Peaceful protest is meant to be a positive thing for a free society. By peacefully protesting, one is attempting to make a statement and bring attention to the matter in a way that is not harmful to society. When Rosa Parks refused to leave her seat and yield it to a white man, she was breaking a law but was not in any way endangering society. She was bringing attention to the injustices caused by the Jim Crow laws in place at the time in an attempt to bring about social change and social justice. While many at the time may have made the argument that her protest was endangering social purity and social order, these things are simply concepts and if removed, society is no less chaotic than before. Nobody in their right mind would suggest …show more content…
Therefore, it should also be that if the benefits of peaceful protest can be shown to be more beneficial than the change that a protest were to become dangerous, then protests should be seen as something beneficial to a free society. To prove that the benefits of peaceful protests outweigh the potential for danger, we must show that peaceful protests have benefited a free society significantly. To this end, we have several examples of evidence to prove that the benefits of peaceful protest are worth this risk of danger. To begin, we have the fairly obvious example of the Civil Rights Movement, which is overwhelmingly agreed to have been a positive thing for social equality in America. While complete equality may not have been achieved yet, the vast majority of Americans agree that the Civil Rights Movement was beneficial. Another great example of peaceful protest resulting in positive change is that of Gandhi and the Indian Salt Marches. In this movement's peaceful protest of British Imperialism eventually, in joint effort with other protests, did lead to Britain relinquishing governance over India. This can be an example social justice brought about by peaceful
When Rosa Parks refused to give up her bus seat to a white passenger in Montgomery in 1955, she engaged in one of the most iconic acts of civil disobedience in American history. She was arrested, and her nonviolent resistance of segregation laws led to the famous Montgomery bus boycott. Although many people hail Parks’ act of civil disobedience as one of courage and great importance, today the topic of civil disobedience is controversial. Some criticize this form of protest as a path to anarchy, and others say that it is not defiant enough. However, peaceful resistance to laws positively impacts a free society because it can help marginalized groups, challenge immoral war, and combat harmful corporate interests.
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.
As Americans, our laws should always line up to what the Constitution says. As Americans, we also have the right to challenge our government to make sure that we are living constitutionally. Rosa Parks along with many others believed that racial segregation was not constitutional and fought for the rights of thousands of African Americans. By demonstrating peaceful resistance, Rosa Parks caught the attention of lawmakers across the country and caused them to question the validity and constitutionality of the Jim Crow laws. Although Jim Crow laws were not completely abolished after the Montgomery Bus Boycott, it began the long road of each law being abolished one by one. As each Jim Crow law was abolished, more freedom for African Americans was gained. It was only by the peaceful resistance of Rosa Parks and several others that caught the eye of the government and began a process of positive change for the segregated United
If something isn’t right, there is a way to fix it. Violence of course is never the answer therefore, non-violent protests were started. Non-Violent protesting had a slow start then it spread around the world when it hit media attention. Non-violent protest also had more effectiveness than violent protests. Non-Violent protests may have taken a while, but the results were successful.
Peaceful protests was one of the ways African Americans tried to make a change. Many sit-ins occurred where whites and blacks would sit together integrated at white bars and refuse to move. By refusing to move many people through things such as ketchup, mustard, fries, milkshakes, vinegar, and everything on the counter. Mobs of people would harass them and even hurt them to try and get them to move. (Document 4) White cops would arrest those people sitting at the counter eventually, but they wouldn’t protect them from white violence. Police officers also used fire hoses and dogs on peaceful protesters showing that they would not protect African Americans. (Document 5) African Americans also started to integrate into schools. John Meredith
When we think of the word “Protest,” we may think of the events that have happened recently. Egypt, Turkey, Libya and other countries where citizens have come out to the streets protesting their government. Not all protesting approaches are like this. Many, throughout history, have been based around peaceful actions. This approach was used during one of the great line of protests in American history. The Civil Rights movement. Many leaders used peace to promote their cause and promoted the passing of laws such as the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The many leaders of this movement, Martin Luther King Jr., Rosa Parks, and others influenced others to join the strive for equality. One of these people that they influenced was John Lewis.
Likewise, violent protests raise awareness in a negative and oftentimes irrational light. Following the tragic shooting of Michael Brown in the fall of 2014***, countless riots shed light on a new twist on a century-old issue; race in America. The man shot was an African-American, unarmed, young adult. He was shot by a white police officer who believed the young man to be a threat to his safety. His death became the catalyst for the modern Black Lives Matter movement’s stance on equality in American justice systems. While the movement places an emphasis on a need for change, much like Martin Luther King did in the 1960’s, the mass riots from Ferguson, Missouri to Baltimore, Maryland contradict civil disobedience. The riots caused hundreds of vandalisms, countless injuries of police officers in both cities, and created fear for the movement. Awareness for the issues were raised because of this movement, but the violent initial spark of it derailed the solid proof of the need for change. This further proves the necessity that civil disobedience is on a free society; peaceable expression of views has a heavier weight when it comes to altering the course of a
Non-violent activist, Cesar Chavez, in his article, published in the magazine of a religious organization, he discusses the effects of nonviolent and violent protest. Cesar Chavez purpose was to persuade his readers that nonviolent protest will always have the better outcome than violent. Cesar uses a authoritative effusive tone throughout his article in order to lead his readers to fully believe that nonviolent protest will be more pure and stronger solution.
Conclusion: Nonviolent protest are more effective than violent protest in effort to bring about social change.
people might say that peaceful protests negatively impacts society because it wastes time, and it never works. For example, on January 21,2017, there was a women's march on washington in repsonse to donald trump's win. They exercised their first amendment rights and statements to let him know women have rights. Donald Trump was recognized for his comments about women. The women rights movement caused people to have a different perspective about them. But, i don't believe that peaceful protests negatively effect society because According to data compiled by Erica Chenoweth at the University of Denver and Jeremy Pressman at the University of Connecticut, at least 3.3 million people participated in over 500 Women's marches across the US. That is a huge turnout for solidarity for women. The effect of the marches probably will be there will be more women's
One evening in December 1773 was the first documented protest within the colonies, later would evolve in the United States (US) known as the Boston Tea party. From the beginning of the U.S conception, protesting is indoctrinated in our history, speaking out against government and unfair labor practices. As our history goes when the cries of the people are not heard, we protest. The First Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits the United States Congress from enacting legislation that would abridge the right of the people to assemble peaceably. (1) Citizens’ from the young to the old, know these words, regardless what part of the country you are from. However, the operative word is ‘peaceful’. The reason for using the word peaceful, is a reflection on the less than peaceful protest of the “Boston Tea Party”. Justified by extremist
William Faulkner once said, “Never be afraid to raise your voice for honesty and truth and compassion against injustice and lying and greed. If people all over the world...would do this, it would change the earth.” Injustice is an issue that infects society all around us. As a people, we have two choices: stand up or remain quiet. If one chooses to stand, there is a certain etiquette they must follow. Peaceful resistance can be monumental, inspirational, and historical. Unfortunately, there are some who do not know the difference between nonviolent and overly aggressive protest. Peaceful protesting will change society for the better. Human rights activists, such as Martin Luther King Jr. and Henry David Thoreau, sought to make a difference
From the Boston Tea Party of 1773, the Civil Rights Movement and the Pro-Life Movement of the 1960s, to the Tea Party Movement and Occupy Wall Street Movement of current times, “those struggling against unjust laws have engaged in acts of deliberate, open disobedience to government power to uphold higher principles regarding human rights and social justice” (DeForrest, 1998, p. 653) through nonviolent protests. Perhaps the most well-known of the non-violent protests are those associated with the Civil Rights movement. The movement was felt across the south, yet Birmingham, Alabama was known for its unequal treatment of blacks and became the focus of the Civil Rights Movement. Under the leadership of Martin Luther King Jr., president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, African-Americans in Birmingham, began daily demonstrations and sit-ins to protest discrimination at lunch counters and in public facilities. These demonstrations were organized to draw attention to the injustices in the city. The demonstrations resulted in the arrest of protesters, including Martin Luther King. After King was arrested in Birmingham for taking part in a peaceful march to draw attention to the way that African-Americans were being treated there, their lack of voter rights, and the extreme injustice they faced in Alabama he wrote his now famous “Letter from Birmingham.”
Gandhi, King, and Mandela, all of them achieved peace through a new tactic that nobody believed would work. However, it did in fact work and that tactic is known as nonviolent resistance. Although many believed that nonviolence would never work, it worked due to nonviolence showing the conviction of the protestors, it painting the aggressors in a bad light, and it gained a massive amount of support from a lot of people.
I am a pacifist; I do not believe in nor promote violence. I do, however, promote peaceful protest. The act of civil disobedience, of protesting something that is unjust, unconstitutional is well within our constitutional rights. The right to criticize our government is one that was given, that was fought for by our founding fathers. It is an act that affects our society in a very positive way; peaceful resistance encourages others to criticize a cruel and unfair government. Peaceful protests, strikes, and boycotts have the opportunity to gain the government's attention, to try and stop these so-called "anarchists". When we look back at Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., we see a hero. We see someone who is intelligent, who is not afraid to argue,