Nationalism and decolonization movements happened in the 1920s through 1960s, but South Africa’s movement didn’t end until 1994. The Nationalist movements are when a lot of people support and believe in being politically independent. The Decolonization movement is when people stop relying on another country that colonized them. Some of the rights that were taken away from the people were that they couldn’t protest, they weren’t represented in the government, the citizens paid high taxes, they were poor, there was segregation, and land was taken away. The citizens of South Africa, Vietnam, Kenya, Nigeria, and Ghana, protested with nonviolent and militant actions. Nonviolent actions were when people peacefully protested. Militant actions were …show more content…
For example, India was colonized by the British and the British government made the people pay a lot of taxes on things like salt and land. The citizens were also forced to buy British goods. Because of those unfair demands, Mahatma Gandhi, leader of the Indian National Congress, decided to protest with nonviolent actions because he understands the experience of poor Indians and is justifying their actions against British rule. In document 1 written in India in the year 1930, Gandhi sent a letter to Lord Irwin, British leader of India, because Gandhi wanted to explain why they were doing the Salt March. The Salt March was to illegally make salt from seawater. The people traveled from Ahmedabad to Dandi, a total of 400 kilometers. Other strategies that the people used for the Salt March were boycotts, held meetings,with held payments of taxes and revenue, passed out brochures when people celebrate national culture, and they blocked liquor shops. The letter said that the Indians suffered a lot under British rule because of the high salt taxes and that if the citizens used nonviolence they would be able to see what the British government did to the citizens. …show more content…
An example where militant actions failed were in India. The people were forced to pay high taxes for salt and land. They were also forced to buy British products. In India there were small groups in India that decided to use violence. The Indian people made movements that encouraged violent actions, these programs were called Quit India Movement and Direct Action Day. Quit India Movement was when the people destroyed government buildings and destroyed anything from colonization. Direct Action Day was when there were a lot of massacres and rioting. Those events happened in the North. Mahatma Gandhi was blamed for some of the militant action and the government didn’t want to negotiate. This shows how the militant actions were unsuccessful because it made the British government ignore the people’s demands. This act of violence didn’t even get attention from others, instead Gandhi was blamed for something he didn’t do. In the same way, the people of Kenya did not have any economic or political rights in the British government. The citizens lost land to the British. The militant actions that the people did were encouraged by the Mau Mau. The Mau Mau was an organization that motivated people to be violent to
King and Thoreau?s approach to civil disobedience is a more civilized way to protest than those at the WTO. King in his letter of response to the Birmingham clergy, ?Letter from Birmingham Jail? he list four basics steps to a non-violent campaign: collection of the facts to determine if injustice exist; negotiation; self-purification; and direct action (174). In his letter he points out that the individuals involved in the campaign attended a series of workshops on nonviolence. During the workshops individuals were to ask themselves if they were able to accept blows without retaliating and if they could endure the ordeal of jail (174). Thoreau?s approach is slightly different at an individual level but yet was nonviolent. He refused to pay his poll tax, which he felt was unjust. The result was he was arrested and jailed. He applied a type of civil disobedience without eliciting violence.
Mahatma Gandhi, a prominent leader in the independence movement of India once said, “Civil disobedience becomes a sacred duty when the state becomes lawless and corrupt.”(brainyquotes.com) Gandhi states that protest and civil disobedience are necessary when the authority becomes unscrupulous. This correlates to “Declaration of Independence,” by Thomas Jefferson; “Civil Disobedience,” by Henry David Thoreau; and “Letter from a Birmingham Jail,” by Martin Luther King Jr., because all three leaders felt that civil disobedience was important to help protest against an unjust ruling. Jefferson stood up to the injustice of the king by writing the Declaration of Independence and urged others to stand up for the independence of America. Thoreau exemplified
When you are fight to get peace and fairness back to your government, does it involve nonviolent or violent acts to get what you want? When Gandhi came back to India after getting his law degree, Gandhi started a movement to bring peace and fairness back to their government. What made Gandhi’s nonviolent movement work? The reason Gandhi’s nonviolent movement worked was because he didn’t believe in segregation, didn’t follow the British’s rules for Indians, went to jail for his movement, and he was determined.
Sometimes civil disobedience can become violent as in the case in South Africa during the struggle to end apartied. It started out with passive resistance, but after years of struggling with no change, a violent group was formed and was willing to do anything to get the freedom they desired.
Since the beginning of the union of the states, the right to succeed has continually been tested. Whether the are reasons severe enough to be considered, or ones that will be forgotten and resolved, the question has been continuously asked if it is acceptable for a state to secede from the union. The amendments were created to protect the rights of the people; if not all the amendments are observed, but instead are violated, the people should have the right to secede. However, before the secession is agreed upon, the state should carefully consider all options; only if the union is doing more damage than benefit should the state seriously consider. This is the exact decision Britain was given. The union with Europe was hurting not only Britain but also Europe its self. Both government and people were put at risk. This was not, however, the case with the outbreak in 1860 in the south. The south aspired for slavery, and if that meant seceding, they would have it, not because it was better for the people. A state should have the right to pull away from a union if: the government is causing more damage than benefit, at least two-thirds of the people of the state vote
During the ratification of the Constitution, anti-Federalists proposed a compromise in which the state of New York reserved the “right to withdraw herself from the Union after a certain number of years” if the federal government did not support reforms the state favored. The Federalists immediately rejected the compromise claiming that the Constitution did not permit unilateral state secession. Alexander Hamilton and John Jay made it abundantly clear that the “reservation of a right to withdraw” was ultimately “inconsistent with the Constitution, and was no ratification.”
Civil disobedience is the refusal to obey civil laws in an effort to induce change in governmental policy or legislation, characterized by the use of passive resistance or other nonviolent means. The use of nonviolence runs throughout history, however the fusion of organized mass struggle and nonviolence is relatively new. The militant campaign for women’s suffrage in Britain included a variety of nonviolent tactics such as boycotts, noncooperation, limited property destruction, civil disobedience, mass marches and demonstrations. The Salvadoran people have used nonviolence as one powerful and necessary element of their struggle. There is a rich tradition of nonviolent protest in this country as well, including Harriet Tubman’s Underground Railroad during the Civil War and Henry Thoreau’s refusal to pay war taxes.
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.
Peaceful resistance to laws positively impact a free society because if there isn't, how will people hear the voices of the oppressed and mistreated? Peaceful resistance comes a long way in trying to advance the rights and customs of the oppressed today. For example, The Salt March of 1930 was based on the Salt Act of 1882, which excluded the people the India from producing or getting salt, only British officials. Mahatma Gandhi was the leader of this protest. According to an article by time.com, it says that "The protest continued until Gandhi was granted bargaining rights at a negotiation in London. India didn’t see freedom until 1947, but the salt satyagraha (his brand of civil disobedience) established Gandhi as a force to be reckoned with and set a powerful precedent for future nonviolent protestors, including Martin Luther King Jr.(Sarah Begley,2015)" This means the salt march was a start for India's independence. Also, Gandhi's brand of civil disobedience set precedents for future nonviolent protests. Another Example of how peaceful protests
Gandhi developed the idea of satyagraha which centered around nonviolent resistance to opposition and evil. The goal of this march was to protest the taxation on salt production and transport in India by the British government. Gandhi's march sparked a wave of civil disobedience which contributed to the expulsion of the British empire. This march had a long term effect, as it inspired many to take part in a successful, organized civil protest. Furthermore, the protest stimulated further motivation for other disobedience and influenced the thinking of many civil disobedience leaders, such as Martin Luther King during the Civil rights
A modern example of violent resistance would be the Arab Spring. In Algeria, people protested because of a lack of housing and several people attempted or committed self-immolation to create awareness including Mohamed Aouichia and Mohsen Bouterfif who set themselves on fire in 2011. In Israel, protesters from Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, and Syria attempted to march into Israel to remember the Nakba, a war in Palestine that forced over 700,000 Palestinian Arabs out of their homes, the protests soon turned violent when the Israeli border patrol would not let them cross. The Syrian Uprising spread into Lebanon and there were many clashes between anti-Assad and pro-Assad groups that injured hundreds of people. In Mauritania, a man set himself on fire to protest Mauritania’s leader, Mohamed Ould Abdel Aziz. In Morocco, a group of protesters set a bank on fire causing five peoples’ deaths. In Oman, protesters set fire to cars and stores which cause the police to violently retaliate. And finally in Sudan hundreds of people protested for their ruler to resign and by the end, there were people wanting to overthrow him by any means. Success is something that differs by opinion so it is not easy to measure, but if I had to state if I think the Arab Spring was successful, I would say yes. I think it was successful because the Arab Spring spread through
In an effort to help free India from the British rule, Mahatma Gandhi once again contributed to a protest against salt taxes, known as the Salt March. This protest advocated Gandhi’s theory of satyagraha or nonviolent disobedience as the nation came together on March 12, 1930 to walk the 241 mile long journey to the shores of Dandi to attain salt. Although some Indians criticized Gandhi for not achieving direct independence from the Raj or British rule, Gandhi’s execution of the Salt March helped to create a stronger nation for the Indians to live in. Gandhi motivated the Indians to act robustly against the injustices of the salt taxes through nonviolent means. This caused Gandhi to create a temporary compromising pact between Gandhi and the British viceroy over the turmoil created by the salt taxes.
Gandhi was known first for his nonviolence behavior and would condemn his own party opposing violence. Gandhi made use of nonviolent and passive resistance through non-cooperation as his weapon of choice in the conflict against the British. The butchery of civilians by British military personnel resulted in increased public anger and acts of violence. Mahatma Gandhi criticized both the activities of British Government and the revenge of the butchery from the Indians. He extended consolation to the British victims and denounced the riots. Initially his party was opposed to his declaration. Later, however, they accepted Gandhi’s principal stating that any retaliation or violence was hurtful and could not be justified. Inspired by Mahatma Gandhi success with nonviolent activism, Martin Luther King Jr. pushed forward his Civil Rights Movement with nonviolent activism as well. Although the two have personally never had contact, Dr. King learned of Gandhi 's discipline while in the seminary. His first application of the nonviolent campaign came in 1955 during the Montgomery bus boycott. Here, he had a witnessed firsthand the power of a peaceful
The process of decolonization in Africa during the 1950’s through the 1970’s was a very smart yet risky idea. For some places independence was easily gained yet in other areas it was a battle. During the time periods where colonization existed, Africa was peaceful and kept things in order. People had control over their specific locations and there were no questions to be asked. Once it was decided to remove these rights, things got out of hand rather quickly. Violence was a main occurrence during the decolonization timeframe because rules, rights, leaderships, etc. got altered and drastically changed. Sometimes nonviolence was used but it usually wasn’t as effective. A major example of using nonviolence actions to gain independence is when Gandhi protested in India. African leaders have tried very hard to lessen the influence of Western powers and the broader international community but they’ve never been completely successful because they continuously needed support in state building, economic development, and public health initiatives.
In another scene, Gandhi is in jail, and some of his followers are peacefully gathered in a square. The police lock up the square and kill almost everyone, over 1,500 people. Gandhi is disgusted and discouraged. He continues to preach non-violence, but the Indians do have occasional conflict with the police. Gandhi’s counter to the popular phrase “an eye for an eye” says that after that, “everyone will be blind.” Gandhi leads several organized protests against British rule. In one, all Indians stopped doing their work, and the major cities in the country were disabled. Another time, he led a 165-mile walk to the sea to protest the British monopoly on salt. The Indians made their own salt out of the sea.