Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The life of cesar chavez
Violent vs nonviolent protest civil rights movement
Cesar Chavez and the Farmworker Movement
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The life of cesar chavez
Before reading or watching the film, I knew little about Cesar Chavez. I only knew that he fought for the rights of farm workers, but had no idea of how he achieved it. I was surprised to learn about some of his innovations that later lead to his success. Especially since some were already used by other strong leaders previously from him. The two innovations that stood out to me the most were the use of nonviolence and boycotting. Both innovations helped Cesar Chavez in achieving fair rights for other farm workers. These innovations are still used and seen today since they have been effective in accomplishing change. One of Caesar’s innovations was the use of nonviolence. He believed that no one had the right to take the life away from another human being. During the film, this concept was shown. There were scenes that showed supporters protesting with signs that stated “Huelga”, and during these protests there were no signs of violence acts. Cesar Chavez knew that his supporters were starting to lose patience, and tried to convince them not to use violence. But there was a group of people who didn’t believe in nonviolence. So, they formed their own group and did their own protest. …show more content…
Nowadays, this concept of using nonviolence is hard to achieve. This is because people think that peaceful protest aren’t effective compared to taking action with their hands. One example is the Blacks Lives Matter Movement. Although there are peaceful protest, there are times when people turn violent against police. This can be counterintuitive since watching these harsh actions by protestors, people start forming negative views about the organization. This leads to people not supporting the cause anymore. Without the support of the public, an organization can’t
In Fight in the Fields: Cesar Chavez, by Margo Sorenson, two teenagers were not paying attention in history class, and their teacher assigned them Saturday school, pulling weeds. Kenneth and Aleesa weren’t friends, they were caught passing a note to someone. After, they started to work on Saturday, they both drank from a blue water jug, that sent them back in time. To the year 1965, where Cesar Chavez was helping out the field workers get their own union. By putting on a strike against the Schenley Company, who grow grapes in Delano, California, and sold them around the world. While, the teenagers were in the past, they lived and worked with the Lopez’s, Juan, Rosa, and their son Luis. Luis helped Kenneth and Aleesa understand what was happening during that time with the NFWA- National Farm Workers Association and the strike to get the workers a union of their own, and they all joined the NFWA. Which ended in the year 1970 and they were able to go back to their time. Both Kenneth and Aleesa were able to experience the strike first hand, and when they went back home, they wished that they had paid a little bit more attention in class, and that they were going to from then on.
Senator Robert F. Kennedy described him as “one of the heroic figures of our time” (Cesar Chavez Foundation). This shows that Cesar Chavez made a difference in people’s lives, including Senator Robert’s. Some people may say that immigrants are bad people but Cesar Chavez was an immigrant himself yet, also a hero to the country. Experts say he was an American farm worker, labor leader, and a civil rights activist. This shows that he fought for what he believed in. Being a farm worker wasn’t something he planned on doing but he had no choice because he was an immigrant. He saw how cruel Americans were treating immigrants so he fought for their rights. He spoke for all the immigrants everywhere. The Cesar Chavez Foundation mentioned that at age 11, his family lost their farm during the great depression and became migrant farm workers. This shows how and why Cesar Chavez fought for farmworkers rights. He grew up not having the best childhood but he took others lives into consideration and fought for them to have a better and brighter
If something isn’t right, there is a way to fix it. Violence of course is never the answer therefore, non-violent protests were started. Non-Violent protesting had a slow start then it spread around the world when it hit media attention. Non-violent protest also had more effectiveness than violent protests. Non-Violent protests may have taken a while, but the results were successful.
Chavez influenced the Federal Government to raise the minimum wage, which made people have faith in him. The article History says, “Victory came finally on July 29,1970 when twenty-six Delane growers formally signed contract recognizing the UFW and bringing peace to the vineyards” (History).Cesar Chavez had the ability to change people's mindset for the better. The people believed in him. VAO states,“The union’s hard work helped in getting the Agriculture Labor Relations Act passed in California, under Governor Jerry Brown” (VAO). Chavez mindset was focused on persuading the government on raising the minimum wage for the farm workers. Without Chavez they would of not have passed the act.
This movie relates to me because currently I am working in agriculture. Thanks to Cesar we have the rights we deserve as humans and we get paid more. If Cesar would have not stood up and started the NFWA “National Farm Workers Association” farm workers would probably would not have the same rights. Now during work I am able to go to a restroom whenever I need to without fearing to be seen, as well as not worrying that pesticide is sprayed during work hours. They started to fight for the rights of every single farm worker in America. I also had past family members that worked in the fields. Thanks to Cesar they did not have to go through what the past farm workers did. Cesar helped out a lot of people and his believes still keep on helping farm workers. This movie was worth watching because it is a lesson, that thanks to the people that boycotted and stopped working. Now with these rules established agriculture workers have a safer place to work in and they do not risk their health.
Cesar "wanted to get away from the interruptions that constantly arose from having the union headquarters located near an urban center and a major highway" due to him feeling too dependent and moving to the place would make it a local decision." (Del Castillo).This shows courage because he didn't want people to be dependending on him do all the work, he moved to a place were people so the people can be more involved in the situation and have them fight for the rights of the farmworkers as well. This is also demonstrating how they'd encouraged to make decisions as well and not depend so much on Cesar because it was a team that was working for the same cause. Another way he demonstrates courage to us in in the article when it says how Cesar Chavez had to drop out of school when he was in middle school to help out his father in the fields. Not only that but the article also mentions that Cesar Chavez fasted in 1968 to show his followers and this organization that nonviolence is the way to fight for their cause. This also tells us how Cesar Chavez had to risk his health and his life just to set an example to his union that violence isn't the answer to win the
People have been using nonviolence resistance in many pictures to solve social issues. In the history of Indian people lead by Mahatma used this system to gain independent from France successfully. As we can see before they prefers this way, Indian people tried to force France to give them independent by violence. Therefore, the situation become much worst many peoples die and a lot of them went to jail. For example, “Nonviolence resistance makee it possible for people to gain what they want” (par. 9) shows that King’s strongly believe that only choose. Furthermore, nonviolence r...
Everyone knows what Martin Luther King Jr. did for the rights of African Americans but not everyone is as familiar with Cesar Chavez. Chavez is an unsung hero in American history. He was the leader that started “La Causa”, the Hispanic American civil rights movement. Chavez changed the lives of thousands of people. He left his imprint on the world by dedicating his life to fighting for the rights of migrant farmworkers. Farmworkers had extremely hard lives, so Chavez inspired people to demand change. Even after his passing, his legacy continues on through the Cesar Chavez Foundation which helps improve communities in numerous states.
"There are many causes that I am prepared to die for, but no causes that I am prepared to kill for," is something that Mahatma Gandhi said. It tells the truth about peaceful protests. By choosing the peaceful way, people do sit-ins and marches, instead of harsher actions like riots. Although breaking the law to create change can appear to work without being peaceful, it will have an easier time getting public and government approval if the activists are not causing serious harm. If the peaceful way wasn’t’ available, people would see change in a harsher way, so peaceful resistance has a positive effect in a free society.
Non-violent methods such as those employed by great men like Mohandas (later Mahatma) Gandhi, Martin Luther King Junior, and Nelson Mandela are absolutely crucial to solving problems of racism, as other stratagems may reap only a crop of renewed hatred and will ultimately lead to continued violence. Peaceful ways of protest against unjust and racist laws are often the only plausible solution, even in the face of hate and oppression.
Nonviolence and civil disobedience are very similar means of protest. Civil disobedience is the refusal to comply with certain laws or to pay taxes and fines, as a peaceful form of political protest (Definition of civil disobedience). Nonviolence is the policy, practice, or technique of refraining from the use of violence,especially when reacting to or protesting against oppression, injustice, or discrimination
From 1900 to 2006, nonviolent campaigns worldwide were twice as likely to succeed outright as violent insurgencies… [In fact,] this trend has been increasing over time, so that in the last 50 years, nonviolent campaigns are becoming increasingly
Now a days violence is still present as an approach to meet oppression but it is not as common as it used to be back then. To me violence is obsolete in certain ways given the fact that now there is rules to follow created by the law. It is also important to mention that, for example, Police officers, often use violence against civilians when they try to put the handcuffs on them or even when they want the civilian to do as they say. Sometimes we feel like we have to resort to violence or aggression to get our points across to people. In reality, this will just make things worse. With that said, nonviolent resistance is the best way to go because there is no violence required.Martin Luther King states, “Nonviolent resistance is not aimed against
Throughout history, revolutions have been effective in voicing the peoples opinions and changing the government using the mass population of the people. Non Violence campaigns as well as violent campaigns have proved to both be successful overtime. You may think of Martin Luther King Jr. leading the civil rights march or the French revolution in the late 1700s, but the question is which is truly more effective? Popular violent campaigns may make the headlines but when it comes down to it, the using of violence in revolts simply does not warrant the same results. The most powerful and efficient form of protest is nonviolent because it is safer with less death, the outcome is more positive in terms of what was trying to be achieved, and lastly, and probably most important, it has a much higher success rate in the results.
A finer point is the fact that any means of non-violence protest is sustainable provided the opposition has a moral value not to cross a certain line. Has it been the case where British practiced shoot or execute anybody who may protest by any means, then Gandhi would have been shot lot earlier, perhaps in the train in South Africa, and there would have been no mahatma or success of non violence. Take Hitler for example. Let alone resisting, even if you try to cooperate with German for the demise of Jews, as a Jew you can be sure you will be shot. Where do you put non-violence against such a tyranny?