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. However, nonviolence does not cause harm to human lives and allows people to still remain on friendly terms. The non-violent path is better to receive independence in comparison to that with the use of violence is not only safer but more effective, and it also promotes peace for the future. Firstly, a non-violent route …show more content…
If the end goal is independence, it would be much better for leaders to talk things out rather than fight, kill innocent lives, and have the same ending. It simply is not effective for all these humans to die when they can use their words to have a conversation with each other. An example of this was in the Indian Independence. Mohandas Gandhi, an Indian activist, led a nonviolent campaign against the British where they boycotted British goods such as salt. At the time, India was a British colony, so they were making money off of the Indian citizens and the goods they made. As an effect, the protest he led to great economic problems in Britain. This caused Mohandas Gandhi and the British leaders to sit down and discuss possible negotiations. This peaceful protest proved to be effective in the end as India negotiated with Britain and obtained its independence. Although many Indians were put in jail and killed, the benefits did outweigh the harms. This includes that fewer people died versus the amount that would have if violence was used. To expand, in war, not only are the people fighting at risk but also the citizens of that country because battle locations can be anywhere in or near the two regions. This shows that nonviolence is essentially much more effective in that the people of the countries are not