The author of the reading “The Politics of Disorder: Reexamining Harlem’s Riots of 1935 and 1943” presents a compelling article about the origins of the riots and why they occurred. While it is useful to look at the causes of the riots, I think the effects of the riots are also significant. Even though we are taught that “violence is not the answer” if you look at the riots, it is clear that violence was the only option left for the African Americans in Harlem. When dealing with racism, only an action as radical as rioting or picketing (in large numbers) can bring about change. After the 1935 riot and La Guardia’s commission’s findings, better government services were brought to Harlem: an Advisory Committee on Negro Problems was established, a new Central Harlem Health Center building opened, and more. However, these changes were not long lasting and the effects of the riot were not far-reaching. The riot only served to make short-term changes in the lives of the Harlemites. It seemed every time there was an advance in equality for blacks, there is bound to be a return to old habits of discrimination or segregation. This step backwards led to the riot of 1943. If the community in Harlem experienced continual improvements in their lives with their more peaceful actions, they wouldn’t have to resort to another violent riot. While the one in 1935 had some issues of class mixed in, the 1943 was solely based on race. The Harlemites realized that discrimination was the reason for their low incomes or difficulty in even finding jobs. After the riot of 1943, La Guardia finally decided to listen to the pleas of the people in Harlem and act upon them. Of course these changes were not long-lasting either, as evidenced by the riot of 1964.Nevertheless, even though violence may not be the best answer to a problem, sometimes it is the only one available.