Response to Peer Post (14)
Response to Peer Post
Author’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Response to Peer Post
I found your initial discussion post interesting and informative because it reveals intriguing thoughts about Martin Luther King Junior (MLK). You draw his image as a leader in our history who used his understanding of rivals’ strengths, weaknesses, and shortcomings to lead his organization through an immensely challenging situation. You begin by acknowledging King’s feat in being a vigorous activist who led the major civil rights movement back in 1955 aimed at bringing social change in an era when the voice of the African Americans was merely heard in the United States. I admire your argument that this civil rights movement was just but the beginning of Martin Luther King Junior’s journey as an activist for the black people. He was aware of his weaknesses, shortcomings, and virtues and strengths. On top of this, you mention that King managed to comprehend the strengths and weaknesses of his civic and political enemies who were mainly people from the South.
Thank you for your elaboration on how MLK understood his strengths and weaknesses and those of his rival. I agree with your assertion that as a strategic leader, King was fully aware of what leadership skills he possessed. He understood how to apply these skills during the civil rights movement to drive and motivate masses in the American public. MLK was also good at using his Christian doctrine as the basis for propelling his nonviolent activism and drive his civil rights agenda. Furthermore, I agree that King managed to employ his profound theological communication capabilities to make his rivals understand and realize that the harm they were causing for propagating racism.
You also mention that MLK’s principal weakness was his focus on leading nonviolent protests at a time when he was constantly threatened and attacked on a racial basis. Here, I tend to differ with you because I see this as a strength and not a weakness because it demonstrates his qualities of perseverance and endurance in difficult moments, which enabled him to spearhead nonviolent protests in situations of racial violence. All the same, I would add that this perseverance and sense of servant leadership drove him to be willing to take risks for his race. Such risks included the time when he allowed a white supremacist to come in during a book signing event only for him to stab MLK in the chest, but he survived. While this attack was aimed to harm him, it only reinvigorated his passion for fighting for the rights of black people against racism.
Indeed, I think that this attack served as an eye-opener for MLK to better understand his enemies’ strengths and weaknesses. I say so because your discussion post describes MLK as being capable of comprehending his enemies, the threat they posed, and their determinations and passions towards resisting the essential social change that he petitioned and advocated. He also managed to understand the strategies used by the white supremacists, which entailed dominating the black people and denying them the deserved opportunity to be heard. With this understanding, King realized the need to mobilize the black community towards articulating their voice to be heard publicly and speak against racial segregation. This way, King managed to lead masses of people towards positive social change. Thank you for your great thoughts.
