A Force Greater Good Analysis

Throughout each paragraph, Chavez continuously mentions and contrasts nonviolence to violence. In paragraph 4, he speaks of the effects of violence, “violence will be escalated and there will be many injuries and perhaps deaths on both sides or there will be a total demoralization on the workers” (Chavez, Paragraph 4). Chavez has already established that his topic of nonviolence is in relation to farm workers and is telling those people how regressive violence as a strategy is to their movement. Defending the nonviolent resistance with the impact of injury, death, and demoralization of workers as an effect of a violent resistance.

Imagine a world without those brave people who dared to not abide by the law and fight for a right. A world without Gandhi would be a world without independent India; without Mandela there would be white superiority in Africa; without freedom fighters, there would be no democracy in Nepal. I believe that all the actions of such law breakers are good, even though they were against various laws, and such actions can be justified to some extent. Even though laws are meant to maintain order and protect rights, it is not always justified; some might be unfair to minorities whereas others might stir up a revolution. Some just violate human rights. In such cases, civil disobedience

Disobedience always comes with a reason, some do it to go against something that is wrong others do it for attention or because they do not care about the situation. When there is an unjust law that is putting someone down or is oppressing it, people will begin to go against the law and not stand around while everyone including themselves gets hurt. Just Laws are to help and to keep everyone safe and unjust laws are made for minorities to stay away from the high-class group who want nothing with them. Sadly today there are still unjust laws to put people down but they are not standing around to let it happen. Martin Luther King could not watch his brothers and sisters be constantly put down so he went against unjust laws to stand his grounds. Antigone shared similarities when she went against king Creon rules rule to not bury her brother Polyneicês, she knew the consequences but paid no minds and stood her ground and kept doing what she has planned to do.

Non-violence is a peaceful strategy people used in the 1900’s to revolt against the government. Martin Luther King Jr., Nelson Mandela, and Mohandas Gandhi had the most success in changing the way we live today. How did they get nonviolence to work? Well they were very disobedient, disciplined, and determined to make a change in society.

When your human rights are being stripped, it is a great way to change society, as we see in Gandhi’s peaceful revolt. However, in many cases it is not necessary. It would do even more damage, especially if there are other, safer and more human ways for addressing concerns. Laws would be threatened as well as American infrastructure and economy. Through this, civil disobedience requires us to examine the situation. It requires intelligent people to sacrifice something for the greater good, and when it is necessary. The people thinking about disobeying must ask the question “is the law I am being pushed under unjust?” before performing the act. As Gandhi once said “An unjust law is itself a species of violence. Arrest for its breach is more so. Now the law of nonviolence says that violence should be resisted not by counter-violence but by nonviolence. This I do by breaking the law and by peacefully submitting to arrest and

We see brutality everywhere, we approach a problem with the easy way out, violence. That's the solution we all resort to when we see no change or when we feel that the injustices that have been done are too much to go unanswered for. Civil rights activist Cesar Chavez published an article claiming that nonviolent resistance has always been more beneficial than violent protest. Chavez’s purpose in this article is to advertise the negative effects of violence and provide a solution for it. In his article Chavez uses an inspirational and objective tone to illustrate how the effects of nonviolent resistance over time outweigh those of violent protest, he creates an appeal to emotion, logic, and authority to persuade followers of God, minorities, and people who have suffered injustices that have gone unanswered for. Chavez uses many rhetorical devices, the most prominent being: repetition, rhetorical questions and allusions to explain why nonviolence protest is better to accomplish their efforts.

Brilliantly put by what many deem to be America’s greatest president of all time, Abraham Lincoln, “Let every man remember that to violate the law is to trample on the blood of his father, and to tear the charter of his own and his children’s liberty.” Civil disobedience is defined as the refusal to comply with certain laws as a form of political protest. Although many may argue that this is the sole way to keep the government in check and to make minorities heard, rational people will realize that it is not this disrespect of the law that proves the democracy of our nation.

All things considered one must devoted to their belief of nonviolence and be willing to suffer without retaliation (Source C), they can not fall victim to anger and fight back, for it would destroy the very principle of the cause. To become a truly successful campaign it should not be run on the basis of humiliating or besting the opponent, rather one should seek friendship and a better understanding of another (Source B). A nonviolent protester should not become bitter of the circumstances the opponent might bestow upon them but rather have open arms and eye for a better future ahead. The central idea of a nonviolent campaign is being able to make changes and spreading peace and love without the use of violence; by pursuing upon this path

If we take a closer look at civil disobedience, we can better understand what it means, its goals, and its outcomes. Civil disobedience predominantly exists as direct and non-violent government defiance. Instead of voicing an opinion with a vote or a simple conversation, civil disobedience stands up for what is right using an individual’s whole influence. Therefore, some sacrifices regarding the legality of actions are made in order to preserve the integrity of the mission. In other words, why should a protester follow the law that they are trying to alter? That doesn’t make much sense, therefore civil disobedience allows unjust laws to be broken for the greater good. This method is very effective if, for example, a minority is attempting to

To begin with, in the middle of Gandhi's speech, he attempts to prove non violence is the most effective way to approach the movement and he does this by appealing to the audience's emotions using abstract diction. He exclaims, “In a violent struggle, a successful General has been often known to effect a military coup and to set up a dictatorship.” He first announces “ In a violent struggle” , which can trigger the audience's curiosity and make them want to hear his reasoning on why violence is not right. Taking this a little further, he uses the word “struggle” to extract the audience’s pain and sorrow, two emotions they would like to avoid. When Gandhi associates violence and struggle, he is making the audience remove themselves from harming others, by not participating in harmful day to day acts or year long movements. Audience members want to disassociate themselves from

Thomas Jefferson once said, “If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so.” Citizens of any government are often subject to unjust, unreasonable legislation that they are required to follow - but are they? In fact, in order to uphold a government that reflects the will of the people, citizens must protest unfair laws by deliberately disobeying them. This method often results in immediate change, would help to ban immoral laws that can be dangerous to some groups of people, and upholds the entire idea of a fair government: to let the people rule.

Civil Disobedience is the peaceful act of protesting a law between the civilians and government. Henry Thoreau explains it like this "… honest men to rebel and revolutionize" (page 392). In civil disobedience by Henry Thoreau he is explaining how the government of his time is abusing its power and people and how the people should do as he did and be a civil disobedient when the laws and government are unjust and go against a man's conscience. Thoreau wants the readers to peacefully protest the laws they feel are unjust, be aware of his own conscience, not be a puppet of the government, and not support anything that is of wrong-doing. He tells the readers to act and not just stand by passively or at least stop supporting what they feel is wrong, and I do believe he presents an effective argument for his point, and as accordingly it appeals to the common man.

Cesar Chavez begins his article by relating MLK’s life to power and how nonviolence brings to bear in this world. Chavez demonstrates his argument that resistance is an effective strategy to create change with the use of logos. He explains that people are so convinced that nonviolence is more powerful than violence. “Nonviolence supports you if you have a just and moral causes. Nonviolence provides the opportunity to stay on the offensive and that is of crucial importance to win any contest.” (13-14) This appeal to logos by showing if people resort to violence then it can get escalated or be total destruction. Nonviolence has the opposite effect. If we respond with nonviolence, we attract others support and it helps us to grow. Chavez uses logos to show that non violence resistance will help resolve problems.

Breaking laws passed by our governing officials is wrong on any level. This is blatant disrespect to authority and shows where people's morals are. Stated by Abraham Lincoln in Civil Disobedience: A Threat to Our Law Society, “Let every man remember that to violate the law is to trample on the blood of his father, and to tear the charter of his own and his children’s liberty.” When one breaks the law he is going against everything people have worked for. Breaking a law is breaking the balance of what holds our society together. When everyone breaks laws society becomes an anarchy. This undoes all of the fighting our founding fathers did for our freedom. Breaking the law is a something that is morally wrong and threatens our liberties and

Why would people go against law? Maybe it's going against his/her conscience or belief, or maybe the law(s) are presenting a danger, or maybe it's writing a “awesome essay”and voluntary writing it for fun (sarcasm). But referring to the Native Americans in North Dakota that fight against the building of a oil pipeline thru ancestral lands (Heim). In the greek play Antigone there is an issue with civil disobedience as well. it's right to disobey the law if it goes against one’s belief or way of life.It is one’s moral obligation to go against laws when they go against one's conscious.