Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
Managing conflict and negotiation
Managing conflict and negotiation
Civil disobedience vs violence
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Managing conflict and negotiation
Managing conflict and negotiation
Civil disobedience vs violence
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
As someone who spends a lot of their day online, one of my favorite things to read are people getting into arguments. The back and forth between two people and ideas are fun especially when they’re well put together; but when someone who blatantly ignores facts and goes off on their
Cesar mentioned that, “If we resort to violence…the violence will be escalated and there will be many injuries and perhaps deaths on both sides, or there will be total demoralization of the workers” (Garcia, 77). He created this idea that violence does not solve anything, and will only create bigger problems. However, a nonviolent movement is a protest
In a time when conflict was rising between America and Britain leading to the first shots at Lexington and Concord sparking the Revolutionary War, and the powerful Federalist Party fell out of favor for a new and improved Republican party. It is in this context that the search for change was set in the heart of each and every American man and women. Two significant changes in the violent protest from 1763 to 1791, the outcome that ensued from the elite fearing the common people and the enemy who the common people targeted their anger at. Admittedly, one significant continuity in violent protest in America from 1763 to 1791, was that the rebellions were always led by the common folk of America to change the government. In the beginning of
In this essay there will be a lot of contrasting between peaceful protest and violent protest.
Everyone has their own opinions on different topics. Some arguments may be more clear than others, but they exist. Some debates on arguments should end, but people always find a way to argue the other side. For example the argument on student debt has been going for a long time. To many, student debt should be eliminated, which makes sense in order to improve our economy.
" This is non-violence at the peak of its power, when it cuts into the profit margin of a business..." (Doc. F) The non-violent protesters knew exactly what to do, exactly what would work, and exactly what would come out of it. This was a luxury that their violent counterparts did not have and is another reason as to why non-violence made more sense for the time
The consequences of peaceful protesting is, the marchers from Selma to Montgomery, had to go back and march three times. The first march didn 't work out and got sent back to the bridge. The second march was when they were crossing the bridge, the police officers attacked them with stick, teargas, clubs, arrested innocent people, guns were fired, knocked people to the ground, whips, rubber tubing wrapped in barbed wire was a weapon that the police officers whipped at the marchers. The third time they went to march, they won Federal Protection and they successfully marched for their cause. The National Guard helped them on the last march.
Non violence protest has been practiced by multiple people all over the world, and it has shown to be successful. Specifically Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. with his form of non violence within the Civil Rights Movement. He is a legend, he has influenced many people to follow his tactics, in order to make the world a better place and to progress the country. Cesar Chavez is a Civil Rights Leader himself and writes an article on DR. King’s 10 year anniversary of his untimely death and his article was on how non violence protests are better than any form of violence by using elements of pathos and ethos.
If done in an anger way or in public the efforts might cause the opposite of what was wanted. Lashing out in anger only gives momentarily satisfaction. Later on, people will feel as if nothing was done which means there effort had not benefits to it. Sometimes this will also bring people to the offenders level , which is what people are trying to prevent not cause. If people respond with lashing out and anger it is more possible for a physical fight or aggression might occur.
Initiating a violent protest will alert their communities of the issue but in a negative way. While a peaceful protest is more likely to positively bring awareness to the issue and spark change. Standing alone can be hard because it means going against social proof. People who stand alone on certain issues and beliefs notify their communities to the existence of a
And although the idea of peaceful protest was to have zero violence, it never seemed to happen that way. Lewis tell us, “Violence does beget violence, but the opposite is just as true” (Lewis and Ayden en 1:100)(see figure 1). At least so they hoped. MLK, Lewis, and Lawson all believed that if they did not start any problems and remained peaceful then there would be no issues. They were wrong.
The arguments by emotions or in other words I would like to say being sympathetic and convince others. For example, when I was a child, I used to get mad over little things and I wouldn’t talk to anyone and I would wait for my dad to come home from work so he can ask me what is wrong, then
When a police officer shoots a young black unarmed man in the streets, than does not face indicement, anger in the city is ineventable. But is Rioting wrong? Protests and Riots began a day after a fatal shooting of Michael Brown by a white officer Darren Wilson on August 9, 2014 in Ferguson, Missouri. Many that were unsettled by the shooting sparked vigorous debates in the United States, about the relationship between the law enforcement and African Americans, and about the use-of-force doctrine in Missouri and nationwide. A St. Louis grand jury decided not to indict officer Wilson, and he was discharged of criminal wrongdoing by the United States Department of Justice.
The consequences of peaceful protesting is, the marchers from Selma to Montgomery, had to go back and march three times. The first march wasn 't what they wanted to achieve and got sent back to the bridge. The second march was when they were crossing the bridge. The police officers attacked them with stick, teargas, clubs, arrested innocent people, guns were fired, knocked people to the ground, whips, rubber tubing wrapped in barbed wire was a weapon that the police officers whipped at the marchers. The third time they went to march, they won Federal Protection and they successfully marched for their cause.
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.