1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
kykrilka [37]
3 years ago
11

"Violence is immoral because it thrives on hatred rather than love. It destroys community and makes brotherhood impossible. It l

eaves society in monologue rather than dialogue. Violence ends up defeating itself. It creates bitterness in the survivors and brutality in the destroyers.
In a real sense nonviolence seeks to redeem the spiritual and moral lag that I spoke of earlier as the chief dilemma of modern man. It seeks to secure moral ends through moral means. Nonviolence is a powerful and just weapon. Indeed, it is a weapon unique in history, which cuts without wounding and ennobles the man who wields it.”

–Martin Luther King Jr.,
Nobel Lecture, December 11, 1964

A) Identify ONE specific example from the life of Nelson Mandela that indicates that he would have agreed with King's statement.

B) Explain ONE specific example from the life of Mahatma Gandhi that indicates that he would have agreed with King's statement.

C) Explain ANOTHER specific example from the life of Mahatma Gandhi that indicates that he would have agreed with King's statement.
History
2 answers:
Basile [38]3 years ago
8 0

Answer:

A) One specific example from the life of Nelson Mandela that indicates that he would have agreed with King's statement is that he protested apartheid in South Africa by leading non-violent protests.

B) One specific example from the life of Mahatma Gandhi that indicates that he would have agreed with King's statement is that he traveled India to protest the British rule peacefully. He advocated for the civil rights of Indians through speech and his travel.

C) Another specific example from the life of Mahatma Gandhi that indicates that he would have agreed with King's statement is that Gandhi led boycotts of British goods that acted as civil disobedience to protest peacefully.

Explanation:

Grace [21]3 years ago
7 0

Answer:

~ make sure to paraphrase !

A) A specific example from the life of Nelson Mandela indicating that he would have agreed with King's statement is that he led non-violent protests against the apartheid in South Africa. Mandela and the fellow members of the African National Congress used non-violent tactics such as protests and strikes to protests the apartheid. This peaceful approach to the issues in South Africa indicate that Mandela would have agreed with and supported King's words such as how "violence is immoral" and how "nonviolence is a powerful and just weapon".

B) A specific example from the life of Mahatma Gandhi indicating he would have agreed with King's statement is that he protested against British rule and advocated or the Indian people peacefully. Gandhi adopted the term of "civil disobedience" and used it to describe his approach to non-violently refuse to cooperate with injustice. He protested against unjust laws, and supported labor strikes. He also organized mass non-violent marches. He also promoted the idea of non-violent protests and strikes to the people of India who were facing unjust norms in British-ruled India. He promoted various boycotts and strikes that were effective, yet mostly remained peaceful. By using this peaceful approach, he matches King's ideas of how peace and non-violence is just as powerful as using violent means.

C) An additional specific example from the life of Mahatma Gandhi indicating that he would have agreed with King's statement in the passage is how Gandhi boycotted against British goods in a peaceful manner. In addition to organizing and attending peaceful strikes against British rule, Gandhi also organized boycotts against British products. In March of 1930, Gandhi began his march in protest of the British monopoly of salt. This was one of his most defiant acts against British rule, yet he was still able to remain peaceful and non-violent. He promote the purchase of Indian goods as opposed to British products in order to help the local economies and hit a blow to the British. Through this effective yet passive demonstration, Gandhi was able to give meaning to King's words such as nonviolence is " a weapon unique in history, which cuts without wounding".

You might be interested in
Which description of the impeachment process as defined by the U.S. Constitution is correct?
suter [353]
The best description regarding the impeachment process as defined by the U.S. Constitution would be that "<span>B. The House of Representatives removes a sitting president from office by a two-thirds majority," since this process has to begin and end in the House. </span>
7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
True or False: The missionaries had a nothing but positive approach and interactions with all of the imperialized natives
mihalych1998 [28]
False: many missionaries were murdered and slaughtered due to their forceful way of teaching Native Americans
8 0
3 years ago
Why can't the United States file charges in the International Court of Justice?
aleksandr82 [10.1K]
United States participation in the ICC treaty regime would also be unconstitutional because it would allow the trial of U.S. citizens for crimes committed on U.S. soil, which are otherwise entirely within the judicial power of the United States.
4 0
2 years ago
What does Wright Mills mean by “cheerful robots
gayaneshka [121]

Wright Mills meant “cheerful robots'' by the Americans were not exercising their right to freedom and just being like robots

<u>Explanation:</u>

Wright Mills was a sociologist and always stood for equality in the society and to improve the conditions of the society. In the year 1959, he stated the words of America people being cheerful robots and by stating this he meant that the people of the United States of America were being like robots who were only listening to the officials of the government.

They were not exercising their right to question the official. They were just simply listening to what the government was saying or doing for them or not questioning the employers. Freedom of choice was not being exercised.

3 0
3 years ago
Why were Americans ? unhappy with President Clinton prior to the midterm elections of 1994 ​
valentinak56 [21]

Answer:

he was involved in several White House scandals.

Explanation:

8 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • Which of the following is NOT a checkbavailable to the legislative branch ? Answer
    9·1 answer
  • I need help with number 8
    15·1 answer
  • A government facing protests and demonstrations that are supported by most of its citizens and spread across its territory has l
    11·1 answer
  • What was the spark that set off world war 1
    8·2 answers
  • In 1919, Charles Schenck was charged with violating the Espionage Act. The Supreme Court ruled that Schenck's actions created a
    9·1 answer
  • What group gained control of Congress after Lincoln's<br> assassination?
    14·1 answer
  • What happened to the factories that kept
    10·1 answer
  • Please answer fast!!<br><br> i got all the rest of them, i just need these 4. help!!
    10·2 answers
  • 1. La creación de la republica fue obra de
    12·1 answer
  • What ethnic conflict is occurring in Bhutan, and how is it similar or different from other ethnic conflicts you have learned abo
    5·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!