Impact Of Gandhi On Civil Disobedience

Gandhi identified a patterned as he studied civil disobedience cases in different countries: people who fought for their rights through non-violent tactics where eventually successful. People headed better outcomes when they mobilized in combined effort. For instance, in the following cases people have mobilized by unifying, organizing major labor strikes and/or refusing to consume products and services from their oppressors. Gandhi had an influential background of Ahimsa, a set of principle against violence towards living things. Therefore, Gandhi believed it was wrong to use violence in political conflicts or any conflict in that matter, for it would only arouse both parties with anger and incent them to use forceful tactics to achieve their goal. Nonetheless, Gandhi understood his political efforts; “passive resistance” in South African produced limited results. Simply opposing political injustice through speeches, petitions and negotiations were not enough to have whites understand and sympathize how Indians were treated unjust (P. Ackerman., J. Duvall., 2000. pg. 65). As a result, Gandhi later adopted “satyagraha” position, a nonviolent though forceful tactic to apply pressure on those in power by protesting against unjust policies through noncooperation

For instance, in the late 1970s, in Argentina the city of Buenos Aires stood a minority group of women in solidarity whom had two things in common; they were mothers of disappeared daughters and sons and they wanted answers from the government. Though they were told that public meeting were against the government, these mothers did not give up (pg. 268). The mothers secretly organized and campaign their stories to outsiders (pg. 272). They utilized news media from other countries to get their stories notice (pg. 274, 76). Their campaign gave voice to their cause by unifying into one identity, an identity that individuals can relate