Comparison Of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. And Gandhi
1015 Words
5 Pages
Civil disobedience is defined as members of a community choosing to actively disobey laws in protest of a cause. As proponents of civil disobedience, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Gandhi advocated for those following their causes to complete acts disregarding unjust laws put in place to draw attention to their separate causes. This method of fighting for a cause emphasizes understanding of the necessity for change, that people are actively defying the law to draw attention to the unfair systems in place. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. used this to promote his movement of racial equality as compared with Gandhi’s movement for the separation of India from Britain. Both of their similar philosophies resulted in a degree of success, “the peaceful
…show more content…
Martin Luther King Jr. and Gandhi changed the course of history by challenging the idea that the status quo can only be affected by violence and upheaval. While both men used methods of civil disobedience and peaceful protest to entice change, it is difficult to compare them based on which is “better”. The two causes being compared were polar opposites, separation of nations as compared with disregard for human rights. One may argue for Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s philosophy to be exceeding Gandhi’s because his actions are more relatable to the American public. He brought the United States to the twenty-first century in terms of racial tolerance and, without him, the changes made to history would have taken years longer. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was fighting for a tangible change, not just the end of British rule in India. His arguments, like Gandhi’s, are influenced by his religion but his did not require belief in a god to support. This makes Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s philosophy more accessible to the public than the other. The more accessible to the public, the more momentum and support the philosophy can accrue. Both the philosophies of non-violent action of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Gandhi reached levels of success that would have never been achieved through other methods thus removing any reason to chose which was
Martin Luther King Jr. and Gandhi changed the course of history by challenging the idea that the status quo can only be affected by violence and upheaval. While both men used methods of civil disobedience and peaceful protest to entice change, it is difficult to compare them based on which is “better”. The two causes being compared were polar opposites, separation of nations as compared with disregard for human rights. One may argue for Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s philosophy to be exceeding Gandhi’s because his actions are more relatable to the American public. He brought the United States to the twenty-first century in terms of racial tolerance and, without him, the changes made to history would have taken years longer. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was fighting for a tangible change, not just the end of British rule in India. His arguments, like Gandhi’s, are influenced by his religion but his did not require belief in a god to support. This makes Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s philosophy more accessible to the public than the other. The more accessible to the public, the more momentum and support the philosophy can accrue. Both the philosophies of non-violent action of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Gandhi reached levels of success that would have never been achieved through other methods thus removing any reason to chose which was