Anger is raw, powerful, and deeply human. It has always been at the core of personal and collective struggles, driving people to stand up, speak out, and fight for change. In social justice movements, it has been a rallying force — bringing people together, fueling resistance, holding those in power accountable, and refusing to let injustice go unnoticed. But history shows that when anger goes unchecked, it can turn into retaliation, sometimes working against the very cause it was meant to fight for. The challenge, then, is not whether anger is justified but how to wield it without letting it consume us.

Philosophers have long debated the role of anger in our lives. Aristotle offers a nuanced perspective on its role. Rather than seeing anger as something inherently bad, he suggests it is something that requires careful handling. As he famously put it, “anybody can become angry—that is easy, but to be angry with the right person and to the right degree and at the right time and for the right purpose, and in the right way—that is not within everybody’s power and is not easy." What this means is that anger in itself is not the issue, it is how we manage it. When directed appropriately and with purpose, anger can drive us toward justice. But when left unchecked, it can become destructive.

Anger is a driving force in social justice movements, from the Civil Rights Movement in the United States to the fight against apartheid in South Africa. More than just a human emotion, it has been a transformative power, shaping pivotal moments in history. When harnessed effectively, anger challenges oppression, unites communities, and demands change.

Take, for example, the Women’s Suffrage Movement, where anger at the systematic exclusion of women from the political process was a driving force. However, this anger was never allowed to devolve into mindless retaliation. Instead, activists channeled their frustration into uniting women across races, socio-economic statuses, and backgrounds. They understood that change would come not from mere anger, but from organizing, building alliances, and crafting a message that resonated with a broad audience. Figures like Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony founded the National Woman Suffrage Association (NWSA) and advocated for a federal amendment to secure women’s voting rights. Their strategic efforts and broad-based support led to the passage of the Nineteenth Amendment, granting women the right to vote.

​Nelson Mandela's leadership exemplifies the transformation of anger into constructive societal change. After enduring 27 years of imprisonment, he consciously chose reconciliation over vengeance, understanding that a fractured nation could not heal through bitterness. Mandela's approach involved learning Afrikaans, studying the culture of his oppressors, and forming unexpected friendships with his jailers, all strategies aimed at fostering unity and cooperation. He believed that "great anger and violence can never build a nation", emphasizing that both black and white citizens should emerge as victors in the nation's reconstruction. He is a clear example of how, when channeled wisely, anger becomes a powerful catalyst for meaningful change in social justice movements.

More recently, the Black Lives Matter protests that erupted after the killing of George Floyd illustrate how deep-seated anger over systemic racism and police brutality can mobilize communities into demanding sweeping reforms. Fueled by widespread outrage, these protests have sparked a global conversation about racial justice, police accountability, and the need for institutional change. The collective anger channeled through BLM has resulted in policy discussions and legislative efforts aimed at curbing police misconduct and addressing systemic racism. The movement has helped bring about legislative reforms, such as the ban on chokeholds and the establishment of police accountability measures in several U.S. cities. This demonstrates that when anger is directed strategically, it can bring about significant social change.

Nevertheless, anger is a double-edged sword, as it can simultaneously serve as a powerful motivator for social change, while also perpetuating cycles of violence, ultimately hindering the very progress it seeks to achieve. Anger has a way of narrowing our focus, and heightening our desire for revenge. This is why personal disputes often escalate into long-lasting grudges and why political movements, meant to unite people, sometimes fracture.

Martha Nussbaum, a leader in feminist philosophical discourse, views anger as a deeply primitive emotion that often brings out our worst instincts. While anger is a natural reaction to injustice, it often comes with a desire for revenge, and a thirst for payback that rarely leads to real, lasting change. Nussbaum argues that retribution only makes things worse. It does not undo the harm that has been done, rather it often fuels further division and conflict. Instead of letting anger consume us and spiral into retaliation, Nussbaum advocates for using that energy in more productive ways. She suggests we focus on reform and constructive dialogue, turning our anger into a force for positive change rather than perpetuating harm.

On an everyday level, anger distorts our sense of right and wrong, making it harder to engage with differing opinions. In today's world, we see this dynamic play out across social media, where anger often spreads faster than reasoned discourse. Performative activism, where the loudest voices are seen as the most powerful, has become very prevalent, with certain movements gaining traction without necessarily leading to meaningful change. Instead of leading to reconciliation, they only deepen divisions. Anger can be a destructive force in political discourse, especially when it is used as a tool to rally support.

Take, for instance, the rise of populism in recent years, where leaders have successfully harnessed anger and fear to galvanize people around a cause. While this approach may work in the short term, the long-term consequences are often deeply damaging, with anger breeding extremism, and deepening an “us versus them” mentality, pushing individuals toward radical solutions. This dynamic played out clearly during the 2016 and 2020 Democratic primaries, where a faction of Bernie Sanders' supporters, often referred to as "Bernie Bros," demonstrated how harmful unchecked anger can be in politics. Frustrated by a system they deemed rigged, they directed their outrage at moderate Democrats like Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden. Instead of building coalitions, their confrontational rhetoric and online harassment pushed potential allies away, reinforcing the image of Sanders' base as unwilling to compromise. This hostility deepened divisions within the party, making it harder to unite around progressive policies and win over centrist voters. The impact was felt personally, as figures like Lindy Li resigned after enduring harassment, showing how anger can fracture unity and hinder progress.

The role of anger in social justice movements has long been debated, with some viewing it as divisive, while others see it as a vital force for change. Critics argue it fosters chaos, whereas supporters contend that without it, movements would lack the urgency to challenge established power structures. When directed at dismantling oppression, anger becomes a powerful catalyst for change.