By never striking back, both Gandhi and King portrayed their causes as civilized and just, capturing the sympathy of onlookers and even their oppressors. In Gandhi's case, he made the British look like the ones who were uncultured and cruel, beating and even killing Indians who never used a fist back. In King's case, he too exemplified the Christian doctrine of "turning the other cheek" and "loving your enemies," gathering the sympathy of bystanders and drawing people's attention on the urgency for change. The weakness of nonviolence, however, is that many of the people promoting the cause nonviolently will have to take in blows and suffer great losses, risking their own lives as well as that of their families' and
Emperor Wu was one of the longest reigning emperors in Chinese history, ruling from 141- 87 B.C.E., partly due to his ingenious ideas and austere policies that he implemented during his time as ruler. Emperor Wu quickly discovered that the cost of running a large empire and army was exorbitant and came up with policies to help fund them. Responding to popular demands for lower taxes, Wu lowered duties for the people and in its place he erected dozens of iron foundries and salt mines that he monopolized. (Comegna, 2016). As a result, prices for these commodities escalated and led to populace unrest and calls for the policies to be abolished.
An example od strong leader would be Jamestown’s governor John Smith. Thoughtful and powerful man in every sense of the word. Then other important thing is that English colonists unlike spanish didn’t want a dominion over the native Indians the British men just wanted land… English North America was a place where businessmen sought investment and ordinary men and women wanted to escape from religious persecution. All they wanted was freedom and better life.As the great leader of Jamestown said:No man will leave England to have worse life in America”
But The Student Nonviolence Coordinating Committee saw no reason not to continue on because the men had cleared the way and therefore they believed they should be able to move through without problems. I believe that Martin Luther King wanted to maintain his practices of non-violence so he abided with his agreement with the federal mediators in order to not endanger anyone. SNCC was a part of “Bloody Sunday” and first handily witnessed the anger and brutality of the men who attacked the demonstrators causing them to be filled with hatred.
Firstly, in order to acquire the power economically, Gandhi utilized a spinning wheel and the traditional clothes of India to address their citizens not to purchase western clothes, which greatly contributes to Britain economy. In contrast with that, Mao did not fight against the government. He just simply reaped a lot of advocate by giving the lands to peasants, whose lands were taken away by the land owners, therefore they sank into poverty. Secondly, in order to make each of their countries better socially, Mao and Gandhi did the same sort of things. Gandhi was desperate to get rid of caste system, whereas Mao wanted to discard the Confucianism system.
His amount of power caused him to control his slaves to do hard work without remorse or sympathy towards them which caused the social inequality. Document 4 is an inscription at Behistun, written by Persian king Darius in 500 B.C.E. Darius said that he was helped by the God because he did good and not evil. This might be a response to social inequality because he stated that he didn’t do anything wrong to the weak nor the powerful, but anyone that was against him, he would kill. It is evident that Darius was not for social inequality to the innocent but had to prove himself a powerful leader if confronted the situation.
Later the indians suspected the colonists wanted to rule them and control the colony. When captain John Smith was appointed as a member of the council and being sent to the colony in dire times of famine. He forced all people to labor stating that “ He that will not work shall not eat” which was proven to be very effective, he also dealt with mutiny from the indians very well. To settle matters even more he bargained with the indians as well. It was due to his leadership that the colony survived.
He attend the London conference on India as the sole representative of the Indian National Congress while other representatives lack his persevering courage. His life explicitly edifies how a person stood for what he thought was right when other people lacked the courage to do so. In addition, from another historical example is Martin Luther King, a hero who spoke for African Americans’ rights when others were too cowardly to do so. In his short life, Martin Luther King was instrumental in helping the public realize and rectify those unspeakable flaws which were tarnishing the name of America. In those days, American Blacks were confined to the position of second class citizenship by restrictive laws and customs.
The Chinese government got really upset so they confronted the British government and this started the Opium war starting in 1899 till 1902. The British didn’t see this as a problem; they crushed the naval forces and in all won the battle. The British had complete control besides the fact that they were corrupting china with opium they also built a colony named Hong Kong. This is a prime example of what I was saying on how the British abused their power. Another major part of European imperialism was the colonization or as I call it the torture of Sudan, in Africa.
Ultimately, because Gandhi’s beliefs and tactics in incorporating those beliefs were based on religion and peaceful, non-violent protests, and Marx believed that violence and action would successfully end social classes in Europe, there is a very distinct difference between both men’s methods, yet they shared the same common goal: to do away with inequality. If Gandhi had to respond to Marx on his methods in transforming class based societies to classless societies, I do not think that he would agree on every one of Marx’s techniques. There are many different aspects of why. They were two totally different types of activists trying to achieve the same ultimate goal. Gandhi was a man that would “strain every nerve to make Truth and Non-violence accepted in all our national activities” (i.e.