Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The life of nelson mandela biography essay
Conclusion for this salt march
The life of nelson mandela biography essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The life of nelson mandela biography essay
o ur world has many ways of solving problems. For example countries write up constitutions and declarations in order to become independent. We write treaties to keep peace and to make allies. Everything we do has a solution yet all of these things stated above take the lives of millions of people, through war. In this paper we will talk about the three virtues that promote non-violence and the three people who became successful using these tactics. Non-violent protests worked because these leaders and their inspired followers were willing to bring attention to their cause by breaking the law, maintaining disciplining the face of violence, and accepting jail time for their acts of civil disobedience. Let us talk about the first reason, …show more content…
breaking the law. Without breaking the law freedom fighter could not show their anger. If these civilians did not show anger the government would not realize the consequences if they did not switch the law. Ways of breaking the law in a non-violent manner would include sit in and boycotts. Three leaders showed this. Let us start with Gandhi. Gandhi broke the law by leading boycotts and marches. His most famous march was the salt march that went against the high taxes of salt given by the British {document 1}.
This inspired citizens who also helped in the cause. King broke the law in a very similar way. He participated in many sit ins and boycotts. “If, by chance…we are guilty of violating the law, please be assured that we did it to bring the whole issue of racial injustice under scrutiny of the conscience of Atlanta” says king from his autobiography {document 2}. Lastly Mandela broke the law by leading non-violent protest which actually put him in jail. {Document 3} The second reason non-violence impacted human rights was maintaining discipline. Maintaining discipline meant nonresistance and not fighting back. This truly made nonviolent protests non-violent. Gandhi maintained discipline during his salt march by showing nonresistance {document 4}. He would walk in ranks and be beaten down yet they never raised a hand in self-defense. King maintained discipline by not taking any weapons and protested without laying a finger on the enemy. “We proved to them that we needed no weapons—not as much as a toothpick. We proved that we had the most formidable weapon of all—the conviction that were right” said king in his autobiography, {document 5}. Mandela maintained discipline in the face of violence when he would protest. {Document 6} when the authorities intimidated and attacked the volunteers they would not
retaliate. Out final reason was accepting jail time. All three freedom fighter needed to accept jail time because it was the moral thing to do. This showed there followers that after breaking the law they must face the consequences for their crime. Gandhi faced months of jail time just because his followers were {document 7}. King and his followers were jailed 14 times {document 8} just for these non-violent protests. And Mandela was jailed for almost 27 years of his life just for protesting on the streets when he was in college {document 9}! These freedom fighter inspired many of our other leaders that run our world today. Gandhi, king, and Mandela gave their whole lives to the cause they made the lives of millions of other people better the cost was their own Gandhi was assassinated by nathuram godse, and king was shot by James earl ray, and Mandela spent 27 years in prison. These men all used these strategies to make nonviolence work these leaders and their inspired followers were willing to bring attention to their cause by breaking the law, maintaining disciplining the face of violence, and accepting jail time for their acts of civil disobedience.
When you are fight to get peace and fairness back to your government, does it involve nonviolent or violent acts to get what you want? When Gandhi came back to India after getting his law degree, Gandhi started a movement to bring peace and fairness back to their government. What made Gandhi’s nonviolent movement work? The reason Gandhi’s nonviolent movement worked was because he didn’t believe in segregation, didn’t follow the British’s rules for Indians, went to jail for his movement, and he was determined.
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 Cesar Chavez’s article, he uses many rhetorical devices to help give the reader a better understanding of how important nonviolence vs violence is. Chavez explains how Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Mahatma Gandhi have endowed reasons of nonviolence worth following.
applies the principles of civil disobedience in his procedure of a nonviolent campaign. According to him, “In any nonviolent campaign there are four basic steps: collection of the facts to determine whether injustices exist; negotiation; self-purification; and direct action” (King 262). The first step, which is “collection of the facts,” clarify whether the matter requires civil disobedience from the society (King 262). The second step, “negotiation,” is the step where civil disobedience is practiced in a formal way; to change an unjust law, both sides come to an agreement that respects each other’s demand, (King 262). Should the second step fail, comes the “self-purification,” in which the nonconformists question their willingness to endure the consequences without any retaliation that follow enactment of civil disobedience (King 262). The fourth and the last step, “direct action,” is to execute it; coordinated actions such as protests or strikes to pressure no one, but the inexpedient government to conform to them, and advocate their movement, and thus persuade others to promote the same belief (King 262). This procedure along with principles of civil disobedience is one justifiable campaign that systematically attains its objective. King not only presents, but inspires one of the most peaceful ways to void unjust
...y shocks most of people who hear and see it, encouraging and moving others who also suffer. In instance, Elena screamed at Longoria to show she would not give them any information about resistances and Antonio when Longoria was about to killing her (Tobar 148). Elena sacrificed her life to protect Antonio and her friends who fought against the Guatemalan government without using any violence when she faced Longoria who tried to kill her. She showed it was important not to be daunted by fear and to keep fighting for justice. Mohandas Karamachand Gandhi advocated nonviolent resistance as a means of seeking peace and gaining independence for the Republic of India from Britain. Justice should be served by means in the name of justice. Nonviolent resistance is a powerful way to fight against the cycle of violence and work towards the realization of a peaceful world.
Non-violent direct action and respectful disagreement are a form of civil disobedience. Martin Luther King, Jr. defines “civil disobedience” as a way to show others what to do when a law is unjust and unreasonable. King is most famous for his role in leading the African American Civil Rights Movement and using non-violent civil disobedience to promote his beliefs. King also firmly believed that civil disobedience was the way to defeat racial segregation against African Americans. While leading a protest march on the streets, King was arrested and sent to jail. In response to his imprisonment and an article he read while there, King wrote Letter from Birmingham Jail, explaining that an injustice affects everyone and listed his own criteria for
Peaceful resistance to laws positively impact a free society because if there isn't, how will people hear the voices of the oppressed and mistreated? Peaceful resistance comes a long way in trying to advance the rights and customs of the oppressed today. For example, The Salt March of 1930 was based on the Salt Act of 1882, which excluded the people the India from producing or getting salt, only British officials. Mahatma Gandhi was the leader of this protest. According to an article by time.com, it says that "The protest continued until Gandhi was granted bargaining rights at a negotiation in London. India didn’t see freedom until 1947, but the salt satyagraha (his brand of civil disobedience) established Gandhi as a force to be reckoned with and set a powerful precedent for future nonviolent protestors, including Martin Luther King Jr.(Sarah Begley,2015)" This means the salt march was a start for India's independence. Also, Gandhi's brand of civil disobedience set precedents for future nonviolent protests. Another Example of how peaceful protests
the segregationists, resulting in the injury and deaths of many of King’s followers. With these points in mind, King came to the conclusion that the best strategy in gaining the rights of African American was the use of non-violent protest. He believed that violence only “intensifies evil,';
The role of violence in the fight against injustice is a tricky one. If an oppressor is willing to use violence to maintain control should not the oppressed use violence to achieve liberation? Franz Fanon would argue that the pent up anger and frustration must be released in violent action to tear down the oppressor’s regime. However, there is a better way and that is through non-violence and understanding that Martin Luther King, Jr. champions. Only through creating tension around injustice via non-violent direct action can the conversation begin around mutual understanding and justice. It is this justice achieved through non-violent means that will last as violent action is ultimately unjust in nature.
...y, and also fidelity to the law. Acts of civil disobediences are aimed to defend principles of justice. In King’s case he aims to persuade the local government and the businesses to comply with desegregation laws. It was important for him to communicate fidelity to the law. You should lovingly break a law, because your reason behind protesting to to achieve what you see as a higher good. You are not directly hurting the people. King’s argument ultimately is you can break the law to make the law more just. You are attempting to break the law to show that the law is unjust, and it is an act of saying that the law can be made better than it is now. He’s gathered his facts and understanding of the law, it is 100% clear there’s a problem. For civil disobedience to be justified a real injustice must exist, or else it wouldn’t addresses a sense of justice of the majority.
Martin Luther King, Jr. advocated nonviolence to suppress oppression in his essay, “The Power of Nonviolent Action.” King's factual and reasoned approach is intended to win his adversaries over by appealing to their consciences. King realized that the best strategy to liberate African-Americans and gain them justice was to use nonviolent forms of resistance. He wanted to eliminate the use of violence as a means to manage and establish cooperative ways of interacting. Moreover, King states that the “oppressed people must organize themselves into a militant and nonviolent mass movement” in order to achieve the goal of integration. The oppressed must “convince the oppressors that all he seeks is justice, for both himself and the white man” (King, 345). Furthermore, King agreed with Gandhi that if a law is unjust, it is the duty of the oppressed to break the law, and do what they believe to be right. Once a law is broken, the person must be willing to accept the ...
Despite the belief that fighting with violence is effective, civil disobedience has been tried throughout history and been successful. Fighting violence with violence leaves no oppertunity for peace to work. By refusing to fight back violently, Martin Luther King Jr. took a race of people, taught them the value of their voice, and they earned the right to vote. Henry David Thoreau presented his doctrine that no man should cooperate with laws that are unjust, but, he must be willing to accept the punishment society sets for breaking those laws, and hundreds of years later, people are still inspired by his words. Mohandas K. Gandhi lead an entire country to its freedom, using only his morals and faith to guide him, as well as those who followed him, proving that one man can make a difference. Civil disobedience is the single tool that any person can use to fight for what they want, and they will be heard. After centuries of questioning it, it appears that the pen truly is mightier than the sword.
According to Martin Luther King Jr., “There are two types of laws: there are just and there are unjust laws” (King 293). During his time as civil rights leader, he advocated civil disobedience to fight the unjust laws against African-Americans in America. For instance, there was no punishment for the beatings imposed upon African-Americans or for the burning of their houses despite their blatant violent, criminal, and immoral demeanor. Yet, an African-American could be sentenced to jail for a passive disagreement with a white person such as not wanting to give up their seat to a white passenger on a public bus. Although these unjust laws have been righted, Americans still face other unjust laws in the twenty-first century.
There is a considerable debate about the precise meaning of nonviolence. Some people believe that nonviolence is a philosophy and strategy for social change that rejects the use of violence. In other words, nonviolence is a method for resolving a conflict without the use of physical power nor enmity towards opponents. Instead, it emphasizes you to look beyond convictions and one’s urge for victory, it is the motto behind the saying “hate the sin and not the sinner”. For others it is a way of living and an essential part of their values and norms, for those people, nonviolence is the road which will lead them towards attaining inner piece and moral satisfaction. “Learn and teach nonviolence as a way of life; reflect it in attitude, speech and action” say’s Gerber in his article The Road to Nonviolence. Thus making nonviolence the ultimate behavior towards achieving truthful, spiritual, loving life. Mahatma Gandhi, the nonviolence guru, defines nonviolence as “a power which can be wielded equally by all-children, young men and women or grown-up people, provided they have a living faith in the God of Love and have therefore equal love for all mankind”. (mkgandhi.org) Therefore we understand that nonviolence has some terms and conditions to be met; living faith in God, truthfulness, humility, tolerance, loving kindness, honesty and the willingness to sacrifice. ...
Martin Luther King jr was arrested on a Friday and charged with parading without a permit. King states that this law is unjust because it interferes with the first amendments privilege of peaceful assembly and protest. He says that he never tried evading or defying the law in any way possible. King knew that he would get arrested but, he continued with his protest just because he was willing to accept the penalty of his crime. He says “One who breaks an unjust law must do it openly, lovingly and with a willingness to accept the penalty” unlike some white protesters who did it hatefully in New Orleans, they were seen on t.v screaming “nigger” multiple times. King also says that anyone who breaks a law and accepts the penalty by staying in jail