Why Nonviolence Works Non-violence can be just as effective or more effective as compared to violence. Mohandas Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr., and Nelson Mandela all used non-violence to stand up for what they believed was wrong, and got many followers to make a change. Their governments were aware of their presence, but they could not do much about it. They did not break any laws. Mohandas Gandhi became a hero of South Africa and led India to independence.
At the very beginning of The Hurt Locker there is an example of the U.S. military wanting to avoid violence in Iraq. They were advocating pacifism by trying to take a bomb away from a largely crowded area with a drone. They were trying to take it to a safe area and blow it up to avoid any casualties. They had complications with the drone and lost lives due to a terrorist detonation. There are multiple situations where nonviolence is used to diffuse a problem by using a bomb specialist named James.
Non-violence is fine as long as it works” (X 3). , Malcolm X said, and according one of Erica Chenoweth's books, it does. Why Civil Resistance Works: The strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict, has many statistics to prove it. For example, that of the 323 violent and nonviolent campaigns between 1990 and 2006, the nonviolent protests had higher success rates (Chenoweth 7). This statistic demonstrates how nonviolent methods of protest are more effective.
Aside from eventually giving a detailed explanation as to why nonviolence is more productive than violence, Cesar Chavez begins with definitive proof that it is more productive by mentioning a well- known, nonviolent activist, Martin Luther King, in his opening paragraph. By using Dr. King in his opening paragraph, Chavez sets up his whole article in a way that not only explains why nonviolence is better, but first uses a real example of when nonviolence functioned better than violence. In addition to this, Chavez is able to engage his audience and explain why nonviolence is always the best decision through the use of uncomplicated diction, sentence structure, and appealing to his audience’s religious beliefs. Chavez hits ground running after his opening paragraph about Dr. King, and his very first stride is appealing to his audience by the religious belief that violence is never acceptable, no matter how just the cause is. Chavez says, “...human life is a very special possession given by God… that no one has the right to take it for any reason…”
As a labor union organizer and civil rights leader, Chavez wrote this article to validate the use of nonviolence instead of violence as means to create change. Chavez presents comparing through counter argument, if-then structure, and parallelism. The article Chavez wrote explains how effective nonviolence is. Chavez argues for nonviolence despite understanding the tendency toward violence. Throughout the article, Chavez counters nonviolence with violence informing the "what ifs".
Some of the ways lone wolf attacks are beneficial to ISIS are, one, it is relatively inexpensive and easy to convince others who are indoctrinated with the Islamic religion to commit acts of terror. Two, it requires little or no planning on ISIS’s part; perpetrators often find their target and implement attacks alone. Three, lone wolves are a preferred method of attack because they frustrate countermeasures that are in place to thwart potential attacks, since they are often virtually undetectable. Four, successful attacks sheds light on possible vulnerabilities and also incites fear in society. Five, ISIS is demonstrating the extremist group’s strength through worldwide proliferation by carrying out lone wolf attacks in various countries (Mendelsohn,
Indiscriminate peaceful resistance to laws is harmful to a society. Peaceful resistance to unjust laws, however, is not only good for a society, but fundamental to a free one. If the people put up no resistance to unjust laws, they are merely slaves of the state, without freedom. An unjust law is a law which either violates the natural rights of the people or forces them to act against their conscience. Although a few situations call for armed resistance, as the Declaration of Independence notes, most situations do not and peaceful resistance will almost always further the common good.
America is a free society, but the result of that is some people are unhappy with the laws put in place to ensure said free society. When that does happen, those people tend to resist the laws to show their discontent to the government. They can either violently resist, which is illegal and penalties are high, or they can peacefully resist. Peaceful resistance, or civil disobedience is quite popular and has proven to be successful. It is also legal and as long as you don't break any laws in the process, cannot be stopped without a valid reason.
Nonviolent resistance is an individual’s (or individuals’) peaceful approach toward a conflict. Individuals such as Henry David Thoreau and The Liberian women claim that nonviolent resistance is justified because it’s peaceful and it encourages participation of those who support it. Nonviolent resistance is best characterized by the relationship between the means and ends of a conflict. It is conceptually viewed as a method of approach toward a conflict. Henry David Thoreau was able to justify nonviolent resistance through his passivity by questioning the government.
A peaceful resistance to law does impact free society in a positive way. If it weren't were random acts of rebellion, many of the civil rights we have today wouldn't have come into being. People like Martin Luther King Jr., Rosa Parks and Daniel Ells berg have all committed acts of civil disobedience that have reached the history books and impacted our society for the better. However misunderstandings of the definition of civil disobedience and the actions that can be taken can lead to a bad ending. Some people can confuse peaceful resistance to going against the law for everything they disagree on, resulting in charges and eventually police arrest.
When people do not agree with the law, the first instinct is to show their opinion and disapproval of the law. A lot of people will protest, sign petitions, or even peacefully resist the law. In today's society we see this everyday throughout all of the country. For example right now in the united states there is a humongous issue with authority and citizens. This matter is particularly African Americans feeling they do not get the right amount of justice from law enforcement officers.
What is suicide terrorism and why is it used? Suicide terrorism is a tactic, where a person sacrifices their life and attempts to harm civilians and/or military personnel in order to gain support in their political or religious agenda. Now does it help them coerce, provoke or spoil the opponent? The purpose of this paper is to find and explain three theories on why terrorists use suicide terrorism as a ploy to get what they want. This is an evident question that needs to be analyzed because of the danger that presents itself with this form of rebellion.
In the speeches, “Facing the Challenge of a New Age,” “The Most Durable Power,” “The Power of Nonviolence,” and “A Look to the Future,” Martin Luther King, Jr. addressed the issues of nonviolence and faith. The first two were given in Montgomery in 1956. The latter two, were both given in 1957, however “The Power of Nonviolence” was given at UC Berkeley, while the latter was given to the Highlander Folk School, a Tennessee institution for training social activist leaders. Through these speeches, King used faith, both political and religious, to persuade his audiences towards the use nonviolence in the Civil Rights Movement.
Since 1982, a fractional list of terrorist organisations using suicide terrorism includes “al-Qaida, Hezbollah, Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Fatah, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), PKK, Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) and Lashkar-e-Taiba” (Rosendorff & Sandler 2010, p. 444). More than thirty-five states on every continent, except for Antarctica and Australia, have experienced the devastation caused by suicide terrorism. In the past ten years, suicide attacks have occurred not only in an increasing number of states, but this tactic has been used by an even greater number of terrorist organisations (Moghadam, 2008, p. 46). These organisations are discovering their value in causing disruptive and lethal effects and their strategic value in achieving larger campaign goals (Atran 2004, p. 68). Terrorist organisations have two types of goals: process goals and outcome goals.
Throughout history, there have been many occurrences where groups must overthrow a dictator to receive independence. Their independence is important for the people to have. For example, in the United States, it allows the citizens to do what they please and live as they want. The road to getting this independence is tough though. It can be difficult to receive from strong leaders and many had to fight in a battle to achieve it.
