Nonviolent Resistance In 'Pray The Devil Back To Hell'

Abraham Lincoln once said, “No law can give the right to do what is wrong”. Similarly, Martin Luther King wanted to end segregation between African Americans and Whites because he disagreed with the law and believed in equality for all. King thought that the best possible route to making change in society was to use specific techniques such as nonviolent resistance and direct action. Nonviolent resistance include protesters that fight for change, but cannot fight others that disagree. Direct action is getting straight to the problem rather than negotiating to make a difference. Nonviolent resistance and direct action is essential for change because it causes tension without creating violence and explicitly addresses the problem at hand.

No inherent difference. Reinhold Niebuhr’s objections of nonviolent resistance was incoherent. Niebuhr put forth the belief that there is no inherent moral difference between violent, and nonviolent forms of resistance, but rather that it was a matter of degree or effectiveness. King points out that Niebuhr’s objection is distorted as there is a vast difference between nonresistance and nonviolent resistance. Nonviolence is not having blind faith in something greater, but rather the planned and deliberate actions carried out which can be both mentally and physically exhausting. There is a lot that goes into nonviolent resistance, and you must be willing to receive violence and mistreatment while knowing you will not reciprocate such behaviour

Nonviolent resistance is the practice of achieving goals such as social change through symbolic protests, civil disobedience, economic or political noncooperation, satyagraha, or other methods, without using violence. This type of action highlights the desires of an individual or group that feels that something needs to change to improve the current condition of the resisting person or group. It is largely but wrongly taken as synonymous with civil resistance. Each of these terms nonviolent resistance and "civil resistance has its distinct merits and also quite different connotations and commitments.The modern form of non-violent resistance was popularised and proven to be effective by the Indian leader Mahatma Gandhi in his efforts to gain

All through history governments and empires have been overthrown or defeated primarily by the violence of those who oppose them. This violence was usually successful however, there have been several situations, when violence failed, that protesters have had to turn to other methods. Non-violent protesting never seemed to be the right course of action until the ideology of Mohandas Gandhi spread and influenced successful protests across the world. Non-violent methods were successfully used, most notably, by Mohandas Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Jr., and Nelson Mandela.

Even with many failures, peaceful resistance is still more efficient than violent resistance. Violence resistance causes problems toward all party and usually does not end well. Peaceful resistance, on the other hand, has a high probability of being successful in its cause. Either way, people should use logical thinking and take actions that will truly make a positive impact toward

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.

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

In the history of mankind, there has been multiple cases of violent and nonviolent opposition. The question is which of these is more appealing than the other. In violent protest, citizens protest against their opposition with violence such as; rioting, vandalizing, arson, assault, and many other forms of violence. In nonviolent protest citizens will protest their opposition peacefully through calm and non-violent protest. This is also known as civil disobedience. Civil disobedience is the most efficient form of protest in a society.

Martin Luther King pinpoint the oppressed should be able to raises their high dignity and do not come with the hate and malice to the injustice system. He also indicates the nonviolent resistance contribute to the moral way and will be a positive model for the next generation. At last, Martin Luther King conclude his argument with his philosophy of how to deal with the oppression, and to clarify that the nonviolence resistance is not against the people but against the

For example, when the Indians started to walk to the salt deposits which was surrounded by 400 native Surat police, they just keep walking towards it until the police beat them up. “ From where I stood I heard the sicking whacks of the clubs on unprotected skulls”(source #3). This shows that, the salt march was mostly nonviolent on the Indians side, but the opposite side uses violence. Also, this will created a huge attentions for the world, and it will grab the attention of people around the world. In conclusion, Gandhi idea of nonviolent will be able to help Indians gain their freedom from Great Britain and their salt back by the salt

Peaceful resistance is a major part of American history, from the American Revolution to the 1960’s Civil Rights Movement to the Travel Ban protests of today. These instances of peaceful resistance shape American society for the better, as the voices of minorities are heard and unjust laws are ended. Peaceful resistance does positively impact a free society, as supported by Henry Thoreau, demonstrated by the 1960 Civil Rights Movement, and anticipated by protests of today.

Nonviolence resistance has been used to achieve many goals in the past, whether it is a political goal, a social goal, or an economic goal. According to Clausewitz, war is the continuation of politics by other means, and the reason why nonviolence resistance can be considered a type of warfare is because the goal is to get what they desired. A well-known example of this was the Civil Right’s Movement, whose goal was to end segregation and discrimination against African Americans. This movement encompassed three broad categories created by Gene Sharp: nonviolent protests and persuasion, noncooperation (economic and political), and nonviolent intervention. A few groups that were involved in this movement and that displayed these categories were the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), and the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC). Despite being nonviolent called nonviolent, though, there are some occasions where violence is present. However, because it is called a nonviolent resistance it can be confusing for others to even consider this as a type of warfare.

Non-violent direct action can also be used for political purposes. Protestors can often be found outside of government buildings demanding change. It also works well in this aspect because it can be more powerful than the use of violence. The destruction and anguish are generally what is heard about not what the purpose it when violence is used. Non-violent action is superior at getting the issues

Peaceful resistance is a mannerism that brings positive impacts to the idea of a "free society". However, one can say that the extent of a certain few brought a negative cloud of shame onto the idea. There have been many examples in our history that prove that one can resist peacefully without disturbing the rights and liberties of one's neighbor. Many would agree that when the negatives or "the ugly side" of an idea is emerged, that is all anyone will ever remember. One can claim the resistance of Rosa Parks was peaceful and dignified.

Peaceful resistance to laws positively impacts a free society. Rather than having violent movements and harming citizens, it is better to peacefully resist. Once a violence is used, the resistance to the law becomes nulled. People tend to not follow a violence protester. Once a violent riot starts, chaos is everywhere. People forget what they are truly fighting for. They unconsciously run away with the fear of getting harmed and dare not to go back. A peaceful resistance on the other hand leads citizens to join and support. People are able to see what they are fighting for and their real intentions. They are able to stand and cause no problem to people passing by as they are showing their support through silent voices. Many famous activists and leaders are for nonviolence. Mahatma Gandhi, a primary leader of India’s independence