Despite Marcus having an extremely intricate plan figured out, he was still unsuccessful in carrying out a successful revolt, whereas the Berkeley students involved in the Free Speech Movement got exactly what they wanted relatively easily. The leader of the Free Speech Movement made himself a personable figure in the revolution; he made himself known and approachable, whereas Marcus did not have a choice in the matter. He had to remain elusive and anonymous for his own safety, otherwise he would have been thrown into prison by the DHS. In an interview with a very important figure of the Free Speech Movement, Barbara Garson talked about her involvement as well as how the leader, Mario Savio took over his role. She discusses how their involvement was purely with a “vision of a better world”. (http://0-web.ebscohost.com.sculib.scu.edu/ehost/detail?sid=323bd677-a680-4f8f-8f68-973f0f8807d8%40sessionmgr113&vid=1&hid=125&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=apn&AN=ALTP29316) Now the crucial difference between this and Marcus’s movement was that Savio’s main dream concerning his movement was to try to do whatever he could to right something he saw as wrong, whereas Marcus’ sole reason for doing what he did was to get back at Homeland Security and prove that he was right. The motives were extremely different and I feel like it played a crucial role in how successful each movement was.  People with negative motives often have their true goals become overshadowed by such strong negative emotions. Marcus had angry motives and thus was unable to carry out a successful revolution.

taken from here