Theodore Roosevelt once said, “Speak softly and carry a big stick; you will go far,” which is exactly how freedom should be demanded, nonviolently but aggressively. To demand freedom you have to protest and ask for it peacefully but always leave a threat of violent in the air, hence the “big stick.” Protesting nonviolently but aggressively is a better way to protest because, if you protest nonviolently, but peacefully, no one will take the protesters seriously, and won’t do anything to help your cause. Another reason why this method is better is because people shouldn’t protest violently or else the protest will be seen as a danger, and the public will not support it. A last reason for protesting nonviolently is that talking is a better way …show more content…
This is when Roosevelt’s “Big Stick Policy” comes into play because with a slight threat of violence, it shows the government that you are serious about your cause and that you need change. When a group of people protest for cause they don’t want to be seen as a pushover, they need to at least give a hint of what they are capable of to show bravery. Malcolm X once said, “Tactics based solely on morality can only succeed when you are dealing with basically moral people or a moral system,” you can’t always use quiet reasoning and expect their reasoning to appeal to the government’s morals, you need to show determination and use harsh words of truth. Usually reasoning is a way to tell the truth of your protests lightly, but sometimes protesters should just say it how it is to get the point across because unfortunately sometimes the government is too ignorant to figure out the motives themselves. An article that can relate to this is “Media Black-out: Militarized Police Raid Dakota Protest To Break Up Peaceful Prayer Circle,” from http://thefreethoughtproject.com/, which is about a group of peaceful protesters quietly stanging in front of the Dakota Pipeline constuction site to protest that their pipeline shouldn’t be closed because the Native American groups in that area needed it. The protesters didn’t how any threat of harm as they were unarmed, but nevertheless the police “swarmed the group—as water protectors and attendees stood calmly with hands clearly raised—and began indiscriminately accosting people while ordering everyone into their vehicles.” The Dakota Pipeline protests went terribly wrong for the protesters because the police took advantage of their seemly serene protests and took it upon themselves to arrest the Native Americans participating. If the protesters showed a little more restraint to the police trying to clear
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
President Franklin Delano Roosevelt delivered a powerful speech before Congress on December 8th 1941, the day after Japan attacked Pearl Harbor. His purpose in addressing the country in this way is his attempt to calm the American People and avoid chaos across the country. Roosevelt is aware of the impact that the event has had on the Citizens. As their leader, he forcefully reassures the population that they will be safe. The President emphasizes that the United States would not allow the attacks to affect the country though his use of rhetorical devices, including pathos.
“Yesterday December 7th, 1941 – a date which will live in infamy” (Roosevelt). The attack on Pearl Harbor was an event that many Americans will never forget. The day after the attack, President Franklin D. Roosevelt gave a speech to address the public and Congress. His speech started by discussing how Japan had deceived America into thinking that they could create peace between the nations. He spent three paragraphs on how the attack was planned and deliberate and how America was completely unaware of Japan’s intentions. Roosevelt spent only a little time on paying respects to the lost lives of the soldiers. After that, Roosevelt talked about how many other nations Japan has attacked. Then Roosevelt started the “pep talk” portion of his speech. He talked about the strength of the nation and how America will defend themselves against evil forces. He ends his speech with a call for war and asked Congress to declare war against Japan. The goal of his speech was to persuade Congress to declare war on Japan, as well as to get the American people to support him in his endeavors. Roosevelt gave his speech in front of Congress, but the American people all over the nation tuned into the radio to hear his speech. Roosevelt uses many rhetorical devices to get American to unite against Japan. His speech uses the rhetorical devices logos, ethos, and pathos to argue his side. He uses
Theodore "Teddy" Roosevelt was the 26th President of The United States Of America. He was a writer, a naturalist and a soldier. He stretched the forces of the administration and of the national government in backing of the general population enthusiasm toward clashes between huge business and work and guided the country to a dynamic part in world governmental issues. Theodore Roosevelt certainly helped the country in the right direction. He paved the way for reform, especially trust regulation. His nickname as the trustbuster was truly earned as he made many constant efforts in those areas, as well as others. His Square Deal plan targeted trust regulation, labor relations, and public health and conservation, the three
After nearly a decade of optimism and prosperity, the United States took a turn for the worse on October 29, 1929 the day the stock market crashed, better known as Black Tuesday and the official beginning of the Great Depression. The downfall of the economy during the presidency of Herbert Hoover led to much comparison when his successor, Franklin D. Roosevelt, took office. Although both presidents had their share of negative feedback, it is evident that Hoover’s inaction towards the crises and Roosevelt’s later eccentric methods to simulate the economy would place FDR in the positive limelight of fixing the nation in one of its worst times.
In his inaugural speech of 1932, Franklin Delano Roosevelt spoke one of the most famous pieces of rhetoric to date, saying that we have “nothing to fear, but fear itself.” In reality, everyone had very much to fear. For one thing, their trusted leader lied straight to their faces every time he made a public appearance. The possibility of war and loss, in terms of love, life, and money, were constantly on the mind of Americans during Roosevelt’s presidency – all four terms. President Roosevelt utilized the tactics of deception and rhetoric to gain the trust of Americans, and was betrayed by the country of Japan. While he was deceptive, Roosevelt’s decisions did, in fact, “justify the means.”
The Great Depression, beginning in the last few months of 1929, impacted the vast majority of people nationwide and worldwide. With millions of Americans unemployed and many in danger of losing their homes, they could no longer support their families. Children, if they were lucky, wore torn up ragged clothing to school and those who were not lucky remained without clothes. The food supply was scarce, and bread was the most that families could afford. Households would receive very limited rations of food, or small amounts of money to buy food. This led to the starvation of families, including children. African-americans faced tougher challenges than most during the Depression due to discrimination. The classes hit hardest were middle-class
According to Morris Liebman, author of “Civil Disobedience: A Threat to Our Society Under Law,” “Never in the history of mankind have so many lived so freely, so rightfully, so humanely. This open democratic republic is man’s highest achievement—not only for what it has already accomplished, but more importantly because it affords the greatest opportunity for orderly change and the realization of man’s self-renewing aspirations.” What Liebman fails to realize is that while the United States of America has made improvements, the United States still has a far way to go before it can be considered a fair country. Liebman also states that “The plain fact of human nature is that the organized disobedience of masses stirs up the primitive. This has been true of a soccer crowd and a lynch mob. Psychologically and psychiatrically it is very clear that no man—no matter how well-intentioned—can keep group passions in control.” While disagreeing with the first example from Liebman, it would be difficult to disregard the way that many protests seem to spiral out of control. Peaceful protest for the most part remain peaceful, however some may turn violent very quickly. Liebman also believes that there is no such thing as “righteous civil disobedience” as men and women are deliberately disregarding laws set in place to protect the country, and regards it as deplorable and destructive(Liebman). To combat Liebman, a new age of civil disobedience is rolling in, a more inclusive type. With various social media platforms, word of walkouts and peaceful, with an emphasis on peaceful, protests are spread more quickly. These student led activist groups are popping up more quickly and are not lacking in passion. Many students of today are tired of being told their too young and inexperienced to be taking
Gandhi once said “An eye for an eye and the whole world is blind.” This is true in most circumstances but there are exceptions. By comparing acts of nonviolent civil disobedience with acts of violent civil disobedience it is apparent that force or violence is only necessary to combat violence but never if it effects the lives of the innocent. A recurrent theme in each of these examples is that there is a genuine desire to achieve equality and liberty. However, one cannot take away the liberties of others in order to gain their own. Martin Luther King Jr. believed that political change would come faster through nonviolent methods and one can not argue his results as many of the Jim Crow laws were repealed. Similarly, through nonviolent resistance Gandhi was able to eventually free India from the rule of Britain. It is true that sometimes the only way to fight violence is through violence, but as is apparent, much can be said of peaceful demonstrations in order to enact change. Thus, it is the responsibility of we as individuals to understand that nonviolence is often a more viable means to an end than violence.
As Dr. King stated in Letter from A Birmingham Jail, “Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and establish such creative tension that a community that has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. I must confess that I am not afraid of the word, tension. I have earnestly worked and preached against violent tension, but there is a type of constructive tension that is necessary for growth. The purpose of direct action is to create a situation so crisis-packed that it will inevitably open the door to negotiation.” Such as in the case of the 1969 student site-in against the Vietnam W...
Legacy of the New Deal For the opposition and supporters alike, Franklin Delano Roosevelt was revered as a man who helped keep the United States intact during the lamentable days of The Great Depression. After a decade of unprecedented economic ruin, most recognized that Roosevelt took necessary measures to ensure the survival of American society. However, where disagreement resided was in the question of whether the New Deal did too much or too little in regards to implementing lasting political, economic, and societal change. Emphasizing this divide, many of the leading politicians and thinkers of the Depression era vocalized their thoughts on Roosevelt’s New Deal policies. Roosevelt’s adversaries, for example, were starkly damned.
In response to the Great Depression, the New Deal was a series of efforts put forth by Franklin D. Roosevelt during his first term as United States’ President. The Great Depression was a cataclysmic economic event starting in the late 1920s that had an international effect. Starting in 1929 the economy started to contract, but it wasn’t until Wall Street started to crash that the pace quickened and its effects were being felt worldwide. What followed was nearly a decade of high unemployment, extreme poverty, and an uncertainty that the economy would ever recover.
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.
Conclusion: Nonviolent protest are more effective than violent protest in effort to bring about social change.
Marriage rights are always something that I have found very interesting, as most cultures differ extremely from what we see in our modern Western culture. In today’s world, women who live in a Westernized society have the same rights in their marriage as their husbands do, especially when it comes to situations such as divorce, custody, and the ownership of property. This is completely different to what a marriage looked like in Ancient Greece. One thing that’s especially interesting to me is what rights a woman has in her marriage (what rights she had in terms of property, divorce, custody of her children, etc.).