Salt March 1930

Words: 799
Pages: 4

The entire scope of human history has been rife with events that have shaped the course of mankind. History has the ability to meticulously trace every human movement, recording a myriad of achievements and faults. The expanse of the British Empire and the rise of American influence, are regularly noted with awe. However, the influences of political and tyrannical wrongdoings are often pushed under the rug. Monarchies and bureaucracies of the past have this magical capability to govern territory and enact primal legislation that overbears the horrors of their reign. This phenomenon does not just rest in the hands of history. Governments and leaders continually attempt to conceal their faults with malpractice that affects the masses. Such misconduct …show more content…
History has proven time after time that certain laws are unjust. The Salt March of 1930 led by Mahatma Gandhi and the Montgomery Bus Boycott (1955-1956) are both prime examples of a populace protesting the laws instituted by a higher power. The Salt March had a defined purpose. The British government instituted legislation that restricted native Indians from collecting or selling salt; a mineral that was vital to their livelihood (Andrews). This restriction justified a revolt. A higher power was enacting policies that degraded the lifeline of its population. Similarly, the Montgomery Bus Boycott proved to be a necessary means of action. This movement was crucial to desegregating the Southern transportation systems and planting the seed for desegregation to become the norm. As Dr. Martin Luther King stated in his letter from Birmingham Jail: “My friends, I must say to you that we have not made a single gain in civil rights without determined legal and nonviolent pressure” (King). It is crucial to note that the act of civil disobedience is often the only response to tyrannical or overbearing legislation and societal criterion. It is this act of disobedience that instigates progressive change. It takes a movement, sometimes an uprising, to alter the course of oppressive wrongdoings. As Henry David Thoreau stated in Civil Disobedience: “All men recognize the right of revolution; that is, the right to refuse allegiance to, and to resist, the government, when its tyranny or its inefficiency are great and unendurable”