More handpicked essays just for you.
Nonviolent protests in america
Nonviolent protests in america
Nonviolence in the protests of Martin Luther King Jr and Nelson Mandela
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Peaceful resistance to laws both positively and negatively impact a free society in my opinion. I say this because while the intentions are to be nonviolent and peaceful, when there are many in numbers present in current protest events it leads to non-peaceful outcomes. For instance, in recent events in Denver, Native Americans peacefully protested against a pipeline and it turned violent. It didn’t turn violent by them but because police turned violent toward them. Another example is the march in Dallas when one man turned violent. It negatively impacts a free society because lawmakers assume that we as a nation can no longer conduct ourselves in a civilized manner, or we are unable to come against things we don’t agree with in a nonviolent way. …show more content…
This causes those same law makers to believe that we as a public people shouldn’t have weapons to defend ourselves against the people hired to protect us. Take for instance, in current news, police officers killing unarmed black men. This action leads to protest. In the protest, police bring weapons, tear gas, swat teams, and military to come against those who are trying to peacefully protest creating a non-peaceful event. While all protest can have both impacts recent events only portray violent outcomes. In the past peaceful resistance didn’t gain negative attention. Rosa parks protested against sitting in the back of the bus. Martin Luther king protested equal rights. Both of these well-known leaders protested laws while being peaceful. So it is possible to have a peaceful protest when given peaceful
In 1963, as protest to the authoritarian regime of President Ngo Dinh Diem, Buddhist monks began to go to public places in Vietnam and commit suicide, by drenching themselves in gasoline and setting themselves on fire. They did this as an act of civil disobedience, defined as an act of defiance of specific laws or policies of a formal structure which the individual or group believes to be unjust. The Buddhist civilization in Vietnam was not apparent to the Americans until the Buddhists began sacrificing themselves in Saigon’s public streets. The pictures of the monks engulfed in flames made world headlines and caused American intervention; and later the capture and killing of Diem and his brother. In contrast to these acts of civil disobedience, one can observe the actions of suicide bombers. In the Palestinian territories, those who support suicide bombing claim that it is merely a tactic of war in defense of their land and homes. Without superior weaponry, they see it as “a heroic act of martyrdom, a final act of resistance, stemming from desperation”(Suicide Bombers). Both the Buddhist monks and the “suicide bombers” in Palestine resort to self-sacrificial actions as their form of violent civil disobedience. Violent forms of civil disobedience should only be necessary to counter violence but never if it inhibits upon the liberties of the innocent. By this definition, the actions of the Buddhist monks are more justifiable than those of suicide bombers in the Middle East.
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.
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.
...laws protect the society. They need to understand that bans and laws work and that they need to be enforced more strictly so the people of the nation can feel safe and protected. The nation has brought many new ideas to try to solve the issue on illegal gun selling and gun traffickers. They have provided with legislation laws on gun control, the declining of allowing fully-automatic weapons to be legal in this country to keep all citizens safe. All of the proposals that legislation has introduced do a great job in monitoring the selling and purchasing of weapons that should not be bought and sold. If the country wants us to be safe and protected by our government, they need to know that bans and laws on assault weapon works and saves lives of the American people and that there needs to be cooperation with them so the bans and laws can stay strict and strong.
Peaceful resistance itself does not affect a free society. A people-group can protest any number of laws: voting rights, taxes, and the legality of murder. A majority of society must determine what is best for itself. If the principles of a resistance aligns with the ideals of the society, the pursuit of betterment positively impacts that
If a person want a peaceful protest, then sit at home and use social media to protest and wait for change. However, violent protest raises awareness and get the issue resolved much quicker than just holding hands and chanting. Violent Protest shows the anger and frustration of the person or people. It also shows how people are willing to risk their life by standing by something they believe in. When violence is used during a protest it gets the point across much quicker. Violence cannot be ignored and it forces the authorities or whomever to take notice.
There are Henry David Thoreau’s refusal to pay taxes in abhorrence of the U.S.’s institution of slavery, Mahatma Gandhi’s 240 mile walk protesting British rule and taxation over India, John Lennon and Yoko Ono’s ‘bed-ins’ against the Vietnam War, Martin Luther King Jr.’s commitment to the principle that, in his words, “the choice today is no longer between violence and nonviolence. It is either nonviolence or nonexistence.” These examples range from gestures designed to bring awareness and attract popular support to actions directed pointedly against an opposing force. Not all of these protests were entirely successful, though many, such as Gandhi’s, instigated great change. It remains to be seen whether many of today’s protests, be they march, rally, traffic blockage, boycott, or something else entirely will accomplish what they wish. The real question here not whether past, present, or future protests succeed, however, for there is value in taking a stance in victory or failure. Neither is the issue truly whether the beliefs driving that stance are right or wrong- people should have the right to believe and protest what they want. By definition, civil disobedience and ‘peaceful’ protesting do not directly harm others. So in the end, does peaceful protesting positively or negatively impact society? Can it truly create positive
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
“An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind” (Mahatma Gandhi), welcome to the world of non-violence, not similar to ‘disney land’ but merely a small philosophical village coated in white, decorated with crystals and abundant in doves; white resembling peace, crystals for clarity and pure spirit and doves for .. I don’t know, I guess I have been driven by my imagination.
If the government acts in a manifest function and decides to loosen gun laws in order to help people protect themselves, it can lead to a latent dysfunction where guns can be reachable to anyone and more accidents will be prone to occur. On the other hand, if the government decides to enforce strict gun control, people will then think of it as them being stripped of their American right to bare arms and hence protests will be made.
In y opinion peaceful resistance to laws positively impact a free society because the people got to know what they are dealing with in that they have rights .''When the bus filled up and no seats remained, the driver ordered four African Americans, including Parks, to clear their seats so that a white man could sit down. All but Parks acquiesced.Parks was arrested for her act of civil disobedience and convicted of violating the Jim Crow laws that enforced racial segregation in the South until 1965''.This show that she resented to getting off because that was not a free society that why people should resented to any right that they think it's wrong. another example is ''Security Agency programs that collect vast amounts of information about the telephone calls made by millions of Americans, as well as e-mails and other files of foreign targets and their American connections. For this, some, including my colleague John Cassidy, are hailing him as a hero and a whistle-blower.''This man is a hero even Dow adore say that he is not because he is showing
Peaceful resistance does impact the free society in a positive way because it has shown many opinions that would help contribute making the free society an excellent place represent the freedom we have at the moment. The reason peaceful resistance is a positive impact because the free society could have their opinion as their benefit; however, there would be inevitable conflicts when it comes to one group over another group.
There are many different ways human beings deal with oppression. In his book, Stride Toward Freedom, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. expresses how people handle oppression in three characteristic ways. Acquiescence, violence, or nonviolent resistance are ways the oppressed deal with their oppressors. In King's excerpt, he expresses that nonviolent resistance is the morally and correct way of dealing with oppression. King believed it was only through nonviolent resistance that things would begin to change for the oppressed.
I believe peaceful resistance to laws is what defines a true democracy. It allows the people to exercise their in masses - which what the purpose of democracy is, it's purpose is to give power to the people. So my stance on peaceful resistance is that it positively impacts a free society. The most common form of peaceful resistance is civil disobedience.
... for individuals to use violence in the name of the law. This opens the door to people becoming vigilantes.