“The Ways of Meeting Oppression” Doctor Martin Luther King, the powerful leader of the black civil rights movement during the 1950s and 1960s, writes about oppression in his book Stride Toward Freedom. In the section, “The Ways of Meeting Oppression,” he points out three characteristic ways of how the oppressed respond to their oppression. According to King, the first method of dealing with oppression is to accept passively an unjust system. He believes in this way oppressed people cooperate with the tyrant system, and allow the oppressor to increase their arrogance and contempt. So, oppressed people can not win the respect of oppressor.
Using material from Item A and elsewhere, assess different sociological explanations for victimisation in society There are many different sociological explanations for victimisation in society. First of all the UN defines victims as those who have suffered harm mentally, physically or emotionally such as suffering or loss in financial ways where as writer Neil Christie disagrees and goes on to say that the belief that the victim is socially constructed. By this he means that the portrayal of a victim comes from the media, public and criminal justice system as a young child or an elderly person who is the target of an attack by a stranger. Linking to Item A, positivist victimology is defined by Miers as having three features such as it aims to identify victims who have contributed to their own victimisation. Also two other features are mentioned like it aims to identify the factors that produce patterns in victimisation and how it focuses on interpersonal crimes of violence.
Prejudice leads to violence shown in the play when the feuding families, the Montagues and Capulets fight. In each case, disruption, fighting, injuries and death occurs. In addition, the prejudice against the two families never
Article Analysis Moral Panics: Culture, Politics, and Social Construction Introduction: One might heard about threats, warnings and illegal actions that are influencing the society at their peak. No matter which culture an individual is belonged to, the thing that matters is the panic he has been influenced by, through various ways. Such panic is simply termed as moral panic and it has been the cause of cultural conflicts, social disturbances and political issues. Moral panic has been a hot topic of discussion that considered through several different perspectives; emphasizing on this aspect, various scholars and researchers have illustrated the society with the instances of social, culture and political problems and more specifically the moral panics. Cohen (1972) defined moral panic as societal threat whereas Furedi (1994) described moral panics as a threat to happiness and health.
Civil disobedience is the act of disobeying certain laws or commands of the government. Both “Civil Disobedience” and “Alice's restaurant” are stories of people who decided to disobey the government to achieve their goal. The main similarity between both stories is the reason behind both cases is mainly caused by war while the biggest difference between the two is tone. In civil disobedience, the tone of Henry David Thoreau is defiant. This can be seen through Thoreau’s arguing that there is a need for individual action against the government when there is conflict with human law.
He got the real experience of joy and devastation instead of just seeing it behind the protection of his castle walls. Lastly, Gilgamesh learned how much his people worked and had to suffer because of him. At the end of the book, he looks at the wall his people have built for him and sees how much effort is really put into everything that seemed so small and easy to him before. The elders also supported him, gave him good advice and moral support. Gilgamesh never thought about how hard his people had it, and he would have continued to think that they had it easier than they really did.
President George Washington emphatically stated that,” we should not look back unless it is to derive useful lessons from past errors, and for the promise of profiting by dearly bought experiences.” Many doubted his greatness but his impact on the United States of America remains paramount. Winning the War for American Independence, being the first president and shaping the way the Constitution was written, were all attributes of the “Father Of this Nation”, President George Washington. From his youth he lived by his belief that “Knowledge is Power” and he was not afraid to let the world know that God is an important part of everything we do. He was an advocate for justice and freedom. The little details in his life predicted his behavior in loftier and more difficult situations presented to him.
In both cases, the person without power ended up feeling isolated and lonely. Another similarity between the two is that the person who was isolated and lonely was dehumanized by a "monster" and the affected person then went on to be a monster. In Grendel, the humans treated Grendel inhumanely, which lead him to become cruel and wicked towards others. The humans would not listen and did not bother to try and understand what he was saying. Instead, they attacked him for no reason.
Gandhi then organized large-scale non-violent campaigns for easing poverty, broadening women’s rights, religious harmony, and most importantly, self-rule. He suffered a lot for what he believed in including: incarceration, fasts, and in the end, death. Antigone’s actions could be compared to Gandhi’s accomplishments because they both behaved in a selfless way for what they thought was right. Despite the consequences, which both ended in death, they decided to follow their individual conscious instead of the ruling
Gandhi’s fight against discrimination eventually leads to the freedom and independence of India. Gandhi experienced this first hand and went around India teaching his ways to other people and gaining followers who wanted to be like Gandhi. These followers would not falter, even when Gandhi went to jail, they did not riot. They responded to the government’s answer of violence with nonviolence, like Gandhi would. Nonviolence, such a great and powerful word yet has contradicted its meaning throughout history as something that can accomplish many great tasks.