Gandhi Vs Mandela

Gandhi, King, and Mandela each fought for their causes with a method that was very rarely used but even less rarely successful. Their efforts at peaceful protest without retaliation to attacks were successful in overthrowing trans-continental rule and ending segregation of races. Gandhi transformed the idea of non-violence into a way to fight for freedom and justice which would ultimately end in success and

In the 20th century, colonized countries were calling for independence from the European powers that colonized them. Mahatma Gandhi and Nelson Mandela were two of the most influential people who participated in that. Mandela worked to liberate South Africa from the clutch of apartheid and Gandhi worked to liberate India from Britain. Over the years, they have been compared on their methods and goals. Mandela and Gandhi were very different when looking at their goals for their countries, their methods and their results.

“In a gentle way, you can shake the world” stated Mahatma Gandhi-- a fierce activist who fought for basic human rights of the people of India. Gandhi, Daisy Bates, and Nelson Mandela were all leaders in the fight for equality. Mandela fought for the rights of the African people while Bates fought in the Civil Rights movement in America. These three individuals used persistence, courage, and peace to defend the basic human rights of all people.

Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. were both extremely eminent figures of the twentieth century. They correspond to Transcendentalism, the idea that you should not conform to society’s laws and expectations, which essential in Gandhi and MLK’s philosophies. It is to do what you feel like doing, and not follow along or be influenced by the crowd, to follow your intuition. MLK and Gandhi both held non-violent resistances. MLK focused on promoting equality and anti-racism, and Gandhi wanted to give India independence from British rule, as well as fight the racism towards Indians in South Africa. Both Martin Luther King Jr and Gandhi’s movements and beliefs were influenced by Henry David Thoreau, and they hold a strong connection to transcendentalism.

Gandhi, King and Chavez all shared one similar goal. That goal was to bring society back from a culture of violence and hate, to a culture of peace and harmony. The method employed in their human rights struggles to achieve social justice was through the supreme importance of non-violent civil resistance/non-violence. A way civil resisters show their civil disobedience is by “noiselessly going to prison” to “ensure a calm atmosphere“ that will then “justify mass disobedience as civil, which means gentle, truthful, humble, knowing, loving, never criminal and hateful,“ (Gandhi, 358). Gandhi, King, and Chavez were all devoutly religious, but their tactics differed in the ways they approached non-violence. Gandhi approached non-violence ideological

In the course of American history, there were many great leaders who brought lights to the humanity, but also there were cruel leaders that put humans in unimaginable experiences. As a nation have been through trials and tribulation, but one of the biggest movement was none other than Civil Rights movement in 1960s. In this writing, I will be talking about the civil rights of African Americans fought by the Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X. These two leaders both were important leaders during the Civil Rights movement, but they each had different way of fighting for racial discrimination and addressing challenges facing African Americans. In order to learn more about them, I read the The Autobiography of Malcolm X As Told To Alex Haley,

Gandhi and Malcolm X both had very successful nonviolent campaigns, although they were in different time periods and in different parts of the world, they both worked. Gandhi was one of the first people to do something big through nonviolence and showcased how well it would work if you were really dedicated to it. Gandhi had a more successful nonviolent campaign than Malcolm X because of the main goal he achieved through his campaign, gaining India their independence.

both had their own reasons in practicing ‘civil disobedience’. They both fought for different causes but they both had a similar motif, that their people were being treated unjustly. Martin Luther King Jr. saw colored people being prosecuted in southern parts by their skin color. Mahatma Gandhi saw Indians being prosecuted based on their race. Both men knew that the only solution to stop the prosecutors is by standing up to them by utilizing ‘civil disobedience’. Martin Luther King would It is grotesque that King and Gandhi had to go through such cumbersome times due to the amoral government. Just put yourself in their shoes, and imagine how your life would be if the government set out laws that would affect only your race, culture, ethnic, or religion. Would you not find that immoral? Would you not want to be treated equally as everyone else? It is imperative that people realize sometimes defiance is necessary in order to promote change.

The Civil Rights Movement symbolized the challenge and opposition to the racial injustices and segregation that had been engrained in American society for hundreds of years. Events that took place in the 1950s and 1960s, such as the Montgomery Bus Boycott, the March on Washington, sit-ins, speeches and numerous protests define this momentous time in United States history. Speeches during this period served as a means to inspire and assemble a specific group of people, for Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X it was the black community that needed to rise up in hopes of achieving equal rights and voting rights for the blacks.

When you hear the names Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr., You think of the men of colored that paved the way for their respective races and nation. Gandhi with his homeland of India from British rule and MLK with the nation of America. Many figures have compared to two but no one has ever attempted to pit these two legends against each other and not in the form of a rap battle. Well, ERB can claim to be the first. With the melodic rhymes and catchy hook. Who exactly won this battle of civil greats, in my esteemed opinion, it would be the Mahatma. Gandhi case presentation and his flow was too beastly for MLK in this

Whether it be in history class or in your everyday life, when you hear the two names, Gandhi or Bin Laden, you would never think to associate the two. They are universally known for what they spent their lives doing. Whether it be for good or evil, their causes were acknowledged worldwide. People have very many distinct opinions about these two men, there doesn't seem to be much in between.

When one thinks of Mahatma Gandhi and Osama bin Laden, they might think of two people who would be considered polar opposites. By just scratching the surface of the history of these two historical figures, it may appear that they are completely different from each other. But, digging deeper shows that Mahatma and Osama have more in common than anyone could have imagined. Both Gandhi and bin Laden inspired people to follow them in their movements against their opposition and were powerful enough to be noticed worldwide. Their early adult lives both contained incidents of rejection and failure that shaped them into the people that they became. However, many people believe these two were very contrasting in their methods of protest, one violent and the other peaceful. Despite popular belief, Gandhi and bin Laden are more alike than most people realize.

People all over the world know that Mohandas Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. did great things in their life times. But which one was more effective during his time? The answer to this question is somewhat biased, usually depending on your race, geographical location, and if you or someone you know has directly experienced the effects of the actions of these men. An Indian would choose Mohandas Gandhi over Martin Luther King Jr. without even thinking about it. African Americans are going to choose Martin Luther King Jr. because he fought for their rights. Someone living in or near South Africa or India would most likely choose Mohandas Gandhi as the more effective person, whereas a person near

We all live in a civil society in a country where we have equal rights and everyone gets the same kind treatment,sounds great right, and it is hard to imagine having all those privileges taken away. But the world wasn't all cheery and great less than 100 years ago the people of India and South Africa were discriminated and unjustly treated by people who were not even native to their region but another one more northern. It sounds dreadful because it was dreadful, but in hardships there are always motivating people like Mahatma Gandhi who liberated India from British rule by motivating a generation and many to come, to stand up for injustices in their life or the life of others.Furthermore, it is people like Nelson Mandela, who worked hard and got jailed for his belief of equal rights for all people no matter the color of their skin.Even if they both are inspirational and had to sacrifice greatly for their respective nation. One person will always come on top of the rest and that position was intended for Mahatma Gandhi.Therefore, you can infer this literary analysis will confirm the thesis that Mahatma Gandhi was the greater civil right activist. For the author for Eulogy For Mahatma Gandhi clearly states, “that man with divine fire, changed us also--and such as we are, we have been molded by him during these years; and out of that divine fire many of us also took a small spark…”, This doesn't make him just a civil rights activist but an inspiration to many people.

Mahatma Gandhi use to say, “Be the change that you want to see in the world.” He changed what he wanted to in the world. He influenced people’s lives and tried his hardest to fight for the people being oppressed. Mahatma Gandhi and Nelson Mandela were both good leaders. They both fought for the people in their country. In Eulogy for Mahatma Gandhi and Long Walk To Freedom for Nelson Mandela, the differences and similarities stood out for how they fought for rights. Mahatma Gandhi’s text was more persuasive. The text showed that he did not want to have other people’s lives treated poorly. It expressed how he felt, what he did, and how he affected people while he was doing it. Nelson Mandela’s text was not more persuasive because it talked more about what the people did and not what he did.