influenced me on that notion, but I truly believe that killing or hurting another is one people becoming what they're trying to fight against. I don't know the exact extent to which they would commit acts of violence, but it surely wouldn't end well on behalf of their population.
I think McKay says this because he means that if you really want something you would do anything to get it. Some people might beg, some might loose their life for it but the main thing is if you really want something you might be willing to die for it.
I believe that fighting violence with violence is stupidity because its like you are fighting fire with fire and its making matters worse, so it makes no sense to make things worse instead of making them better, because they want the their to see it from their point of view but they don't want to.
What Mckay is trying state is that is something worth dying for? Like are you willing to die for somebody just for that person to have a better life or have a better benefit to themselves? In my case, that's how i see what Mckay is trying to state.
On the other hand, based on my personal opinion there's a good and bad to both options whether you react to violence violently or not. For example, look at Jackie Robinson, he consumed all that racial and brutality experience and yet he still didn't fight back. He was a peaceful man and had set a good example to fight against violence by doing nothing and by being peaceful. As for a Fighters life's perspective, for me or for any fighter, the best solution/way when it comes down to violence, it is always better to walk away from it, and not to fight back or meet at their level which causes situations and problems much worse. BUT, if you get from the other person, for me i was raised to fight back because its not your fault that you started the fight first, its called "Self-Defense" regardless if anything. That's how my godmother and family trained me and raise me. For us fighters the best thing about us is we always try our best way to avoid violence in the streets, we always handle situations in the ring ONLY.
Claude McKay came from a time where the racial relations between blacks and whites were at a complete nadir. There was no push for integration in any way, and the races distrusted each other intensely. There was good reason, for his time, for McKay to advocate resistance even in the most adverse of conditions. It was during the Red Summer that McKay's main reason for having a doomed resistance prove to be worthwhile prove to be very true. Many African Americans in the year of 1919 perished at the hands of racial hatred provoked by returning war veterans. These African Americans fought for their rights. While many did perish, they did so in the name of their culture, a worthwhile resistance in McKay's eyes, rather than laying down and dying for the white man. Yet there was a deeper scale to this. While the outnumbered African Americans were helpless to the violence inflicted by the influx of veterans, their resistance inspired many African Americans to improve themselves outside the political spectrum. With these stubborn acts of hopeless resistance, the Harlem Renaissance was born through the expression of black culture against these injustices. Black culture flourished in the enclave of Harlem, where literature and the arts bloomed as a result of doomed resistance.
However, this is not to say that doomed resistance and reaction to violence is the best solution. Looking back at history, reacting to violence with violence is an incredibly stupid and ineffective method. It promotes the use of violence, usually illegal, within your own ranks and stirs up hatred in the eyes of your adversaries. For McKay's time, violence was somewhat justified. Yet as we look through the coming decades of the Civil Rights Movement, we realize that violence was not necessary. Black culture may have come to fruition with the violece of the Red Summer, but full equality and integration with other races only came with the nonviolent demonstrations led by Dr. Martin Luther King in his peaceful Civil Rights Movement. Violence may be justified, but it should never be necessary unless as a last resort. The Civil Rights Movement proved this well.
I think that claude mckay is saying that if you really want something you will try your best to get it even if you have to beg or die for it, but if you are not willing to die for it then you should stop saying i will do anything to get it.
Some people say things like i want freedom and i will do anything for it but when someone says will you die for it they say no and they dont get what they really want so it becomes a waste of time. i also think that if you really believe in something you will stand up for it and you will never back down.
I think that reacting to violence with violence is stupidity because you cant fight fire with fire you will just make a bigger fire and make things worse so it becomes a big waste of time. another reason you cant do that is because it could lead to your death or an accidental death because you wanted to fight fire with fire then its noones fault but your own and the others who made the same choice with you.
Claude McKay is saying that even a doomed resistance is worth while because at least they did not die in vain. "If we must die, O let us nobly die, So that our precious blood may not shed In vain; then even the monsters we defy Shall be constrained to honor us though dead!" He's saying that even if they do die while fighting for a cause they believe in, the people they are defying will also respect them for dying for something they believed in. They would rather die a noble death doing something with a cause than die sitting around being a bystander. McKay is saying that even if they're dying they are still fighting back. Reacting to violence violently is not stupidity but intellegence. But there are good and bad connotations pertaining to the action. If you act violently because you are being assailed and beaten then that is just self defense. But if you act violently because you are angry in a situation or somebody hit you trying to get you mad then you are being stupid. If there is another way to react without using violence then you must use that choice first.
McKay believes that even a doomed resistance is worthwhile because he believes if one fights back against their impending death, no matter what the concept or situation is, they will die knowing that they at least tried to stop the situation. If one resists, they can retain their pride and sense of personal dignity. Since there are whites fighting against them, they wouldn’t rather give them the inhumane; McKay believes that resistance is worthwhile so that they will not appear as being less important than humans. McKay expresses his thoughts, in “If We Must Die”, by saying, “It was during those days that the sonnet, “If We Must Die”, exploded out of me. And for it the Negro people unanimously hailed me as a poet. Indeed, that one grand outburst is their sole standard of appraising my poetry”. This section in the reading, describes how McKay’s feelings and emotions got to him during this time period and how since this one outburst situation occurred his poetry changed him as a person and as a writer of poetry. Most of all changed him as a human being. I believe that reacting to violence is both violently stupidity and intelligence because fighting for no purpose gets you nowhere in life which is an example of violently stupidity and if there was a situation that was for family or peers that were close to you than I would say that would be fighting for intelligence because first, you are fighting for a purpose and second you are helping others out, and if it was the other way around where you were needing help, I have a guarantee that they would help you in whatever situation occurred to you. In all, McKay believes that it is necessary to stand up against what you believe is wrong and resist, even if death is the consequence.
The reason McKay says that a doomed resistance is worthwhile because it is the first step in a chain reaction to produce other events. For example, the Spartans in three hundred only sent three hundred warriors against one million Persians. Not to mention the Spartans were not permitted to leave because of a holy celebration. They had more in numbers back home, but they wanted to make a statement. When the Persians were losing many men compared to the Spartans, it sent a message to all of Greece that the Persians are not as strong as they are believed to be. Then after most of the three hundred and their king die, they sent the whole army of Spartans to wipe out the Persians. It sent a message that the Spartans will not lay down to anyone, no matter where, or when. Depending on the situation, violence is a key strategic move in order to defeat your opponent. There are times when your opponent's ignorance makes it unable to avoid an altercation. You could try to tone it down with them, but because they are ignorant they will not listen to anything you say. The next step is to strike first, they have already made up in their mind that they're willing to hurt you, why not strike before they can? Only intelligent people will use this as a strategy to become three steps ahead of their opponent. You're already involved, the only thing left is to finish the job.
McKay's influence of his quote came from all the stereotypes and racism that were directly aimed at African Americans during the early twenties. He saw the violence and how futile their resistance were compared to the white people. According to him a doomed resistance a very worthwhile thing. I believe that a futile resistance is very worthwhile because it sends a message. It can also be a beacon of hope and start a resistance that's even more successful. An example of this would be the British control on India. At the arrival of the British at te continent of India, the country was actually split into many nation states that had no affiliation with each other. When the British kept on taking more land and land, none of the nation states attempted to do anything, except one. That one nation state attempted to repel the British Advances, but were quickly crushed. The leaders were executed. The other nation states inspired of what they did united in order to stop the British. Although their military resistance was crushed, they would later use politics in order to remove British hands from the continent, Had if that one nation state had not done anything, the independence of India, Pakistan, and Bandgaldesh might have been delayed for a long time. If right a futile resistance can lead into something big and worthwhile. There is not only one way of reacting to violence. In fact there is two ways. Someone that reacts to violence very stupidly is someone that decides to feed the chain of violence. In other words fighting violence with violence, or fighting fire with fire. If there is fire you do not use fire as it will get bigger. For example if someone gets in a fight. The person who gets hit first will react stupidly to violence if he fights back. Another way if reacting to violence is very intelligently. Someone that does that is someone who decides to not feed the cycle of violence and hatred. For example if the person gets in a fight blocking and dodging might be a good way of reacting very intelligently to violence. Another smart way in a fight is to not hit back. Although you'll be viewed as a weakling you have avoided a cycle of violence. McKays words are truly inspiring and will inspire future generations of Americans whether Black or White
The Harlem Renaissance had led to the advancements in many other movements helping with civil rights and such. But to earn rights, you must fight for it. The birth of those revolutions, in a way, the original seed, was the Harlem Renaissance. McKay had said that even a doomed resistance is worth fighting for. For even if it is unsuccessful, you are gaining the attention of your enemies, your allies, and the bystanders. Showing them that you are willing to sacrifice yourself and all you may have for what is right. And in doing so, you may encourage those bystanders to become more than bystanders, but allies of your cause. An example: "If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine." - Obi-Wan Kenobi Even if your resistance towards something unjust is futile and destined to lose, as long as you, and others around you understand the reason of your rebellion, then your sacrifice will only strengthen yourself as well as your resistance.
If you react to violence through violence then it is all leading to a circle of war and destruction. Violence cannot end violence, for violence is fuel for hatred, and the aftermath is nothing but rubble and death. An example, "An eye for an eye only ends up making the whole world blind." - Mahatma Gandhi If one chooses to seek revenge on one who has attacked first, then fighting back will only make them seek revenge as well. The only way to properly end a conflict of violence is to accept all enemy, not to simply tolerate them, but to accept them with open arms as you would with a friend. Although it may lead to them attempting to back-stab you, you will be hurt indeed, but you mustn't stray to the path of violence for it will end you, your enemy and everything in between. For what war hadn't been ended through diplomacy? What nation had been completely devastated through war? All conflicts have had an end, and all of them had been ended through words and compromise. If these words are taken into thought and adopted, then the future world shall become one of an infinite golden age of peace and understanding just as civil leaders had all hoped to eventually reach.
"Even a doomed resistance is worthwhile" We can always predict and anticipate the outcome of the actions we take as a person and as a group but we can never be certain an expected outcome will happen. As humans we all have the ability to distinguish from right or wrong. When we see something wrong we must try to change it and not live with the harm the wrong does. Whether it directly affects you or not you must not accept nor ignore wrong actions causing harm, you must change it. We're all scare of change because we're used to the same routine but it doesn't mean it perfect or that we're content with it. We must not stand by and watch the world burn because we're not brave enough to support change-change that must be done in order to ameliorate society. Cloude Mckay knew that resisting to the injustice African Americans had to face wasn't going to easy and the outcome wouldn't be exactly what they hopped for. The chances of him and other African Americans during the Harlem Renaissance of witnessing change wasn't was low because America wasn't ready to change but it was in desperate need of change.
We all have our way of reacting to certain situations. The situations we are put in already set up a path to the decisions we decide to make in that situation. If we are facing violence the most logical answer is to violently respond to it because of the way it approached us. There's no thought into it, it's a simple impulse. If we don't think about it carefully we are not applying any knowledge to the way we respond to violence therefore it becomes a stupid decision to act without thinking, to respond violently. In order to have a better outcome out of a violent situation we must think about the way we respond to it before responding to it, when we do that's when it becomes more than just a violent a catastrophe.
In the quote McKay is saying: is something worth dying for? and that is what he did with his protests. McKay wanted racism to end towards African Americans and if had to put his life on the line he would. McKay wanted to end racism seeing at the time racism towards African Americans resulted in violence and have many killed towards the steps of ending racism. For McKay's second part of his quote of reacting to violence violently, reacting violently at the time is intelligence considering that at the time there was not a significant amount of protests compared to the civil rights movement. reacting violently is intelligence because it will also show the cause of the problem but give a bad message to either party. so all in all is something worth dying for? yes, if it is for the better good of the people in a setting of oppression yes it is towards ending the oppression or racism. is reacting to violence violently stupidity or intelligence? it is intelligence because it show how much you want what you want to change and can send a message of what is going on in the world
My belief when Mckay says that even a doomed resistance is worthwhile means that although you still fight for something even though it may not be worth it in the end, it still shows how much you care for what you stand up against. People will see how much you stood up for your own belief and it can affect the many others around you. It all goes to show how far you are willing to resist. It will make everything worthwhile because if it is something that you truly believe in that is wrong, then it is something that can motivate you to go all the way.
The way one can react to violence can go both ways. It could be classified as being stupidity and also intelligence. I believe that in the end, it all depends on the type of violence one can face. If it’s something that I will stand up against, then I would see it as intelligence. If it’s something that I just want to fight against for nothing, then that would be stupidity. There is always a reason to do something. That reason would have to be justified because that can either cause it to cause out of stupidity or being intelligent. Like for an example, if I was being threatened and harassed physically I would act out of self defense because that is a natural instinct that I have. Self defense, in my own opinion would be known as being an intelligent manner of reacting to violence. Another way of reacting to violence out of stupidity would be if I was to harass and physically abuse another individual for the heck of it. In the end, it is all based on the decisions of an individual and how they would react to violence.
My belief when Mckay says that even a doomed resistance is worthwhile means that all thought what your fighting for may not actually change at the end it shows how you actually cared about it enough to defended it. and all thought at frist people will juge you but you could light up other peoples courage who also believe in the same cause to join you.
i would say that reacting to violence violently can be both stupidity or intelligence in it own unique way. I think if you act violently in a situation were its not really importan or really big of a deal its just stupidity coming from you inorder to draw attention to your self from other. but if some one is bullying you i feel that it is right an a correct moment to at violently in order to show the person that they are not intimidating would be intelligence. JOSE MACIEL-
My belief when Mckay states that even a doomed resistance is worthwhile means that fighting even though you know your going to do is all worth it. In my opinion, it all depends on the cause. Mckay related to the Harlem Renaissance. With all the slavery that happened. Referring back to what Andrew said, Mckay was probably sick of slavery so much that he would risk his life to end it. I understand what he was trying to do. Get rid of slavery. But for me, it all depends on the problem. Lets say my family member was in danger, this is when i would start considering what Mckay said because i would do anything for them. I think reacting to a situation in a violent way is not stupidity. Again, it is all about the cause. A guy can push you so far over the edge that there is just no other option. You can try using non violence such as civil disobedience but using violence is not stupidity.
I believe that Mckay means that even though you will lose its better to lose with pride than to lose with no pride and to not put up a good fight when being pushed around. African Americans were pushed around and oppressed to the point where they are easily controlled. They will either lose losing or lose winning and that's what McKay means by doomed resistance being worthwhile.
Honestly i don't think reacting to violent violently is smart. yes you will be pushed around but if you are the bigger and mature person you will not act apon what your enemy is doing or you will just be doing the same. in other words you will become a hyprocrite. Endure the violence and get bossed around because patient will win at the end when people start to realize that the guys who are establishing the violence are the wrong doers.
I believe McKay is telling all of us that we all die, and we might as well die for a cause. We are all doomed to death. Despite this fact, McKay believes that we should all live life as if we were to die soon. I believe he is trying to say that a doomed resistance should in fact be motivation to take actions and stick up for ourselves. In his poem he is imparting the harshness African Americans endured at the time and how they should react to them.
If you're held captive to leak confidential information and you're in between life and death what do you do? Most would say that they wouldn't spill the information. Why? Because they know that they are held to a high ground of loyalty and courage. This is what McKay is talking about. When African Americans were being brutalized he was telling them to not fear them and to fight back without fighting back.
In regards to reacting violently, I think it should be your last resort. I believe in nonviolence and don't condone fighting. But a part of me still says that when it comes down to the situation violence and physically fighting back is the only way. However, if you can't resolve a problem through words or compromise and violence seems to be your only option, I think that it's probably not a battle worth fighting.
A doomed resistance is basically going against a cause, and knowing and accepting the consequences. McKay says that a doomed resistance is worthwhile because the what you get out of all the perseverance and fighting will be much more liberating than the work itself. The process of fighting for what you want will result in a positive outcome. Even if the result is death, your strife will be sure to leave a legacy. Though your life is temporary, the legacy you've left behind will remain for generations to come. It's a cliche, but hard work does pay off. It's much better to lose in a way in which you can reminisce and be proud of than losing as a result to doing nothing.
Reacting to violence in a violent manner can be intelligent and stupid, at the same time. Depending on the situation, violence might actually go against "Violent is not the answer" and be the only solution you have. Violence is a weapon that should be used with the utmost precaution. When communication and compromise don't satisfy the problem, then violence may have to be used. If one day a foreign army came down to Florida, or some place, and reasoning and rhetoric just doesn't suffice, there's nothing more to do other than fight physically. Sometimes choosing your "weapons of destruction" can be a battle itself. In conclusion, choose violence only when communication and compromise just won't do the trick.
Claude mckay is meaning that we are all destined to die and it would be pointless to leave without having done something meaningful and worthful with your life. He wants to let people know we are all put on this earth to try and make a statement. Dying having not done anything will only make you look like a waste of space, however, contributing inwhat you believe in to make a change will make your life worth something. It makes you known how much you cared for what you did not agree with.
Reacting to violence violently can be seen as stupid and intelligent. When someone is acting in a violent can be smart because in most cases the first person that uses violence will back down noticing you are capable of causing harm. It will make them realize is it actually smart to start something physically if you are able to get hurt as well as who your trying to violently attack.
It can also been seen in a stupid way because violence matched with violence will only cause more violence. It can hurt innocent people as well as loved ones in long term effects. Violence is never the first option unless you need to show dominance over another person or country. Violence has been around with animals, countries and people for many years and isn't going away any time soon.
Claude McKay explains that ever since we have been given the gift of life, we have also been choices to make the time you have until you die worth living. We are all-in on this journey and one day each of us are all-out of it. Being expected to die shall be a downer, but it shall not allow anyone to stop in their tracks for something that they do not exactly know what's coming. everyone morally should have the ethic to never give up because we all perform actions to please ourselves, maybe not just ourselves, but we always strive to make things better for ourselves. The only person i need to live for is myself, that's why for every good day and bad i have, i tell myself that it belongs to me and it's my job to make better for the next day. As for the violence that is always present, there are right and wrong ways to react to it. Violence happens in many different shapes, sometimes amorphous. Most of us could say that if we saw something like personal violence on the streets, it could be up to the community or a bystanding crowd to let it be to certain extent. Whereas if you were stuck on the ground witnessing a bank robbery, you know you would be clueless on what is the exact right thing to do. Any event in life has its attributes that make it unique and has us left with choices on what to do when violence is upon us, but all reactions should be considered on what is appropriate to do. Marquis Corpuz
McKay is saying that a doomed resistance is worthwhile because in doing/thinking that it leads to other things.It also shows that if something means alot to you than you have to fight for it.it just shows that you actually do care and that you had the nerve to stand up for it .The people around you will see what you did and might want to do the same as you,which could be positive for you and everyone .If it is something you feel strongly about than you will do it until the end.McKay was most likely sick of slavery ,that he was willing to risk himself to end it ,to me that shows me how passionate he was about slavery.For me i see where Mckay came from but i personally would have to consider all the the options i have and i would not risk my own life unless it was for my mother.I would rather try to approach it as a civil disobedience act and not using actual violence because i wouldnt want to harm anyone.If anything violence should be your last option or it should be self-defense if someone attacks you first ,then of course you have to defend yourself in order to save yourself.It is only dumb if you act out of pocket towards something that is not that seruis.
What is the point of living your life if you know one day that you will die? Because life is a beautiful thing an we are all entitled to enjoying it. Much like how McKay knew that a doomed resistance us worthwhile. You miss 100% of the shots that you don't take 100% of the time. But if you attempt at least one you can say that you put forth your best effort and that itself is commendable. You never know for-sure what the outcome of your actions will be but if you never try you will never get any results. Ff McKay sat back and accepted oppression than he would have never known what could have resulted if he would have responded.
Knowing when to react to violence is a very circumstantial scenario. Reacting to violence for no significant reason is stupidity. But reacting to violence that pins you against a wall and controls your life is intelligence.
Sometimes violence is the only way to get your voice heard. it may be the incorrect way to respond to a situation but either way you lose. If you react with violence with violence purely for the sake of your ego or pride you are doing so for the wrong reason. But sometimes when fighting fire with fire is your option.
What he is trying to say is that are you willing to die for what you believe in are u going to give up your life to make a change. I think if you want to make a change id doesn’t matter how long it takes of if you die but you will die with happiness and dignity because you fought for what you want and didn’t give up. If you have your mind set on something that will benefit others and you are willing to give your life away then make a change. Make a change and you will help a lot of people because you would have the courage to do something others cant.
They are two ways people see violence one as stupidity because you would engage on violence when you can prevent it. People see it this way to not make it a bigger deal and to walk away form it because others can get hurt. The other way is intelligently and this is were I agree because I would only use violence only if im provoked or self defense. Because only use violence in a smart way like when you are being attack or need to defend yourself.
If you were a solider would you go out and fight,still knowing there is a slight chance that you will never come back? Many would say yes. The meaning of a doomed resistance that might be worthwhile is that even if it brings death to a person's life, generation or their ideas that it can bring a better future. If sacrificing everything can bring a better future many can do it. A better future is the future where are past selves live in. As humans we always trying to improve. Improving the future is just one of those aspects. Living through harsh times, discrimination and segregation makes many people want to change that inequality. Not for themselves, but for their kin. The only reason we try to improve things is to make a better world for our next generation, so they won't repeat our mistakes and achieve world peace. That is as humans main goal, to achieve world peace. In McKay's experience it's to make an equal society in America, where African Americans wouldn't be looked down upon.
Reacting to violence violently is instinct , but stupid. Violence should not fought with violence, it's like fight fire with fire it will only increase it. These events that are reacted with violence will only cause chaos and destroy the world. People can't make others see what they want, unless they want to, forcing is not the way. It's like if a person hit you the smarter tactic is to block than hit where both parties get injured. Even though reacting with violence violently can be justified as self-defense, but there are other ways around it. There might be times where it is acceptable, but to use violence when there are alternatives are not. Reacting violently is stupidity because in many ways it could've been prevented and that would just injure both parties without seeing eye to eye. There ais a reason of why the bible would state. "turn the other cheek".
My belief is that Claude McKay felt the African Americans during his time period were oppressed and doing nothing for it. His poem is like a letter of morale-boosting stimulation for the African American culture to rise up and have pride for their struggles.
ReplyDeleteMcKay wrote his poem during the Harlem Renaissance to help fellow African Americans embrace their culture and help put a stop to the white man putting them down like hogs, as he says in his poem. Is his doomed resistance worthwhile? In his view, it was a calling to end a bad situation, but in my view, it's a poem flowing with pride past the brim, which creates the bad situation.
Whether I believe McKay's resistance is sheer stupidity or intelligence is too high and too low a scale to choose from; I feel that it's a combination of dying for pride and knowing it's right for them. I wouldn't die to prevent oppression, but rather embrace the oppression, because that's my view on how to deal with situations. My Religion may have influenced me on that notion, but I truly believe that killing or hurting another is one people becoming what they're trying to fight against. I don't know the exact extent to which they would commit acts of violence, but it surely wouldn't end well on behalf of their population.
I think McKay says this because he means that if you really want something you would do anything to get it. Some people might beg, some might loose their life for it but the main thing is if you really want something you might be willing to die for it.
ReplyDeleteI believe that fighting violence with violence is stupidity because its like you are fighting fire with fire and its making matters worse, so it makes no sense to make things worse instead of making them better, because they want the their to see it from their point of view but they don't want to.
What Mckay is trying state is that is something worth dying for? Like are you willing to die for somebody just for that person to have a better life or have a better benefit to themselves? In my case, that's how i see what Mckay is trying to state.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, based on my personal opinion there's a good and bad to both options whether you react to violence violently or not. For example, look at Jackie Robinson, he consumed all that racial and brutality experience and yet he still didn't fight back. He was a peaceful man and had set a good example to fight against violence by doing nothing and by being peaceful. As for a Fighters life's perspective, for me or for any fighter, the best solution/way when it comes down to violence, it is always better to walk away from it, and not to fight back or meet at their level which causes situations and problems much worse. BUT, if you get from the other person, for me i was raised to fight back because its not your fault that you started the fight first, its called "Self-Defense" regardless if anything. That's how my godmother and family trained me and raise me. For us fighters the best thing about us is we always try our best way to avoid violence in the streets, we always handle situations in the ring ONLY.
Claude McKay came from a time where the racial relations between blacks and whites were at a complete nadir. There was no push for integration in any way, and the races distrusted each other intensely. There was good reason, for his time, for McKay to advocate resistance even in the most adverse of conditions. It was during the Red Summer that McKay's main reason for having a doomed resistance prove to be worthwhile prove to be very true. Many African Americans in the year of 1919 perished at the hands of racial hatred provoked by returning war veterans. These African Americans fought for their rights. While many did perish, they did so in the name of their culture, a worthwhile resistance in McKay's eyes, rather than laying down and dying for the white man. Yet there was a deeper scale to this. While the outnumbered African Americans were helpless to the violence inflicted by the influx of veterans, their resistance inspired many African Americans to improve themselves outside the political spectrum. With these stubborn acts of hopeless resistance, the Harlem Renaissance was born through the expression of black culture against these injustices. Black culture flourished in the enclave of Harlem, where literature and the arts bloomed as a result of doomed resistance.
ReplyDeleteHowever, this is not to say that doomed resistance and reaction to violence is the best solution. Looking back at history, reacting to violence with violence is an incredibly stupid and ineffective method. It promotes the use of violence, usually illegal, within your own ranks and stirs up hatred in the eyes of your adversaries. For McKay's time, violence was somewhat justified. Yet as we look through the coming decades of the Civil Rights Movement, we realize that violence was not necessary. Black culture may have come to fruition with the violece of the Red Summer, but full equality and integration with other races only came with the nonviolent demonstrations led by Dr. Martin Luther King in his peaceful Civil Rights Movement. Violence may be justified, but it should never be necessary unless as a last resort. The Civil Rights Movement proved this well.
I think that claude mckay is saying that if you really want something you will try your best to get it even if you have to beg or die for it, but if you are not willing to die for it then you should stop saying i will do anything to get it.
ReplyDeleteSome people say things like i want freedom and i will do anything for it but when someone says will you die for it they say no and they dont get what they really want so it becomes a waste of time. i also think that if you really believe in something you will stand up for it and you will never back down.
I think that reacting to violence with violence is stupidity because you cant fight fire with fire you will just make a bigger fire and make things worse so it becomes a big waste of time. another reason you cant do that is because it could lead to your death or an accidental death because you wanted to fight fire with fire then its noones fault but your own and the others who made the same choice with you.
Claude McKay is saying that even a doomed resistance is worth while because at least they did not die in vain. "If we must die, O let us nobly die, So that our precious blood may not shed In vain; then even the monsters we defy Shall be constrained to honor us though dead!" He's saying that even if they do die while fighting for a cause they believe in, the people they are defying will also respect them for dying for something they believed in. They would rather die a noble death doing something with a cause than die sitting around being a bystander. McKay is saying that even if they're dying they are still fighting back.
ReplyDeleteReacting to violence violently is not stupidity but intellegence. But there are good and bad connotations pertaining to the action. If you act violently because you are being assailed and beaten then that is just self defense. But if you act violently because you are angry in a situation or somebody hit you trying to get you mad then you are being stupid. If there is another way to react without using violence then you must use that choice first.
Alexandra Barton
ReplyDeleteMcKay believes that even a doomed resistance is worthwhile because he believes if one fights back against their impending death, no matter what the concept or situation is, they will die knowing that they at least tried to stop the situation. If one resists, they can retain their pride and sense of personal dignity. Since there are whites fighting against them, they wouldn’t rather give them the inhumane; McKay believes that resistance is worthwhile so that they will not appear as being less important than humans. McKay expresses his thoughts, in “If We Must Die”, by saying, “It was during those days that the sonnet, “If We Must Die”, exploded out of me. And for it the Negro people unanimously hailed me as a poet. Indeed, that one grand outburst is their sole standard of appraising my poetry”. This section in the reading, describes how McKay’s feelings and emotions got to him during this time period and how since this one outburst situation occurred his poetry changed him as a person and as a writer of poetry. Most of all changed him as a human being. I believe that reacting to violence is both violently stupidity and intelligence because fighting for no purpose gets you nowhere in life which is an example of violently stupidity and if there was a situation that was for family or peers that were close to you than I would say that would be fighting for intelligence because first, you are fighting for a purpose and second you are helping others out, and if it was the other way around where you were needing help, I have a guarantee that they would help you in whatever situation occurred to you. In all, McKay believes that it is necessary to stand up against what you believe is wrong and resist, even if death is the consequence.
Aidan A.
ReplyDeleteThe reason McKay says that a doomed resistance is worthwhile because it is the first step in a chain reaction to produce other events. For example, the Spartans in three hundred only sent three hundred warriors against one million Persians. Not to mention the Spartans were not permitted to leave because of a holy celebration. They had more in numbers back home, but they wanted to make a statement. When the Persians were losing many men compared to the Spartans, it sent a message to all of Greece that the Persians are not as strong as they are believed to be. Then after most of the three hundred and their king die, they sent the whole army of Spartans to wipe out the Persians. It sent a message that the Spartans will not lay down to anyone, no matter where, or when.
Depending on the situation, violence is a key strategic move in order to defeat your opponent. There are times when your opponent's ignorance makes it unable to avoid an altercation. You could try to tone it down with them, but because they are ignorant they will not listen to anything you say. The next step is to strike first, they have already made up in their mind that they're willing to hurt you, why not strike before they can? Only intelligent people will use this as a strategy to become three steps ahead of their opponent. You're already involved, the only thing left is to finish the job.
McKay's influence of his quote came from all the stereotypes and racism that were directly aimed at African Americans during the early twenties. He saw the violence and how futile their resistance were compared to the white people. According to him a doomed resistance a very worthwhile thing. I believe that a futile resistance is very worthwhile because it sends a message. It can also be a beacon of hope and start a resistance that's even more successful. An example of this would be the British control on India. At the arrival of the British at te continent of India, the country was actually split into many nation states that had no affiliation with each other. When the British kept on taking more land and land, none of the nation states attempted to do anything, except one. That one nation state attempted to repel the British Advances, but were quickly crushed. The leaders were executed. The other nation states inspired of what they did united in order to stop the British. Although their military resistance was crushed, they would later use politics in order to remove British hands from the continent, Had if that one nation state had not done anything, the independence of India, Pakistan, and Bandgaldesh might have been delayed for a long time. If right a futile resistance can lead into something big and worthwhile.
ReplyDeleteThere is not only one way of reacting to violence. In fact there is two ways. Someone that reacts to violence very stupidly is someone that decides to feed the chain of violence. In other words fighting violence with violence, or fighting fire with fire. If there is fire you do not use fire as it will get bigger. For example if someone gets in a fight. The person who gets hit first will react stupidly to violence if he fights back. Another way if reacting to violence is very intelligently. Someone that does that is someone who decides to not feed the cycle of violence and hatred. For example if the person gets in a fight blocking and dodging might be a good way of reacting very intelligently to violence. Another smart way in a fight is to not hit back. Although you'll be viewed as a weakling you have avoided a cycle of violence. McKays words are truly inspiring and will inspire future generations of Americans whether Black or White
The Harlem Renaissance had led to the advancements in many other movements helping with civil rights and such. But to earn rights, you must fight for it. The birth of those revolutions, in a way, the original seed, was the Harlem Renaissance. McKay had said that even a doomed resistance is worth fighting for. For even if it is unsuccessful, you are gaining the attention of your enemies, your allies, and the bystanders. Showing them that you are willing to sacrifice yourself and all you may have for what is right. And in doing so, you may encourage those bystanders to become more than bystanders, but allies of your cause. An example:
ReplyDelete"If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine." - Obi-Wan Kenobi
Even if your resistance towards something unjust is futile and destined to lose, as long as you, and others around you understand the reason of your rebellion, then your sacrifice will only strengthen yourself as well as your resistance.
If you react to violence through violence then it is all leading to a circle of war and destruction. Violence cannot end violence, for violence is fuel for hatred, and the aftermath is nothing but rubble and death. An example,
"An eye for an eye only ends up making the whole world blind." - Mahatma Gandhi
If one chooses to seek revenge on one who has attacked first, then fighting back will only make them seek revenge as well. The only way to properly end a conflict of violence is to accept all enemy, not to simply tolerate them, but to accept them with open arms as you would with a friend. Although it may lead to them attempting to back-stab you, you will be hurt indeed, but you mustn't stray to the path of violence for it will end you, your enemy and everything in between. For what war hadn't been ended through diplomacy? What nation had been completely devastated through war? All conflicts have had an end, and all of them had been ended through words and compromise. If these words are taken into thought and adopted, then the future world shall become one of an infinite golden age of peace and understanding just as civil leaders had all hoped to eventually reach.
- Zachary Borja
"Even a doomed resistance is worthwhile"
ReplyDeleteWe can always predict and anticipate the outcome of the actions we take as a person and as a group but we can never be certain an expected outcome will happen. As humans we all have the ability to distinguish from right or wrong. When we see something wrong we must try to change it and not live with the harm the wrong does. Whether it directly affects you or not you must not accept nor ignore wrong actions causing harm, you must change it. We're all scare of change because we're used to the same routine but it doesn't mean it perfect or that we're content with it. We must not stand by and watch the world burn because we're not brave enough to support change-change that must be done in order to ameliorate society. Cloude Mckay knew that resisting to the injustice African Americans had to face wasn't going to easy and the outcome wouldn't be exactly what they hopped for. The chances of him and other African Americans during the Harlem Renaissance of witnessing change wasn't was low because America wasn't ready to change but it was in desperate need of change.
We all have our way of reacting to certain situations. The situations we are put in already set up a path to the decisions we decide to make in that situation. If we are facing violence the most logical answer is to violently respond to it because of the way it approached us. There's no thought into it, it's a simple impulse. If we don't think about it carefully we are not applying any knowledge to the way we respond to violence therefore it becomes a stupid decision to act without thinking, to respond violently. In order to have a better outcome out of a violent situation we must think about the way we respond to it before responding to it, when we do that's when it becomes more than just a violent a catastrophe.
In the quote McKay is saying: is something worth dying for? and that is what he did with his protests. McKay wanted racism to end towards African Americans and if had to put his life on the line he would. McKay wanted to end racism seeing at the time racism towards African Americans resulted in violence and have many killed towards the steps of ending racism. For McKay's second part of his quote of reacting to violence violently, reacting violently at the time is intelligence considering that at the time there was not a significant amount of protests compared to the civil rights movement. reacting violently is intelligence because it will also show the cause of the problem but give a bad message to either party. so all in all is something worth dying for? yes, if it is for the better good of the people in a setting of oppression yes it is towards ending the oppression or racism. is reacting to violence violently stupidity or intelligence? it is intelligence because it show how much you want what you want to change and can send a message of what is going on in the world
ReplyDeleteMy belief when Mckay says that even a doomed resistance is worthwhile means that although you still fight for something even though it may not be worth it in the end, it still shows how much you care for what you stand up against. People will see how much you stood up for your own belief and it can affect the many others around you. It all goes to show how far you are willing to resist. It will make everything worthwhile because if it is something that you truly believe in that is wrong, then it is something that can motivate you to go all the way.
ReplyDeleteThe way one can react to violence can go both ways. It could be classified as being stupidity and also intelligence. I believe that in the end, it all depends on the type of violence one can face. If it’s something that I will stand up against, then I would see it as intelligence. If it’s something that I just want to fight against for nothing, then that would be stupidity. There is always a reason to do something. That reason would have to be justified because that can either cause it to cause out of stupidity or being intelligent. Like for an example, if I was being threatened and harassed physically I would act out of self defense because that is a natural instinct that I have. Self defense, in my own opinion would be known as being an intelligent manner of reacting to violence. Another way of reacting to violence out of stupidity would be if I was to harass and physically abuse another individual for the heck of it. In the end, it is all based on the decisions of an individual and how they would react to violence.
My belief when Mckay says that even a doomed resistance is worthwhile means that all thought what your fighting for may not actually change at the end it shows how you actually cared about it enough to defended it. and all thought at frist people will juge you but you could light up other peoples courage who also believe in the same cause to join you.
ReplyDeletei would say that reacting to violence violently can be both stupidity or intelligence in it own unique way. I think if you act violently in a situation were its not really importan or really big of a deal its just stupidity coming from you inorder to draw attention to your self from other. but if some one is bullying you i feel that it is right an a correct moment to at violently in order to show the person that they are not intimidating would be intelligence.
JOSE MACIEL-
Dustin Piring
ReplyDeleteMy belief when Mckay states that even a doomed resistance is worthwhile means that fighting even though you know your going to do is all worth it. In my opinion, it all depends on the cause. Mckay related to the Harlem Renaissance. With all the slavery that happened. Referring back to what Andrew said, Mckay was probably sick of slavery so much that he would risk his life to end it. I understand what he was trying to do. Get rid of slavery. But for me, it all depends on the problem. Lets say my family member was in danger, this is when i would start considering what Mckay said because i would do anything for them. I think reacting to a situation in a violent way is not stupidity. Again, it is all about the cause. A guy can push you so far over the edge that there is just no other option. You can try using non violence such as civil disobedience but using violence is not stupidity.
Darren Nguyen
ReplyDeleteI believe that Mckay means that even though you will lose its better to lose with pride than to lose with no pride and to not put up a good fight when being pushed around. African Americans were pushed around and oppressed to the point where they are easily controlled. They will either lose losing or lose winning and that's what McKay means by doomed resistance being worthwhile.
Honestly i don't think reacting to violent violently is smart. yes you will be pushed around but if you are the bigger and mature person you will not act apon what your enemy is doing or you will just be doing the same. in other words you will become a hyprocrite. Endure the violence and get bossed around because patient will win at the end when people start to realize that the guys who are establishing the violence are the wrong doers.
I believe McKay is telling all of us that we all die, and we might as well die for a cause. We are all doomed to death. Despite this fact, McKay believes that we should all live life as if we were to die soon. I believe he is trying to say that a doomed resistance should in fact be motivation to take actions and stick up for ourselves. In his poem he is imparting the harshness African Americans endured at the time and how they should react to them.
ReplyDeleteIf you're held captive to leak confidential information and you're in between life and death what do you do? Most would say that they wouldn't spill the information. Why? Because they know that they are held to a high ground of loyalty and courage. This is what McKay is talking about. When African Americans were being brutalized he was telling them to not fear them and to fight back without fighting back.
In regards to reacting violently, I think it should be your last resort. I believe in nonviolence and don't condone fighting. But a part of me still says that when it comes down to the situation violence and physically fighting back is the only way. However, if you can't resolve a problem through words or compromise and violence seems to be your only option, I think that it's probably not a battle worth fighting.
A doomed resistance is basically going against a cause, and knowing and accepting the consequences. McKay says that a doomed resistance is worthwhile because the what you get out of all the perseverance and fighting will be much more liberating than the work itself. The process of fighting for what you want will result in a positive outcome. Even if the result is death, your strife will be sure to leave a legacy. Though your life is temporary, the legacy you've left behind will remain for generations to come. It's a cliche, but hard work does pay off. It's much better to lose in a way in which you can reminisce and be proud of than losing as a result to doing nothing.
ReplyDeleteReacting to violence in a violent manner can be intelligent and stupid, at the same time. Depending on the situation, violence might actually go against "Violent is not the answer" and be the only solution you have. Violence is a weapon that should be used with the utmost precaution. When communication and compromise don't satisfy the problem, then violence may have to be used. If one day a foreign army came down to Florida, or some place, and reasoning and rhetoric just doesn't suffice, there's nothing more to do other than fight physically. Sometimes choosing your "weapons of destruction" can be a battle itself. In conclusion, choose violence only when communication and compromise just won't do the trick.
Marcus Herrera
ReplyDeleteClaude mckay is meaning that we are all destined to die and it would be pointless to leave without having done something meaningful and worthful with your life. He wants to let people know we are all put on this earth to try and make a statement. Dying having not done anything will only make you look like a waste of space, however, contributing inwhat you believe in to make a change will make your life worth something. It makes you known how much you cared for what you did not agree with.
Reacting to violence violently can be seen as stupid and intelligent. When someone is acting in a violent can be smart because in most cases the first person that uses violence will back down noticing you are capable of causing harm. It will make them realize is it actually smart to start something physically if you are able to get hurt as well as who your trying to violently attack.
It can also been seen in a stupid way because violence matched with violence will only cause more violence. It can hurt innocent people as well as loved ones in long term effects. Violence is never the first option unless you need to show dominance over another person or country. Violence has been around with animals, countries and people for many years and isn't going away any time soon.
Claude McKay explains that ever since we have been given the gift of life, we have also been choices to make the time you have until you die worth living. We are all-in on this journey and one day each of us are all-out of it. Being expected to die shall be a downer, but it shall not allow anyone to stop in their tracks for something that they do not exactly know what's coming. everyone morally should have the ethic to never give up because we all perform actions to please ourselves, maybe not just ourselves, but we always strive to make things better for ourselves. The only person i need to live for is myself, that's why for every good day and bad i have, i tell myself that it belongs to me and it's my job to make better for the next day.
ReplyDeleteAs for the violence that is always present, there are right and wrong ways to react to it. Violence happens in many different shapes, sometimes amorphous. Most of us could say that if we saw something like personal violence on the streets, it could be up to the community or a bystanding crowd to let it be to certain extent. Whereas if you were stuck on the ground witnessing a bank robbery, you know you would be clueless on what is the exact right thing to do. Any event in life has its attributes that make it unique and has us left with choices on what to do when violence is upon us, but all reactions should be considered on what is appropriate to do.
Marquis Corpuz
TIANNA DILLMAN =)
ReplyDeleteMcKay is saying that a doomed resistance is worthwhile because in doing/thinking that it leads to other things.It also shows that if something means alot to you than you have to fight for it.it just shows that you actually do care and that you had the nerve to stand up for it .The people around you will see what you did and might want to do the same as you,which could be positive for you and everyone .If it is something you feel strongly about than you will do it until the end.McKay was most likely sick of slavery ,that he was willing to risk himself to end it ,to me that shows me how passionate he was about slavery.For me i see where Mckay came from but i personally would have to consider all the the options i have and i would not risk my own life unless it was for my mother.I would rather try to approach it as a civil disobedience act and not using actual violence because i wouldnt want to harm anyone.If anything violence should be your last option or it should be self-defense if someone attacks you first ,then of course you have to defend yourself in order to save yourself.It is only dumb if you act out of pocket towards something that is not that seruis.
Leila Harara
ReplyDeleteWhat is the point of living your life if you know one day that you will die? Because life is a beautiful thing an we are all entitled to enjoying it. Much like how McKay knew that a doomed resistance us worthwhile. You miss 100% of the shots that you don't take 100% of the time. But if you attempt at least one you can say that you put forth your best effort and that itself is commendable. You never know for-sure what the outcome of your actions will be but if you never try you will never get any results. Ff McKay sat back and accepted oppression than he would have never known what could have resulted if he would have responded.
Knowing when to react to violence is a very circumstantial scenario. Reacting to violence for no significant reason is stupidity. But reacting to violence that pins you against a wall and controls your life is intelligence.
Sometimes violence is the only way to get your voice heard. it may be the incorrect way to respond to a situation but either way you lose. If you react with violence with violence purely for the sake of your ego or pride you are doing so for the wrong reason. But sometimes when fighting fire with fire is your option.
What he is trying to say is that are you willing to die for what you believe in are u going to give up your life to make a change. I think if you want to make a change id doesn’t matter how long it takes of if you die but you will die with happiness and dignity because you fought for what you want and didn’t give up. If you have your mind set on something that will benefit others and you are willing to give your life away then make a change. Make a change and you will help a lot of people because you would have the courage to do something others cant.
ReplyDeleteThey are two ways people see violence one as stupidity because you would engage on violence when you can prevent it. People see it this way to not make it a bigger deal and to walk away form it because others can get hurt. The other way is intelligently and this is were I agree because I would only use violence only if im provoked or self defense. Because only use violence in a smart way like when you are being attack or need to defend yourself.
If you were a solider would you go out and fight,still knowing there is a slight chance that you will never come back? Many would say yes. The meaning of a doomed resistance that might be worthwhile is that even if it brings death to a person's life, generation or their ideas that it can bring a better future. If sacrificing everything can bring a better future many can do it. A better future is the future where are past selves live in. As humans we always trying to improve. Improving the future is just one of those aspects. Living through harsh times, discrimination and segregation makes many people want to change that inequality. Not for themselves, but for their kin. The only reason we try to improve things is to make a better world for our next generation, so they won't repeat our mistakes and achieve world peace. That is as humans main goal, to achieve world peace. In McKay's experience it's to make an equal society in America, where African Americans wouldn't be looked down upon.
ReplyDeleteReacting to violence violently is instinct , but stupid. Violence should not fought with violence, it's like fight fire with fire it will only increase it. These events that are reacted with violence will only cause chaos and destroy the world. People can't make others see what they want, unless they want to, forcing is not the way. It's like if a person hit you the smarter tactic is to block than hit where both parties get injured. Even though reacting with violence violently can be justified as self-defense, but there are other ways around it. There might be times where it is acceptable, but to use violence when there are alternatives are not. Reacting violently is stupidity because in many ways it could've been prevented and that would just injure both parties without seeing eye to eye. There ais a reason of why the bible would state. "turn the other cheek".