Strength in numbers is undeniable however, this strength is often misused. This misused strength often transforms even the most peaceful protests and originations into ruthless mobs. These mobs are directed by a leader, who without a strong moral compass, often will lead his own group to self destruction through the destruction of peace. Cooperation between like minded people to fight for what they believe in is nothing new. These groups tend to be peaceful with the exception for groups who wish to promote social change. However, people are creatures of habit who follow the guidelines of society and when a hot bed issue such as the civil rights or a more modern comparison such as gay marriage, people become very reluctant to change what is common place in society. These creates division between people and from there groups form on how to make their change become reality. These groups then form their own mob mentality which is where they begin to go down the slippery slope of immorality. This immoral behavior is spawned from the belief that individuals can hide from their moral respo...
Two articles, in particular, help clarify and explain this trend. The first is “The Genocidal Killer in the Mirror” by Crispin Sartwell, who explains how so many average people can be turned into hordes of willing and eager killers. In the case of Rwandan, Sartwell notes how the Hutu government ordered the mass-killings of the Tutsis for the “greater good” of it’s people, forcing the people to see the Tutsis as schemers and assassins to prevent personal injury to themselves and their loved ones. The other article, was Erich Fromm’s “Disobedience as a Psychological and Moral Problem”, in which Fromm illustrates how many can be forced into becoming an automatized man, who simply does as he is told by his superiors, allowing him to become a killer without conscience. Fromm also discusses the importance of group mentality upon morality, and how when subjects are viewed as a group, they can be demonized and easily passed off as subhuman. Though both Crispin Sartwell’s article “The Genocidal Killer in the Mirror” and Erich Fromm’ piece “Disobedience as a Psychological and Moral Problem” are from two vastly different time periods, the Cold War era with its apocalyptic fears and the post- Col...
In reading “Armed & Underage” by Jeffrey Gettleman, along with “The Charge: Genocide” by Lydia Polgreen, it is clear that when groups come together, they help stop injustices in addition to doing good by those who are involved. Notwithstanding, there are those that conversely the idea. Opponents feel as though when groups come together, they can't stop injustices
One striking fact of violent and nonviolent campaigns is that the frequency of both has grown throughout the years. Both had been steadily increasing since the 1900s and both had a sharp decline after 2006. However, the frequency of violent campaig...
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. ‘
... stated this famous quote, "voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country" (Mikkelson). This method is used any and every time to change the views of the public to that of the politicians.
In response to the annexation of Texas in 1845 by the United States, Henry David Thoreau's wrote the essay, Civil Disobedience. Thoreau felt that this purely economic move by the United States expedited the Civil War, which he, and many Americans, disapproved of. In his essay, Thoreau argues that government should not be in control of the people and that the people should be able to rule themselves freely however they please. In addition, he clearly states and points out that in many instances it is best when individual rights take priority over state authority.
Numerous cases in history show that identification with a particular group can lead to dreadful outcomes. Together, with historical evidence, classic psychological studies tell a very powerful story. Decent people can take on oppressive roles and succumb to oppressive leaders. However, people often resist tyranny, and their resistance tends to be most effective when it is collective.
The need for power is a reality of life; to use or abuse, to claim or deny, own or disown. However the struggle many go through to gain that feeling of control and power can lead to inner turmoil and conflict between others and one self. Set in the times of the tragic witch trials The Crucible is a drama that shows power resting on moral, legal and religious dynamics that lead to inner, social and religious conflicts. Marking Time an ABC miniseries explores the inner conflict of Hal as he struggles to maintain his power by being with a group he does not really fit into, it also shows how the youth of society challenge authority which leads to social conflict between the two groups. Lord of the Flies a novel by William Golding about the savageness in all innocence and explores the concept of fighting for power to gain status and attitude. Power can be gained, won and fought for but the struggle for it can cause inner, social and religious conflict is explored in all three texts some the concept more clearer than others.
In order to impede mass acts of violence one must look at the root cause and fix what caused the person to commit such acts of violence, and create change
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
No one possesses the same morals or beliefs. Morality does not have a black and white answer because no one is exactly alike. Everyone has their own opinion and right to voice that opinion, and there are numerous ways of doing so. As a citizen with my own beliefs, I believe I have the right to violate laws if I feel morally obligated to. The amount of progress that America has made in such a short amount of time is astonishing. In some ways it seems as if the only way to make any headway is to speak up. If I was morally opposed to a policy or law I would go against it due to its effectiveness, individualism, and past history of the world that has made immense progress.
Within any problem between people or societies, a new social group will begin to grow. People may be living in unison, but when there becomes a conflict the unison begins to divide causing the possibility for at least two social groups to form. The conflict of one group trying to decide to enforce their wants and desires and what they see fit, and the opposing group doing the same, but with their views being different enough to create a conflict. (Britannica, 2015)
Martin Luther King Jr. once said that our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. Americans complain relentlessly about the government and presidential candidates, but that is as far as it goes. When they are given the opportunity to enable a change, one that they cry out for, they meet the opportunity with reticence. They are supposedly so angry that it leads them to rebel in massive rebellions demonstrated by silence. The silence is not only restricted to noiselessness but rather it refers to “doing nothing.” However, what Americans fails to perceive, is that doing “nothing” is doing “something.” Consequently, silence is often the action that leads to destruction.
Passive resistance, simply defined as “peaceful resistance by fasting or refusing to cooperate,” (hyper-dictionary) is a complex issue, and potent tool to attain a means through absolutely zero violence. As Martin Luther King Jr. and Gandhi, have argued, passive resistance is a noble means to a peaceful end, in which only the followers of a movement risk themselves and bring no harm to those whom they oppose. “Passive resistance,” according to Mahatma Gandhi, “is an all sided sword; it can be used anyhow; it blesses him who uses it and him against whom it is used. Without drawing a drop of blood it produces far-reaching results. It never rusts and cannot be stolen.” Martin Luther King Jr. and Gandhi both knew that police forces could not stifle those who would not fight against them. Likewise, no matter how powerful a government, the hearts of those fighting for a just cause could not be quelled. Others are also moved by those who fight passionately for their cause without using violence, and that independence from those who oppress is a key to developing a change in social and political structure.
According to the Elie Wiesel, fanaticism today is a symptom of people fearing to take responsibility for their own choices, fearing to have their own moral consciences. Wiesel suggests that fanaticism is a kind of degraded conformity, an escape from moral responsibility by joining a party, a gang, a banner, and a dogma: “The fanatic thinks he can tear down the wall of his cell by joining other fanatics. No need to think – the Party does the thinking for him, and the deciding for him.” Wiesel’s essay here well defines who is fanatic, and proposes the idea that “we cannot continue to live with fanaticism.” In January 2012, a feminist punk collective, called Pussy Riot, has organized a provocative concert in the Cathedral of Christ the Savior, which is the main church of orthodoxy in Russia, singing a song against the Russian president and the political situation in Russia. There is a big debate in the society about it, and while some people are totally against them, and find their actions inappropriate, others support them. However, it is hard to deny that singing inappropriate slogans, dressing indecently and making political protests in the main church of the country is radical and fanatic.