Colonialism entails a nation or state invading the territory of another nation and ruling in the colonizers' own interests, rather than those of the local people. Some anti-colonial activists believed that nonviolence was the best way to end colonial rule and achieve autonomy or independence. Others argued that colonialism could only be defeated through violent struggle.
IS VIOLENCE JUSTIFIED IN FIGHTING AGAINST COLONIAL RULE? WHY OR WHY NOT?
Formulate an argument and support it using examples, from readings and lecture, of authors’ arguments and real-world cases.
· Make an argument regarding if violence is justified in fighting against colonial rule or not and the main reasons why.
· Ex. Violence is justified in fighting against colonial rule because x, y, and z.
· Ex. Violence is not justified in fighting against colonial rule as demonstrated by x, y, and z.
· Give a bit of background to the use of violence vs. nonviolence - major leaders, movements, key concepts, etc.
· Give supporting evidence to your argument. There should be a section elaborating on x, another on y, and another on z. All should be linked back to your initial argument, and backed by examples given in readings or lecture.
· Conclusion: sum up the main points of your paper, reiterate your argument summarizing the main evidence given.