Are Non-Violence Causes More Effective Than Violent Ones?

Are non-violent resistances more effective than violent ones? Violent methods of resistance may be the most powerful, but forceful methods are not as effective as non-violent strategies because a non-violent resistance achieves its objectives against the will of the opponent by grasping control of the situation through widespread non-cooperation and boldness. Governments can easily justify violent retaliations against armed protesters. Government violence against nonviolent movements is more likely to backfire against the government, and nonviolent methods augment its legality and encourage more extensive participation in the resistance, which brings increased pressure being brought on the objective. Acknowledgment of the opponent’s allegations can turn into greater support, undermining the government’s main sources of political, economic, and armed forces. …show more content…
For example, in India a large group peacefully lead by Gandhi marched over 240 miles to protest the British imposed salt laws, and on April 5th, 1930 the Salt laws were broken.

Additionally, governments can easily justify violent retaliations against armed protesters, therefore when non-violent disobedience occurs government violence against nonviolent movements is likely to backfire against the government. After Gandhi’s Salt Satyagraha (or march), he along with thousands of others were jailed. Instead of suppressing the movement, it brought the beginning of India’s movement for absolute independence. This shows that non-violent resistance can bring a government to its knees, without using