We have not always agreed, but I have said repeatedly and publicly many times that Al Sharpton has never counseled violence, but he gets blamed for a whole lot of that.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
Man has an innate capacity for violence, but can only justify it in the name of justice.
In my books, I never portray violence as a reasonable solution to a problem. If the lead characters in the story are driven to it, it's at the extreme end of their experience.
We've never advocated violence; violence is inflicted upon us. But we do believe in self-defense for ourselves and for black people.
I think that there's something in the American psyche, it's almost this kind of right or privilege, this sense of entitlement, to resolve our conflicts with violence. There's an arrogance to that concept if you think about it. To actually have to sit down and talk, to listen, to compromise, that's hard work.
I think violence can never be justified.
It is not he who gains the exact point in dispute who scores most in controversy - but he who has shown the better temper.
I do not hold to non-violence for moral reasons, but for political and practical reasons.
I think that the effort to continue to look for some law to somehow make violence go away is missing the point.
Non-violence requires a double faith, faith in God and also faith in man.
We all agreed that violence begets violence, and you can't solve issues with more violence.