what did the civil disobedience movement achieve
Answers
Answered by
14
Civil disobedience, also called passive resistance, refusal to obey the demands or commands of a government or occupying power, without resorting to violence or active measures of opposition; its usual purpose is to force concessionsfrom the government or occupying power. Civil disobedience has been a major tactic and philosophy of nationalist movements in Africa and India, in the American civil rights movement, and of labour, anti-war, and other social movements in many countries.
Civil disobedience is a symbolic or ritualistic violation of the law rather than a rejection of the system as a whole. The civil disobedient, finding legitimate avenues of change blocked or nonexistent, feels obligated by a higher, extralegal principle to break some specific law. It is because acts associated with civil disobedience are considered crimes, however, and known by actor and public alike to be punishable, that such acts serve as a protest. By submitting to punishment, the civil disobedient hopes to set a moralexample that will provoke the majority or the government into effecting meaningful political, social, or economic change. Under the imperative of setting a moral example, leaders of civil disobedience insist that the illegal actions be nonviolent.
A variety of criticisms have been directed against the philosophy and practice of civil disobedience. The radical critique of the philosophy of civil disobedience condemns its acceptance of the existing political structure; conservative schools of thought, on the other hand, see the logical extension of civil disobedience as anarchy and the right of the individual to break any law he chooses, at any time. Activists themselves are divided in interpreting civil disobedience either as a total philosophy of social changeor as merely a tactic to be employed when the movement lacks other means. On a pragmatic level, the efficacy of civil disobedience hinges on the adherence of the opposition to a certain morality to which an appeal can ultimately be made
The philosophical roots of civil disobedience lie deep in Western thought: Cicero, Thomas Aquinas, John Locke, Thomas Jefferson, and Henry David Thoreau all sought to justify conduct by virtue of its harmony with some antecedentsuperhuman moral law. The modern concept of civil disobedience was most clearly formulated by Mohandas Gandhi. Drawing from Eastern and Western thought, Gandhi developed the philosophy of satyagraha, which centres on nonviolent resistance to evil. First in the Transvaal of South Africa in 1906 and later in India, via such actions as the Salt March (1930), Gandhi sought to obtain equal rights and freedom through satyagraha campaigns.
Drawing in part on Gandhi’s example, the American civil rights movement, which came to prominence during the 1950s, sought to end racial segregation in the southern United States by adopting the tactics and philosophy of civil disobedience through such protests as the Greensboro sit-in (1960) and the Freedom Rides (1961). Martin Luther King, Jr., came to be most associated with the movement’s nonviolent actions. Later the tactics of civil disobedience were employed by a variety of protest groups.
The principle of civil disobedience has achieved some standing in international law through the war crime trials at Nürnberg after World War II, which affirmed the principle that an individual may, under certain circumstances, be held accountable for failure to break the laws of his country.
Civil disobedience is a symbolic or ritualistic violation of the law rather than a rejection of the system as a whole. The civil disobedient, finding legitimate avenues of change blocked or nonexistent, feels obligated by a higher, extralegal principle to break some specific law. It is because acts associated with civil disobedience are considered crimes, however, and known by actor and public alike to be punishable, that such acts serve as a protest. By submitting to punishment, the civil disobedient hopes to set a moralexample that will provoke the majority or the government into effecting meaningful political, social, or economic change. Under the imperative of setting a moral example, leaders of civil disobedience insist that the illegal actions be nonviolent.
A variety of criticisms have been directed against the philosophy and practice of civil disobedience. The radical critique of the philosophy of civil disobedience condemns its acceptance of the existing political structure; conservative schools of thought, on the other hand, see the logical extension of civil disobedience as anarchy and the right of the individual to break any law he chooses, at any time. Activists themselves are divided in interpreting civil disobedience either as a total philosophy of social changeor as merely a tactic to be employed when the movement lacks other means. On a pragmatic level, the efficacy of civil disobedience hinges on the adherence of the opposition to a certain morality to which an appeal can ultimately be made
The philosophical roots of civil disobedience lie deep in Western thought: Cicero, Thomas Aquinas, John Locke, Thomas Jefferson, and Henry David Thoreau all sought to justify conduct by virtue of its harmony with some antecedentsuperhuman moral law. The modern concept of civil disobedience was most clearly formulated by Mohandas Gandhi. Drawing from Eastern and Western thought, Gandhi developed the philosophy of satyagraha, which centres on nonviolent resistance to evil. First in the Transvaal of South Africa in 1906 and later in India, via such actions as the Salt March (1930), Gandhi sought to obtain equal rights and freedom through satyagraha campaigns.
Drawing in part on Gandhi’s example, the American civil rights movement, which came to prominence during the 1950s, sought to end racial segregation in the southern United States by adopting the tactics and philosophy of civil disobedience through such protests as the Greensboro sit-in (1960) and the Freedom Rides (1961). Martin Luther King, Jr., came to be most associated with the movement’s nonviolent actions. Later the tactics of civil disobedience were employed by a variety of protest groups.
The principle of civil disobedience has achieved some standing in international law through the war crime trials at Nürnberg after World War II, which affirmed the principle that an individual may, under certain circumstances, be held accountable for failure to break the laws of his country.
Answered by
15
Results of Civil disobedience movement:
The Civil Disobedience movement played a substantial role in the consolidation the social roots of India's freedom struggle. The following were the results of the movement:
- This movement devastated the faith of Indians in the British government.
- This movement invigorated the will of the Indians to take part in the elections.
- This movement resulted in large scale contribution of women in the pro-independence struggle of India.
Hope it helped...
Similar questions