Non-Violence vs. Violence
Non-violent acts to accomplish a goal have been in existence for a long period of time. Martin Luther King Jr., Frederick Douglass, and Gandhi used non-violence methods to obtain favorable settlements, to show how the peaceful boycotts became a new and effective weapon to gain rights for all people and to improve society by becoming one. However, violence may appear to be a masterful technique and highly effective in the moment because of the threats visibly shown like weapons. But nonviolence techniques are more difficult to spot while in conflict and it takes a lot more time to be effective. But if one wants an outcome without harm and bigger lasting difference nonviolence is the way to go. Nonviolent based controversies produce better outcome and contrast to violent based issues. The issues addressed by Martin Luther King Jr. were his political revolutionary forbears and forefathers. Dr. King is a big advocate of nonviolence. He is the most know nonviolent leader in history. He led a nonviolent movement in the late 1960s to accomplish equality for African Americans. Dr. King, unlike most activists, did not use the power of guns and knives. However, he used power of words and nonviolence resistance like civil disobedience, protest, and boycotts to achieve
…show more content…
He began his activism as an Indian immigrant in South Africa. After WW1, he became the leading figure in India's path to independence from Great Britain. He took many protest for poor classes, unfortunately he was imprisoned several times. Frederick Douglass was an African American abolitionist who escaped slavery at the age of 17. After the Emancipation Proclamation in 1863, Douglass helped recruit black soldiers to fight in the Union Army. Also, Douglass continued his campaign for civil rights by working to help the freedmen in the South. During his nonviolence resident he also established his own newspaper called the North