you think they're zero not hero?
Dear Editor:
I question your views on the article you wrote about the influential individuals during the African-American Civil rights movement. You say how the speeches of many didn't affect the outcome of the movement, but I contradict your ridiculous idea that they weren't "influential" like they're supposed to be.
With so many great examples of influential power during the African American civil Rights movement it is nearly impossible to say that they're useless. People with influence don't have to express their ideas through a speech, but it could also be displayed as the actions performed. Without these actions, the Civil Rights Act of 1968 would've never been released.
For example, how would the African-American race portray their feelings about discrimination against them without someone influential, in this case, Martin Luther King. You say how African Americans could've just refused laws (like Jim Crow Laws) to show their feelings, but it is all about persuasion. With the statistical information I have gathered, 85% of the people I survey agreed with me how the influential people did affect the outcome positively.
What you are implying in your article is similar to saying that Ghandi had nothing to do with the freedom of India, or how Thomas Edison had no contribution to the lightbulb. I am overwhelmed how you exclaimed that influential individuals, such as Martin Luther King Jnr, Ella Baker, Malcolm X, had no effect on the outcome of the movement. Please think before you write and publish, so you don't get letters like mine in the future.
Sincerely,
Joshua Parks
78 The Boulevard
2398 9883
I question your views on the article you wrote about the influential individuals during the African-American Civil rights movement. You say how the speeches of many didn't affect the outcome of the movement, but I contradict your ridiculous idea that they weren't "influential" like they're supposed to be.
With so many great examples of influential power during the African American civil Rights movement it is nearly impossible to say that they're useless. People with influence don't have to express their ideas through a speech, but it could also be displayed as the actions performed. Without these actions, the Civil Rights Act of 1968 would've never been released.
For example, how would the African-American race portray their feelings about discrimination against them without someone influential, in this case, Martin Luther King. You say how African Americans could've just refused laws (like Jim Crow Laws) to show their feelings, but it is all about persuasion. With the statistical information I have gathered, 85% of the people I survey agreed with me how the influential people did affect the outcome positively.
What you are implying in your article is similar to saying that Ghandi had nothing to do with the freedom of India, or how Thomas Edison had no contribution to the lightbulb. I am overwhelmed how you exclaimed that influential individuals, such as Martin Luther King Jnr, Ella Baker, Malcolm X, had no effect on the outcome of the movement. Please think before you write and publish, so you don't get letters like mine in the future.
Sincerely,
Joshua Parks
78 The Boulevard
2398 9883