Throughout history, resistance has proven to be a key strategy when protesting against laws or policies. For example, the Civil Rights Movement, and even rebellion within the workforce produced some effect, whether positive or negative. Past events have shown that violent means of handling uprisings often lead to a brutal outcome. On the other hand, civil resistance has allowed groups to efficiently challenge a law without harming individuals. In this way, I believe while violence often produces a large reaction, peaceful resistance to laws more positively affects a free society. Peaceful resistance is a way for suggestions to be proposed to a society without having detrimental effects. A society needs to grow and change in order to be successful,
…show more content…
Most people do not want to take part in violent acts and will be more likely to respond positively to a civil rebellion, leading to a more unified society. For example, on March 12, 1930, Indian independence leader Mahatma Gandhi set out to fight against the Salt Acts that British had imposed on India. The Salt Acts required Indian citizens to pay the British for salt, which was a key ingredient in their diets, as well as an additional tax on the mineral. Gandhi saw disobeying the Salt Acts as a way to nonviolently break the law in hopes of gaining independence from Britain. He and his followers marched to the coast and made salt from the saltwater, openly breaking British law. Soon, millions of citizens across India, following Gandhi’s lead, began to march to the coast and produce salt. This stunt resulted in urgency for Indian independence, and brought the Indian community together to achieve a shared goal. In his book The Mind of Mahatma Gandhi, Gandhi quotes, “Non-violence is the greatest force at the disposal of mankind. It is mightier than the mightiest weapon of destruction devised by the ingenuity of man” (Gandhi, 1967). Here, Gandhi is saying the effects of a whole society peacefully unifying in order to fight an unjust law are much greater than those of a violent
Most people do not want to take part in violent acts and will be more likely to respond positively to a civil rebellion, leading to a more unified society. For example, on March 12, 1930, Indian independence leader Mahatma Gandhi set out to fight against the Salt Acts that British had imposed on India. The Salt Acts required Indian citizens to pay the British for salt, which was a key ingredient in their diets, as well as an additional tax on the mineral. Gandhi saw disobeying the Salt Acts as a way to nonviolently break the law in hopes of gaining independence from Britain. He and his followers marched to the coast and made salt from the saltwater, openly breaking British law. Soon, millions of citizens across India, following Gandhi’s lead, began to march to the coast and produce salt. This stunt resulted in urgency for Indian independence, and brought the Indian community together to achieve a shared goal. In his book The Mind of Mahatma Gandhi, Gandhi quotes, “Non-violence is the greatest force at the disposal of mankind. It is mightier than the mightiest weapon of destruction devised by the ingenuity of man” (Gandhi, 1967). Here, Gandhi is saying the effects of a whole society peacefully unifying in order to fight an unjust law are much greater than those of a violent