# data[].attributes.body
Violence is more effective because it draws more attention to the situation at hand.

# data[].attributes.body
is a more effective approach as it stimulates passion in people, rather than continue an old message of "unity" when unity has not been a thing since the years of slaves. Malcom X's speech of "The Ballot or the Bullet" proves this point as it ignites a fire of passion in people to support Black Nationalism, making it clear that whatever religion you follow does not matter: Black Nationalism is everywhere and must be everywhere to change problems in society such as segregation and civil rights.

# data[].attributes.body
nonviolence was more effective in unifying everyone as a whole whereas violence was more effective in unifying African Americans to take action

# data[].attributes.body
They are both effective, but nonviolence takes more time to bring change. However, your cause will be viewed in a more positive light if it is nonviolent, so others will be more accepting.

# data[].attributes.headline
It depends on what goal you intend to achieve. MLK was trying to unite black and white people, so patience and nonviolence would be they key to convince an ignorant group of people (white people) of what is right. Malcolm X was black people to unite as a separate community from white people based on their frustration and anger. Drawing on these emotions, which can turn into violence, was effective for his goal.

# data[].attributes.subject
It depends on what goal you intend to achieve. MLK was trying to unite black and white people, so patience and nonviolence would be they key to convince an ignorant group of people (white people) of what is right. Malcolm X was black people to unite as a separate community from white people based on their frustration and anger. Drawing on these emotions, which can turn into violence, was effective for his goal.

# data[].attributes.body
The more violent approach (Malcolm X) was more effective because it exhorts the people to stand up and fight instead of "sitting" and waiting for the world to change. Nonviolence can be mistaken as submissive and therefore less effective, because while the movement is attempting to gain sympathy, showing their strength is more important.

# data[].attributes.body
Has the most effective / quick outcomes

# data[].attributes.body
I think violent protests can create resentment towards  a cause. I think nonviolent protests are more effective because it promotes unity rather than division.

# data[].attributes.body
Violence is more effective and shows more power

# data[].attributes.body
Nonviolence is more effective because it cause conversation and empathy
You may well ask, "Why direct action, why sit-ins, marches, and so forth? Isn't negotiation a better path?" ...Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and establish such creative tension that a community that has consistently refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored. I just referred to the creation of tension as a part of the work of the nonviolent resister. This may sound rather shocking. But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word "tension." I have earnestly worked and preached against violent tension, but there is a type of constructive nonviolent tension that is necessary for growth. J

# data[].attributes.headline
Letter from a Birmingham Jail vs Ballot or the Bullet 

# data[].attributes.subject
Letter from a Birmingham Jail vs Ballot or the Bullet 

# data[].attributes.body
Both of these methods are effective because they both appeal to their different audience. These two pieces have different purposes therefore they are both able to evoke the desired response from their targeted audience.