More handpicked essays just for you.
Mandela's fight against apartheid laws
Nelson mandela civil disobedience movement
The role of Nelson Mandela in the struggle of South Africa
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Mandela's fight against apartheid laws
Throughout the history of the world, there have been many fights, movements, and wars. The thing about these, though, is not all can be successful. Now, we can look back in history to all of these disputes and find that the most successful movements are missing one thing- violence. This has been shown through leaders such as Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King Jr, and Mahatma Gandhi. Even though these great leaders live in vastly different locations, that one missing tactic helped each achieve their own goals. Non-violence as a tactic has historically been successful, but a few things are required in order to make it work. Complete submission, unity (through the leaders), and respect for their enemies are just a few things that helped them achieve their goals. When you say ‘non-violent’, you might only …show more content…
But you would never think that such a large group of people could agree on not fighting back whatsoever. If you are being arrested, beaten, or even being prepared to be shot in the head, participants in the movement weren’t allowed to fight back. At all. The three major leaders who used the non-violence tactic made it crystal clear that if your purpose was to be violent to the enemy, that you didn’t have a place in the movement they were leading. Document 5 gives a good example of this; it says that Martin Luther King Jr. would ask for volunteers, but would not accept any that didn’t agree to the idea of no violence at all. “We proved that we had the most formidable weapon of all- the conviction that we were right”. This quote (also from Document 5) shows that the leaders of the Civil Rights movement would refuse to take on anyone who would be
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.
The Outsiders by S.E. Hinton proves the point that violence can be justified if necessary. To inflict change in their lives people often fight with violence instead of peace to evoke change. The world strives for change everyday whether or not you like it. How the people create a change in society whether they use peace or war, it is up to them to decide how to modify our ever changing world. Violence and fight between the Socs and Greasers tells us that both can be justified if it inflicts positive change in society. ‘
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...
The Civil Rights Movement brought many accomplishments to African Americans such as the 1964 Civil Rights Act, Voting Rights Act of 1965, and the Fair Housing Act of 1968. The key issues that African Americans fought for were voting rights, integration and racial equality. They were tired of the discrimination and humiliation they received as a result of the segregation laws imposed on them. “State laws mandated racial separation in schools, parks, playgrounds, restaurants, hotels, public transportation, theaters, restrooms and so on” (Blumberg 40). Lawsuits had been tried to gain rights such as the unsuccessful Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896 and the successful Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka. Although, the Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka declared the “separate but equal” clause unconstitutional, de facto segregation continued in the South. During the 1960s, two methods were used: nonviolence and violence. Violence proved to be ineffective since it perpetuated social tensions among Whites and Blacks. Nonviolence was the most effective method in bringing social change in America during the 1960s Civil Rights Movement because it attracted sympathy towards Black people, provoked positive media attention, and promoted unity among African Americans.
types of nonviolent actions from not just the leaders, but the ones who follow them, show a true
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.
Rodney King a black man who lived in Las Vegas was severely beaten by four white police officers. The officers were brought into court and tried on charges of assault. The officers were acquitted of the assault charges. Immediately protestors took to the streets, to express their angry over the judge’s decision. Protestors found the ruling to be unfair and was fed up with the ill-treatment. The violent protest turned into a riot. A lot of damage occurred; over 50 people were killed, over 2,300 people injured, 8,000 arrests and estimated over $1 billion in property damage. The riots exposed the police abuse, poverty, and lack of economic opportunity. If it was not for the violent protestors no light would have been shed on the way black were being
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.
Mohandas K. Gandhi, a great Indian philosopher, wrote the essay “My Faith in Nonviolence”. His essay focuses on the use of nonviolence means on overthrowing the British rule of India. Gandhi’s main claim on this essay is that love is the higher law of life and that “every problem lends itself to solution” (p. 203) , if we followed that law.
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 ...
It has been debated though out history whether or not nonviolence “works”. Many societies, and this without question includes the United States, have mostly relied on violent tactics. Many people believe that violence is the only way to stop wars, even though it creates war, and people tend to believe that violence is the one solution to many global and political problems. However, recent literature and research is starting to prove otherwise. Erica Chenoweth, a political scientist, recently published a book, Why Civil Resistance Works in 2011. The research highlights data that shows throughout history, nonviolent tactics are more effective than violent ones in various ways.
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. ...
While using violence to counteract violence may seem like a contradiction of sorts it is possibly the only recourse for the oppressed. It is impossible to create a formula of what works and doesn’t work in terms of emancipation because it is highly dependent on the particular situation but it is quite apparent that counterviolence is a necessary tool in this struggle. As we have seen, violence is not the only tool in liberation; the reconstruction of human ethics and perceptions is as, or more, important. Furthermore, it has been shown that sometimes nonviolence can create systemic change and that violence is not always applicable. Other times, violence is the only means to achieve true human emancipation.
The non-violent philosophy was not a movement of pacifism to Martin Luther King, it was one of action. Absolute strength was apparent in its practice, but how? The student movement caused many of its’ participants to be severely beaten, chastised, and arrested, only to continue while never fighting back. Why were they doing this? King felt the answer was that through their actions they would awaken not only the majority, but more importantly the minority to the need for equal rights. Apathy had set in among both groups causing them to accept the current state of affairs, and like the great “gadfly” Socrates, King and the students were forcing both groups to wake up and open their eyes.
The Vietnam War: the most dismal and disputed war that the United States has fought. A war plagued by fatalities and extreme costs. It began as a political war, when North Vietnam tried to overrun and impose communism on South Vietnam. Americans, at the outset, felt the war was justified and worthwhile. Opinion started to change, at least among young people, as the war lingered and the death toll rose. Peace protesters emerged, and along with the peace movement came music. Unlike any other war in history, the artists of the Vietnam era used their music to influence political beliefs and to unite the protesters. During the Vietnam War, the music became integral to the peace movement.