The Role Of Peaceful Resistance In The Civil Rights Movement

The civil disobedience is to describe when the public refusal to obey the law or commands of a government that violate one's personal principals without the act of violence, as an effort to induce a change in governmental policy or legislation. The purpose is to force concessions from the government or occupying power. For example, if a group of people refuses to pay taxes as a peaceful way to express disapproval of those laws they disagree with or taxes. Civil disobedience may be appropriate when a democratically elected government uses its power to discriminate against their race, sex, religion or skin color. In such a situation, people would most liking object the Laws and start a protest to show they want to be treated equally. Another point is that civil disobedience is a beneficial behavior in bringing about stability to this society. In fact, Martin Luther King Jr is the one of the most associated with nonviolent civil disobedience he saw color people getting treated unjustly and getting prosecuted because of their skin color. Another example would be the STC protest that occurred this month; six people refused to get off the bus keeping police on the scene for five hours till one in the morning. The six people got arrested but later they were released.

The question of whether or not peaceful resistance toward the law impacts society in a positive way is really a question of circumstance. If I were to refer back to the historical aspects of the subject, then my immediate answer would be yes, it does; peaceful resistance has often prevailed in situations that required immediate attention, yet were simply overlooked by the general public, despite their importance. One extremely important example of this would be the many boycotts during the civil rights movements of the 60's. Civil disobedience was a way to communicate the true inequality represented by the phrase, ''separate but equal'' by peacefully marching for their beliefs. For example, many white officials used various schemes to prevent

Nonviolent protest is the act of protesting nonviolently to gain justice. In the mid-1900s, Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, Montgomery Approvement Association and the Southern Leadership Conference were nonviolent organizations, nonviolently fighting for desegregation. To bring fairness to African American citizens, the NAACP was formed to work towards black equality in Criminal and Civil cases. In the 1900s, southern states began the Civil Rights Movement as African Americans became fed up with the continuation of disenfranchisement, segregation, and race brutality. Years after the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments were declared in the Bill of Rights, African Americans were still faced with the “Separate but Equal” doctrine that was

The consequences of peaceful protesting is, the marchers from Selma to Montgomery, had to go back and march three times. The first march wasn 't what they wanted to achieve and got sent back to the bridge. The second march was when they were crossing the bridge. The police officers attacked them with stick, teargas, clubs, arrested innocent people, guns were fired, knocked people to the ground, whips, rubber tubing wrapped in barbed wire was a weapon that the police officers whipped at the marchers. The third time they went to march, they won Federal Protection and they successfully marched for their cause. King wrote to New York Times, “This is Selma, Alabama. There are more negroes in jail with me than they are on the voting rolls.” (Klein 1). The National Guard helped them on the last march. No police officers could turn them back, and they couldn 't beat them in front of the National Guard. These innocent, peacefully protesting people were injured and one was shot and killed. Jimmy Lee Jackson was a 20 year old who was protecting his grandma and mom. He was struck by a club, then shot with a gun. Over 50 people were injured and hospitalized. A couple people died months later because of their injuries. These marchers were not interrupting anybody or bothering anything and the police officers had to take action. They were on the sidewalk of the highway and away from the officers and others. The officers thought they were going to do something bad so they took

For example, during the African-American civil rights movements, many blacks took part in nonviolent protests and other forms of resistance to the segregation and racism. Unfortunately, the protesters would have to stay strictly nonviolent, lest they would be subject to many forms of persecution. Unfortunately for them, nonviolence and peaceful protests also meant vulnerability to attack. Another problem was the fact that peaceful protests could easily become violent, and very fast. Peaceful resistance could be a gateway to other, more violent forms of resistance. As Harrop Freeman, a Professor of Law with over three different degrees from Cornell, said, “On the one side of the balance is the long history of Negro non-violence and a strong pacifist leadership; on the negative side is the poverty, injustice, police and civilian brutality of the section in which the Negro is brought up. I hope for this great period of change to be achieved non-violently. But I cannot escape the very real chance of non-violence escalating into violence and the necessity of society being understanding and tolerant.” While it is not absolutely negative, this example shows that there is a negative side to peaceful

Accounts of civil disobediences have made their way into the paper many times since the start of this country: the Boston Tea Party, Thoreau's refusal to pay a poll tax, and Rosa Park's decision to stay seated on the bus. All of these examples represent a time of distress when people responded in non-violence to prove a point. But many would ask if this is really proving a point or if it is simply disregarding the law and setting a bad example? Well let me ask you this: would it be better to sit back and to hope that someone will speak out about the problem, or to go forward in violence thinking that that is the only way to achieve something? It seems that an act of non-violence is a way of being heard without coming across as irrational or

Thousands of dedicated people march the streets of a huge city, chanting repetitively about needing a change. They proudly hold vibrant signs and banners as they fight for what they believe in. Expressions of determination and hope are visibly spread across their faces. These people aren’t using weapons or violence to fight for their ideas; simply, they are using civil disobedience. Civil disobedience is nonviolent resistance to a government’s law in seek of change. Civil disobedience is an effective way to bring about change because it is a harmless way of fighting an unjust law or idea, it can educate people about the cause, and it has been successful many times in history.

Peaceful Resistance no matter what way you look at it, it 's still going against someone whether it involves words or actions, resistance still causes more conflict. The last 5 years we have had people say they want change through these “peaceful protest” but these peaceful protests have done nothing but turn to violent riots were theirs damage to vehicles, business families rely on destroyed, bystanders hurt, officers killed and our country torn apart. Back when Martian Luther King Jr was around and he had his Peaceful Resistance or rallies for equality, they were peaceful and brought our country together with something that needed to be changed, but the protest we’ve had the last 5 years… he would be ashamed of. Peaceful Resistance to laws does negatively impact our free society in America.

Peaceful resistance is necessary for social change. The founders of the United States believed in this idea when writing the Declaration of Independence. John Locke, an enlightenment thinker who our founding fathers took ideas from, came up with the idea of the social contract. This is the agreement that a government and its people have and when citizens feel their government is wronging them then they have the right to revolt. Civil disobedience is a form of expressing the social contract and the consent of the governed. Why is it wrong to peacefully show the government why "we the people" are upset with it?

Peaceful resistance to laws positively affect a free society. Throughout history, there have been multiple cases of both violent and peaceful protests. However, the peaceful protests are the ones that tend to stick with a society and are the ones that change the society for the better.

I believe that civil disobedience is good for the advancement of the American society. This a simple fact which has been proven many times by history all around the world. A few examples of important historical participants and leaders in civil disobedience include Mohandas Gandhi, Susan B. Anthony, Martin Luther King Jr., Rosa Parks and much more. Mohandas Gandhi was an Indian man who spent his life protesting the unjust anti-Indian law in Britan using, you guessed it, civil disobedience. Most importantly on March 30, 1930, when he lead a defiance march to the sea. His efforts caused India to gain its independence in 1947. This happened in the very year he went on a hunger strike. Susan B. Anthony was one of the world most famous suffragettes in American history.

As Oscar Wilde said, “ It is through disobedience that progress has been made-- disobedience and rebellion.” Disobedience during the American Revolution was originally peaceful, but as grievances grew and British rule became harsher, Americans could no longer sit idly by. Radical disobedience to the law was necessary in order to promote change for American society. During the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960’s, a drastic nonviolent movement was necessary to counteract the expectation of violence, reiterating to Americans that peaceful resistance to laws can positively affect a free society. The Civil Rights movement was split by two factions: one was a violent resistance named The Black Panthers and the other was a nonviolent protest led by Martin Luther King Jr. Both parties had a similar goal: to unite the African American population of the United States, and create change within the

The African-American Civil Rights Movement was very influential in its time; and more specifically, the Freedom Rides that took place were the epitome of the movement that brought down the racial barriers of segregation. This paper specifically focuses on the precursor events to the Freedom Rides, the major events that took place during the rides, and how the effects of the rides shaped history and redefined civil rights in modern-day America. Leading up to the Freedom Rides, the Supreme Court issued two rulings that denounced Plessy v. Ferguson, which were Irene Morgan v. The Commonwealth of Virginia and Boynton v. Virginia. These rulings mandated a halt to the segregation on public buses and declared it to be unconstitutional. The main

Nonviolent movements and protests have appeared throughout history, most, if not all, eventually achieving what they set out to go. From Dr. Martin Luther King Jrs.’ March on Washington campaigning for civil rights for African-Americans, to the National American Woman Suffrage Association’s demonstrations for voting rights for women, to British Parliament repealing the Stamp Act due to colonial boycotts on tariffed goods, nonviolence has prevailed in being successful. What can be accomplished via war can also be accomplished via peace. People standing up for what they believe in and demonstrating their beliefs peacefully helps accomplish more than them hurting themselves and each other to try to change things. Going out and rioting, burning down and destroying local businesses and institutions is going to get less done than petitioning for redress, such as in the case of Donald J. Trump’s victory in the 2016 US elections in

Peaceful resistance to laws positively impacts a free society, as it forces people to confront issues, leading to advancements for the true majority of society.