The Success of Nonviolent Action “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable” (John F. Kennedy). Today, citizens of the U.S have many ways of voicing their opinions on issues or arguments, such as social media. But many of those methods do not have a good effect on the issue or argument being made. In today 's society, civil disobedience and nonviolent action are the most beneficial for protesting against injustice towards minorities. An example of a method of nonviolent action would be peaceful marching.
My analysis of Gandhi 's non-violent protest is that the most effective protest was the Salt March, an act of civil disobedience. It was a march in colonial India to produce salt for the water as a practice of Bhartiya people until British officials forcibly illegalized this practice. The protest began on March 12, 1930, and was a direct action campaign of the tax resistance and nonviolent protest. This gained international attention and gave motivation to the Indian independence
Gandhi and the Indian people created some dilemmas to throw the British government off balance. Gandhi told the Indian people to boycott all British goods and only buy Indian goods. Boycotting the british goods hit the foundation of the british economy and at the same time buying Indian goods was good for the local economies. The turning point was when Gandhi and the Indian people made the salt march to the
“Non-violence is the greatest force at the disposal of mankind. It is mightier than the mightiest weapon of destruction devised by the ingenuity of man.” This perfectly illustrates Mohandas Gandhi’s approach on peaceful protest. Gandhi strongly opposed violence even though his people, the Indians, were being unjustly treated throughout the British Empire. Mohandas Gandhi fought to free India from English rule, pushed to end racism throughout his life, and influenced Dr. Martin Luther King in his battle for civil rights in America. Early Years: Mohandas Gandhi’s eventful life began on October 2, 1869 in Porbandar, Kathiawar, India.
Gandhi, leader of the indian independence movement. Gandhi put in a lot of hard work to gain their independence, was imprisoned many times, but has inspired movements for civil rights and freedom across the world. In his essay he mentioned twice about how they will not obey their laws. He mentioned this when he said “We made it clear to the said Government that we would never bow to its outrageous laws” and also when he said “but so long there is yet life in these our bones, we will never comply with your arbitrary laws.” This demonstrates civil disobedience because he just told them simply and peacefully that they will not abide by those laws they've set. They didn't try to fight or overrule the government, they just informed them what they were doing, and they protested without using violence.
In the first paragraph Chavez mentions Dr. Martin Luther King Junior, stating that Dr. King’s “entire life was an example of power that nonviolence brings…” This reference to Dr. King causes those who know of his impact to realize that he lead a strong historical example of what nonviolence could achieve. By using Dr. King as an example it indicates that Chavez thinks that if nonviolence had heavily impacted the past, then it would most likely do the same in the present and future. Chavez also makes a reference to Gandhi and his nonviolent boycott in India, claiming that what he taught “is the most nearly perfect instrument of nonviolent change.” By using the word perfect to describe Gandhi’s teachings of nonviolence, it further supports Chavez’s stance for nonviolent resistance. The two allusions to historical figures develop Chavez’s argument as they remind him and the audience of how large of an impact nonviolence had on the world in the past and how it could be applied to the
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. Gandhi’s attempt to peacefully fight for independence still left a considerable amount of violence during protests. Gandhi advocated for oppressed or mistreated groups, such as untouchables, women, and those
King shows his message by recommending, “We must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence.” Additionally, he believed that one should not exhaust their efforts on violence. King also made clear that it may take some time to gain equality; however, they need to stay strong as stated in the his speech, “No, no we are not satisfied and we will not be satisfied until justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream.” King’s speech affected his audience greatly by showing off his ardor and ability to relate to others.
Chavez generalizes that masses of people have involved “in their own struggle throughout the movement “and free men and women “instinctively prefer democratic change to any other means,” which is “our best way of avoiding senseless violence.” By doing so, Chavez creates the idea of organized protest as both peaceful and effective, and therefore, makes nonviolence better than violence. To back these generalizations, Chavez uses Gandhi’s credibility. He paraphrases Gandhi in saying that boycott is the “most nearly perfect instrument of change.” Overall, Chavez makes a generalized claim that is easily rational, but locks it down with a quote from the famous nonviolent advocate Gandhi. 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.
He lived his life in truth, and spoke to everyone with truth and wisdom, he highlighted self knowledge in everything he did. Without Gandhi India wouldn’t have it’s independence. Gandhi and Malcolm X were both assassinated, if either had lived a full life they would have many more accomplishments. Their approaches are different but they had both fought for equal rights, one for African Americans, and the other for the world. They knew how to address a crowd and get the results they wanted even without being aware of how they affected the public.
He again uses pathos to try and persuade the colonist to fight for their independence. On page seven lines thirteen through fourteen he says "Such a power could not be the gift of a wise people, neither can any power, which needs checking, be from God". Paine wants the colonist to understand that no wise person would ever want to be ruled by a monarchy. He says "[no] power, which needs checking, [could] be from God", because if the subjects have to watch your every move to make sure you do not mess up your doing something wrong. Therefore the colonist will stop being loyal to the