More handpicked essays just for you.
Role of Gandhi in freedom struggle
The impacts of the civil rights movement
Gandhi contribution to india freedom
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Former President John F. Kennedy once said, “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable” (Brainyquote.com). John F. Kennedy was a man who believed in a better America, and inspiring quotes like this are exactly what Martin Luther King Jr. and Mahatma Gandhi used to help change their country. Both men had a vision of a better tomorrow and through peaceful protests, and similar tactics both men were able to achieve their end goal. During this time, these leaders may have also conquered some personal issues. Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. both had an end goal of civil rights and equal treatment for their people. Both men experienced peaceful protest, negative reception, and personal effects. …show more content…
Some people may not be aware or may not fully understand what the person is fighting for, so they form a negative opinion or have a negative reception about the subject at stake. During these times of protesting and struggling both Martin Luther King Jr. and Gandhi had received a negative reception -from people -for what they were fighting for. Everyone no matter what country they are from has probably heard about Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I have a Dream” speech, a speech filled with inspiring words, hope and an overall message of a better tomorrow for America. Many people praised this speech and nothing more, it gave them a sense of hope that no matter what happens to them things would get better. However, this is not the way it has always been. “Reactions to the speech immediately following its delivery, were mixed, and some praised the speech, while inexplicably others completely ignored it” (Duffy,185). The negative reception that followed King’s speech only fueled his passion to continue fighting for his people and his country. Gandhi had gone through similar situations when fighting for Indian Independence. The British rule did not appreciate what Gandhi was fighting for in order to gain independence for his people, and “by accepting the punishments and negative reception imposed on him, he confronted his captors with their own brutalization” (Tharoor). When Gandhi …show more content…
Being a leader is not an easy job, especially when the leader is known worldwide. When Martin Luther King Jr. and Mahatma Gandhi said they would lead their people to correct treatment they knew what they were getting themselves into. We as the followers really saw some of the effects the movement laid upon the leaders. Through times of struggle and stress when fighting for what is right, these protests had personal effects on these men. Martin Luther King Jr. was a man of faith, a father, a reverend, and a leader; during these times of protest, he was arrested and put in jail, many people threw objects at them while marching and it sometimes effected them. When people do not truly understand what you are fighting for and just ignore and put your message down, it sometimes makes you question if this is even worth your time. However, according to Clayborne Carson when Martin Luther King Jr. experienced these moments of doubt he resorted to prayer and family and continued to see that the injustice in America would continue to grow unless someone stopped it. When it came to effects on Mahatma Gandhi, his were more physical. He was a big advocate of peaceful protest and an inspiration for Martin Luther King Jr., however, “when British rule imposed punishment of suffering upon him” (Nathanson,3), he threw it right back at them. Upon himself, “he went on hunger strikes, he
As we know about These hero’s I want to contrast a little about them. I want to start with Fannie Lou Hamer she was an southern sharecropper in which she was poor. She had dropped out of school when she was 12 years old to help out on the farm. But she always had been had all of her life. No she didn’t wait on a bus until an white man told her to move to make a change. She pushed herself by doing things any man think that a woman could not do. As you know she joined the SNCC. Hamer founded Mississippi’s Freedom Democratic party.
As Chris McCandless once said, “I now walk into the wild,” a phrase that not only represents a future with unknown mysteries, but a phrase that finishes the puzzle of his and Martin Luther King, Jr’s life. When looking at a historical or inspirational person, you may notice they operated outside the usual bounds of society to achieve a particular purpose. Such is the case for McCandless and King. Although Chris McCandless and Martin Luther King, Jr both shared a fatal death, these men had many similarities and differences between how they reached success, encountered obstacles, and left an impact towards people's lives.
"an unjust law is no law at all."- quote by St. Augustine who was an Christian theologian and philosopher, whose writings influenced the development of Western Christianity. Martin Luther King Jr. was a baptist minister and civil rights leader that made advancements for civil rights peacefully, exclusively for African Americans in America. Mohandas Gandhi was a non-violent leader of the Indian independence movement against British rule. Accordingly, both MLK Jr. and Gandhi were leaders for civil rights that practiced and preached non-violent approaches for their freedom.Martin Luther King Jr. and Mohandas Gandhi were both valid in their judgment to break the law for their peaceful protests.
Mohandas Gandhi and Mao Zedong were two great leaders who succeeded in many ways through their actions and decisions. Gandhi was an Indian leader and Mao a Chinese leader. However, their approach to success, peace, and ultimately, a revolution, was very different. Mao favored peace through violence, and Gandhi favored peace through non-cooperation and standing up for what is right. He also believed that these changes would be accomplished by “conscious suffering”, which was the way he put it.
Martin Luther King Jr. and Cesar Chavez are just some people who have fought for the Civil Rights of us people. The people who make these movements are for the most part very similar. This essay will be explaining about these two people’s lives and, how they resemble on how they handled being a good leader. Basically, the essential features of a civil rights leader can be seen in their life’s influences, contributions, and their honors received.
Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X paved a significant path towards a racially neutral society. There is no doubt that both Martin and Malcolm influenced a whole generation of rebels to fight racism and discrimination. Martin Luther King Jr. had a more peaceful standpoint to attempt to solve racism. Malcolm X on the other hand used violence and force to get the necessary results. They both shared a common objective, but took different actions to achieve the goal.
Comparing the Civil Disobedience of Martin Luther King Jr., Henry David Thoreau, and Mohandas Gandhi. From the onset of man fighting for freedom or his beliefs, the question has always been whether one person can make a difference using words rather than wars. Philosophically, the concept of civil disobedience would appear to be an ineffective weapon against political injustice; history however has proven it to repeatedly be one of the most powerful weapons of the common man. Martin Luther King Jr. looked at the way African Americans were treated in the United States and saw an increase in inequality.
History has encountered many different individuals whom have each impacted the 21 in one way or another; two important men whom have revolted against the government in order to achieve justice are Henry David Thoreau and Martin Luther King Jr. Both men impacted numerous individuals with their powerful words, their words carried the ability to inspire both men and women to do right by their morality and not follow unjust laws. “On the Duty of Civil Disobedience” by David Henry Thoreau along with King’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail”, allow the audience to understand what it means to protest for what is moral.
Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X were the two most influential leaders of the civil rights movement. They inspired the need for change and the conquest for civil liberty. Stylistically, their philosophies, rhetoric, and feedback from the public significantly varied. Some of their tactics were controversial, and they both died in the fight for total freedom. Despite their differences, in the end, civil rights were established for all men, and segregation laws were eradicated. All in all, MLK and Malcolm X used different strategies to fight for civil
Throughout his education, Martin Luther King Jr. tried to find a way to demonstrate his belief of racial equality with the most effective means possible. He quickly realized that the best strategy to end segregation was to use nonviolent forms of protest. At Crozer, Morehouse and Boston University, he studied the teaching of Mohandas Gandhi, who used nonviolent methods to help India claim its independence from Britain. King read several books on the ideas of Gandhi, and eventually became convinced that his methods could be employed by African Americans to obtain equality in America. King knew that any violence on the part of African Americans would lead to violent responses from segregationists, which would lead to injury or maybe even death for his followers. He had to teach his followers not to respond violently to cruel attacks from segregationists. King decided to sponsor workshops to train African Americans in nonviolent beh...
Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X were very significant during the Civil Rights Movement. Both were excellent speakers and shared one goal but had two different ways of resolving it. Martin Luther King Jr. chose to resolve the issues by using non-violence to create equality amongst all races to accomplish the goal. Malcolm X also wanted to decrease discrimination and get of segregation but by using another tactic to successfully accomplish the similar goal. The backgrounds of both men were one of the main driven forces behind the ways they executed their plans to rise above the various mistreatments. Martin Luther King Jr. was a more pronounced orator, a more refined leader, and overall saw the larger picture than Malcolm X.
Both Dr. Martin Luther King and President John F. Kennedy were the change they wished to see. They didn’t worry about the consequences or the repercussions. They were tired and fed up, but most of all they did not want their children to grow up in such a hard and harsh generation. Unlike some civil rights leaders, Dr. King was adamantly against violence. I can truly appreciate and am envious of how King kept such dignity and composure throughout the entire civil rights movement. He believed in forgiveness and sought out his commitment to non-violence while trying to educate as many Americans as he could. Reading about him being throw in jail time after time broke my heart, but nothing could hold him back from seeking out what he was so passionate about. I am forever grateful for Dr. Martin Luther King and his
However, Gandhi puts emphasis on a need for personal suffering in the practice of nonviolence, a stance that is somewhat less aggressive than King’s need to suffer for the sake of his cause. Martin Luther King Jr. was an American Baptist minister, humanitarian, activist, and leader in the African-American civil rights campaign. His main goal was to guarantee the progress of civil rights in America, and he has become a human rights figure. King led protests, held boycotts, and organized the southerly Christian Leadership Conference, serving as its first chairperson. Gandhi was known first for his nonviolent behavior and would condemn his own party for opposing violence.
Thesis: Actions, beliefs, and patience are characteristics that are comparable in both the lives of Martin Luther King and Nelson Mandela.
Gandhi was inspirational for many people. As General George C. Marshall, the United States secretary of state from 1946 to 1949, said at Gandhi 's death, “Mahatma Gandhi was the spokesman for the conscience of mankind.” (Bio.com.) He is only one of many who believed in what Gandhi was fighting for. Many people not only believed in what Gandhi stood for but they also follow in his footsteps and try to do what Gandhi accomplished. (“Gandhi, Mahatma”)