It takes a lot out of one person to gain power. Throughout history nonviolence has been proven to overcome violence including; Egypt, India and the USA. Many people think that violence will solve all problems. In fact the best way for the oppressed to gain power is by nonviolence.
Many people say that violence is never the answer. This is true, violence cannot solve people 's problems. Gandhi, a prominent leader, believed in civil disobedience as he stated in his letter to the British Officials in India. Gandhi writes “And the conviction is growing deeper and deeper in me that nothing but unadulterated non- violence can check the organised violence” (Gandhi). Gandhi truly and deeply believed that nonviolence is more pure and will overcome violence. Gandhi was both a civil rights activist and leader. This leader accomplished the most incredible events. The salt march, was one of the biggest events that Gandhi lead. The salt march was a march of the Indian people intended to end the purchase of salt from the British. The salt march was indeed an example of Gandhi leading people non violently. The march was a success, and the people used nonviolence to do it. Gandhi was an incredible and an inspiration on lots of people all around the world including civil rights …show more content…
This is another form of civil disobedience. A guy from the Egyptian revolution made a facebook page about a man murdered. The first day the page was posted 36,000 people joined the page. The page was not just popular in Egypt but it also was released worldwide. This page became the voice of the people for the people. The man who created the page states “ Itself as the voice of those who despised the deterioration of Egypt, particularly as far as human rights were concerned” (Ghonim). Social Media is another form of non- violence, and it does not cause more problems. Social media was able to risk awareness , perhaps even more than violence would
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
Have you ever felt the need to disobey authority in a fight for change? If so, then you are similar to some of the greatest leaders of monumental movements throughout history, including people like Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. These leaders worked their way towards change through nonviolence and civil protesting. However, they were not the first to tread a peaceful path to change.
Martin Luther King Jr., plus his own beliefs and conclusions, shows that nonviolence methods historically and analytically accomplish much more than violent tactics. The utilization of formal diction in Chavez’s article is proven to be most evident when he mentions, “The greater the oppression, the more leverage nonviolence holds. Violence does not work in the long run and if it is temporarily successful, it replaces one violent form of power with another just as violent. People suffer from violence” (Chavez). By the author using formal diction, especially towards the conclusion of his article it makes the audience have to or want to agree with him as the statements he provides don’t leave much room for counterarguments and instead reaches to the audience's logos or reasoning.
Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr., and Mandela Make a Change Mohandas Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr., and Mandela, all had a vision of a world where equality was amongst the different races. The leaders decided to lead protests in favor of equality. This led to a lot of diversity between views. Violence broke out against the protesters but they were determined to fight for their beliefs. Peacefully protesting, completely avoiding violence, and accepting punishments, were all reasons these leaders’ movements could be considered successful today.
Violent protest can "...go to the point of murdering the hater, but it doesn't murder hate. " The result of the Nonviolent protests under king both saved the hater and lessened thee hate." ... in purely practical as well as moral terms, the American Negro has no alternative to non-violence." (Doc L) This was true, and the non-violent approach was much more well accepted by the white majority at the time.
Non violence protest has been practiced by multiple people all over the world, and it has shown to be successful. Specifically Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. with his form of non violence within the Civil Rights Movement. He is a legend, he has influenced many people to follow his tactics, in order to make the world a better place and to progress the country. Cesar Chavez is a Civil Rights Leader himself and writes an article on DR. King’s 10 year anniversary of his untimely death and his article was on how non violence protests are better than any form of violence by using elements of pathos and ethos.
Mohandas Gandhi was a “key figure in the Indian struggle for independence.” He worked to use nonviolent ways to fight for equality and change in India. Gandhi was able to unite many groups and “inspired the common people of India to work for change.” In addition, Gandhi advocated using a more traditional approach (Wadley 202). Although Mohandas Gandhi 's satyagraha campaign caused violence, his advocacy for those who were discriminated against in Indian society led to the initial unification of India to gain independence from Great Britain.
During the civil rights movement, civil rights leader; Cesar Chavez wrote and published an article to a magazine of a religious organization. Chavez claims that “nonviolence is more powerful than violence” itself. His essay contains many rhetorical appeals and strategies that contribute to him convincing his readers about nonviolence resistance - meaning that they should stop violence and resolve a conflict in peace. Adding on to that line, he makes them feel sympathetic.
This ultimately explains how nonviolence is effective, justifies it, and makes it more favorable than violence. Chavez’s use of repetition, generalizations, and credibility effectively persuades everyone of nonviolence. In using multiple strategies, he constantly provides ways of nonviolence’s betterment compared to the pitfalls plaguing violence, and does so,
Violence did not need to be performed for the advocate to get their point across. Ghandi states “No country has ever become, or will ever become, happy through the victory in war. A nation does not rise that way, it only falls further.” (Gandhi 377). He simply wants his followers to know that war does not bring happiness.
This tactic allows Chavez to gain credibility, which strengthens his overall argument that peaceful protest is key to truly changing the world. He continues to portray nonviolence in a favorable light by using Mahatma Gandhi as a prevalent historical example. Gandhi is a famous advocate for nonviolent protest, as he successfully gained India’s independence from Britain in the 1940s. With the use of Gandhi’s example, Chavez proves that nonviolent tactics can be truly effective in bringing forth change, and can even suppress the violence to create peace. Directly following this example however, Chavez illustrates the detrimental effects that a violent conflict has on a community.
Who would've thought that nonviolence could amount to anything, much less produce results that are far more effective than that produced through violence? There have been several figures in history who have conveyed the power nonviolence bears. It doesn't not lie in the hand off of anyone to take the life away from another, especially because once a life I taken, it can't be returned. When people partake in violence, there is sure to be at least one negative results. Often, much more than not, the violence ends in injuries or even death.
Using nonviolent resistance does not include killing off anyone that doesn’t share the same opinion, it is simply protesting to prove and persuade a need for change. Also, peacefully protesting attracts attention from all over the world; thus, educating more people about a serious issue in society. If no one takes action, no one will realize the problem and it’ll only continue to grow. Also, many political leaders such as Mahatma Gandhi, Rosa Parks, and Martin Luther King, Jr. are extremely known for their delightful use of civil disobedience. Even better, all of them were successful in bringing about a change in society.
Civil Disobedience by Thoreau is the refusal to obey government demands or commands and nonresistance to consequent arrest and punishment this had an extreme effect on Martin Luther King Jr and Mahatma Gandhi. They were fighting for different beliefs. However they both had the same believes about civil disobedience and they both end in the same place, jail. In the first place Gandhi believed that the only way to confronted injustice was with non-violent methods.
At the sea, Gandhi picked up a handful of salt. This act went against the British law mandating that they buy salt from their government and this law did not allow them to collect their own salt. That act was made to let the British government know that the Indian people were tired of being under Britain’s rule and they were tired of following all of the unjust laws that were