Argumentation #6 : Violence Isn't an Instinct

   In his novel Native Son, Richard Wright writes “Violence is a personal necessity for the oppressed...It is not a strategy consciously devised. It is the deep, instinctive expression of a human being denied individuality.”This is certainly true for Bigger Thomas, the main character of the novel who views whiteness as an aggressive and hostile force against him and many who find themselves stifled by oppression. But at the same time there are many in oppression who find non-violent ways to protest and fight against the social norms, laws, and bigotry that shackle them.   Write a response in which you support, refute, or qualify Wright's claim that violence is a personal necessity or an instinctive expression of humans being oppressed. Use examples from your readings, experiences, or knowledge to support your argument.

   Violence is the act of using physical force to potentially hurt, damage or kill someone or something. It is something that, unfortunately, many have had the chance to experience,  from the smallest acts to the greater ones.  Richard Wright claims that violence  is the reaction to people being oppressed, “Violence is a personal necessity for the oppressed...It is not a strategy consciously devised. It is the deep, instinctive expression of a human being denied individuality.”  However, that is not the case. There are thousands, millions, maybe even billions  of people who are being oppressed that do not result in violence. Sometimes there are those individuals that believe violence to be a form of expressing their oppression, but that is not the case for all mankind. 
   There are many ways in which people can respond to oppression, and violence is never the only way. Many people protest, and go with non-violent options. For example, Martin Luther King led a large group of African Americans in non-violent protests, and was successful. He, and many other African Americans were non-violent, although they were being really oppressed. Violence wasn't their first choice to their oppression, making Wright's claim incorrect.   
   Sometimes there can be times where non-violent protests turn violent. Wright said that instinctive expression of a human being denied individuality, but that violent instinct can be taken away. Although sometimes violence can take over, it can be oppressed. If violence were an instinctive act when being denied individual, then why didn't it occur before there was a big movement. Violence Cesar Chavez led a large group of farm workers protesting against being oppressed when it comes to work conditions. Although they tried really hard to keep their non-violence protests, violence at one point did come to be. However, it stopped. Violence can be oppressed, and be taken away all together, 
    Violence is not an "instinctive expression of a human being denied individuality." I'm pretty sure that many wouldn't resort to violence, when their mother is oppressing them. Violence is not our first instinct, we may think terrible things, but it isn't the first thing we resort to, well at least for many of us.