Amazon.com Widgets
  • Peaceful protest is effective.

    I believe that peaceful protest is the most effective way to protest. When it comes down to it all the people who were the most known for protesting like MLK , Gandhi, Mother Teresa and Nelson Mandela. None of these leaders used violence. They used their words and knowledge and got their point across and changed the world.

  • Non violent protesting works because please listen better then in violent protesting.

    When you have a non violent protest pleople will listen to you more. If you show up with a gun and start telling people fallow me we can move faster and get it done faster it does not work.Ttherefore, our world needs to work on becoming non violent by trying to not be at war.

  • Violence wont help

    Unless you want to keep the anger going, you have to keep peace in between each other. Fighting back will just make people more, like if you punch someone, will they like you? Maybe if they're your friend, but probably not. Instead, if you were to keep neutral between each other, everything would be fine.

  • Nonviolent protests are affective.

    In the question that was asked do nonviolent peaceful protests work. I believe that they do because martin Luther king proved that they work. If they are handled in the right way and violence is not the answer to your problems. But in some cases it is. It just depends what topic or situation that you are protesting for.

  • Nonviolent protests are affective.

    In the question that was asked do nonviolent peaceful protests work. I believe that they do because martin Luther king proved that they work. If they are handled in the right way and violence is not the answer to your problems. But in some cases it is. It just depends what topic or situation that you are protesting for.

  • Violence is never the answer.

    Peaceful protest is the easiest way to get someone to consider and actually think about it. MLK made a huge impact by just using his words instead of using violence to be heard. Everyone heard Martin Luther King and he pushed and got what he wanted. I would rather fight someone with words and intelligence than to fight with fists.

  • Nonviolence protest does work in my opinion.

    Martin Luther king Jr. Used nonviolence protest to change peoples views against unfair treatment to African American's. In my opinion this way of protest stops people from getting injured and can also demonstrate a more civilized way of gaining followers, and respect for their cause. A nonviolence protest can result in change because it helps show people that violence isn't needed and their words mean more than anything. Martin Luther was an example of that along with Gandhi . Those 2 historical figures fought for change and got it due to nonviolence protest.

  • Violence makes things worse. (by carla)

    Violence causes tension. Whether one side "wins" there will never be justice. Hurting people causes mental and physical damage. By talking things out peacefully we will come to a peaceful agreement eventually. Dr. MLK never used violence even once and as you can see he made a world changing impact.

  • Violence Doesn't work

    Violence causes people to loose support for a movement. Look at the Civil Rights Movement. During the violent protests people didn't like that protesters were shooting at them and it lost them protesters On the other hand, nonviolent protests gained more supporters. And all of you who are saying actions speak louder than words, nonviolence is an action. And, according to this website it works better statistically as well:
    https://www.Washingtonpost.Com/news/worldviews/wp/2013/11/05/peaceful-protest-is-much-more-effective-than-violence-in-toppling-dictators/

  • Cant fight fire with fire

    Peaceful protest is the most effective way to bring about change. Just look what Martin Luther King Jr did. He led protest in the south and he earned legislations respect. They were willing to hear what he had to say unlike Malcolm X, since the government considered him a criminal.

  • Nonviolence, by itself, fails every time.

    Find an example of a nonviolent movement which succeeded in its aims which was not contemporary to other groups with similar aims, but who offered a credible threat of violence.

    I can think of one debateable group of examples, and that's it; I'll leave it to anyone reading this to guess what that would be. But it sure the hell wasn't the Indian independence movement or the US civil rights movement.

    Nonviolence works if and only if it is the more attractive option to violence. When nonviolence is not accompanied by a genuine threat, it is ignored (Occupy) or crushed (Tiananmen).

    Of course, the nonviolent always get all the credit when they win, and the violent usually still get killed or imprisoned.

  • Unless you don't want anything to happen that is.

    I have nothing against peaceful protests, I really don't. But they are not helping anyone, just wasting time. Some even erupt into violent protests anyway. If you want to get somewhere most of the times violence IS actually the answer, sorry parents. In some circumstances the government (or whoever it is) WILL NOT BUDGE. In some circumstances, you need a reaction or SOMETHING to get people on your side. Peaceful protests just get them annoyed.

    Take Nelson Mandela for example. Everyone idols him as they think he is an amazing guy as he 'peaceful protested' against apartheid, but what they don't know is that actually he was head of the militant wing at his rebellious group against apartheid, the ANC. Go ahead, search it up if you don't believe me. Anyway, he did a protest, NOT THE PEACEFUL KIND and was put in prison and not apartheid is basically nonexistent.

    Just to let you know, I'm not a violent person. Nothing of the sort. I am just a person who knows what I want, knows when to get it, knows what needs to happen and knows what to use to get it, and peaceful protests are not that.

  • Sometimes however most of the time not.

    I mean come on, Peaceful protest are perfectly fine. However "fine" is not enough the circumstances can be raised and even a peaceful (at first) protest can turn into a violent one. Just by the police getting involved and 'terrorising' the protesters anyway.

    Furthermore violent protest have actually gotten something. For example take Nelson Mandela, everyone says he was a peaceful protester but actually he was head of the militant wing at the ANC and got arrested for doing so. Guess what now there is no more apartheid.

    All I'm saying is Peaceful protests are not the way to go

  • Unfortunately not all right now.

    Trump is not altering his course in light of all of the protests. He has power now, he does not have to care about public opinion. He continues to make it more difficult for people to speak out against him. When the students at Berkley lit some fireworks and broke a couple windows Milo's speech was cancelled. You know, the guy who says it's OK for older adult males to have sex with minors. People like him should not be speaking in public in an attempt to justify harmful behavior. I am guessing peaceful protestors would have gone unnoticed and he would have spoken.

  • There is no definitive answer. The people must use whichever is effective at the time.

    Non violence worked well for the civil rights movement of the 60's. It was the most effective way to bring about change. Sometimes, though, violence is the best way to bring it. Look at the Women's March today. It was the largest protest in history, yet it has accomplished nothing. With those kinds of numbers, just the threat of violence is all that's needed to get things done. Different situations call for different action.

  • There is no definitive answer. The people must use whichever is effective at the time.

    Non violence worked well for the civil rights movement of the 60's. It was the most effective way to bring about change. Sometimes, though, violence is the best way to bring it. Look at the Women's March today. It was the largest protest in history, yet it has accomplished nothing. With those kinds of numbers, just the threat of violence is all that's needed to get things done. Different situations call for different action.

  • Waste of time. Only very small % of population protest.

    Only very small % of population actually participate. History shows vast majority of protests accomplish nothing other than wasting the time of other citizens attempting to support their family and get to their job. So you have few people standing in the way chanting what someone told them to chat.

  • Threat of Violence Needed

    Peaceful protests are useful in signaling the extent of public distress over a particular issue, but few have been successful without an underlying threat of violence. Some actual violent action is regrettably necessary to signal the validity of that threat, but this must be a measured response to acts of violence from the opposition. The violence must be conducted by parties unaffiliated with the organizers of the peaceful protest, and must be denounced by leaders of the peaceful protests to maintain their legitimacy.

  • Ask the bullet that went through MLK's head if non-violence works

    To paraphrase Chomsky, people in power only know one language. Violence. Unless the people in power do not fear violent retribution upon them or their family, nothing changes. Love and understanding never changed a thing. If someone is oppressing you, you don't sit around singing "We Shall Overcome", you hit back. That's a lesson you learn early when you are being bullied at school. You don't keep getting hit trying to understand the bully, you hit back. Then it stops.

  • Ask the bullet that went through MLK's head if non-violence works

    To paraphrase Chomsky, people in power only know one language. Violence. Unless the people in power do not fear violent retribution upon them or their family, nothing changes. Love and understanding never changed a thing. If someone is oppressing you, you don't sit around singing "We Shall Overcome", you hit back. That's a lesson you learn early when you are being bullied at school. You don't keep getting hit trying to understand the bully, you hit back. Then it stops.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Anonymous says2013-05-22T18:57:28.997
I agree so much with the no section because no one would listen to you if you were peaceful, you have to be heard like libya who suffered for their country!
Anonymous says2013-09-19T22:18:27.207
Not true! See South Afirca, countries all pitched in to help the peaceful protests
iaghgf says2015-11-05T19:46:33.953
They wear crocs
iaghgf says2015-11-05T19:48:01.843
We need crocs we need croc it not fair