Throughout human history, people have been fighting for their freedom in many ways ranging from killing and revolution, to peaceful protests and speeches. Always using the idea of freedom, a better future and peace as the banner of their actions. Freedom, everyone wants true freedom, but that's the thing, how do people define freedom? The idea of freedom isn't the same to everyone and because of this the way people attain it varies wildly. Freedom allows people to make their own choices which could be different than everyone else resulting in conflict, but what would humanity be without it.
Che Guevara, a communist involved in the Cuban Revolution, viewed as a hero in Cuba and a monster in North America and Europe. He fought to overthrow the Dictatorship that Cuba had at the time, freeing the people from an oppressive leader and helping the country become what it is today. Che helped the country become a communist country which to him was ideal for the it. To Che he had freed Cuba and helped introduce equality to the country, but just freeing Cuba wasn't enough. Several years he tried to start a rebellion in Bolivia but was captured and killed. During his life Che killed many people to achieve his goal and to free the people he fought for. He started revolutions, overthrew the Cuban government and died fighting for what he believed in. However his idea of freedom was far different that many other countries. He was known for his attacks on the USA's foreign policies and he felt betrayed when the soviets pulled their missiles out of Cuba at the end of the Cuban Missile crisis. Che disagreed with the US about freedom and how a government should be run that he was willing to fire nuclear missiles at the US. How could his idea of freedom vary so much from the US's that he would be willing to kill countless people to achieve his idea of freedom?
Another example of conflicting idea's of freedom was in Canada during the FLQ Crisis. The FLQ was a group of extremists who wanted Quebec to leave Canada and were responsible for over 200 bombings. They kidnapped a British Trade Commissioner named James Richard Cross and Pierre Laporte who was the Quebec Mister of Labor. At the time Pierre Trudeau was the Prime Minister who was well known for protecting the rights of the people. He sent the army into Quebec and enacted the war measures act, striping the rights of everyone allowing police to arrest with warrant and didn't even need to tell you why. This only created sympathy for the FLQ in Quebec. The FLQ was starting to have a lot more influence than ever before, until they killed Pierre and lost almost all support they had. The FLQ wanted to separate from Canada because they felt oppressed and like Che, they fought for their version of freedom. Also like Che, their idea of freedom was so different than Canada they were willing to kill so they could achieve their goals. How is it that the idea of freedom can vary so much from others?
Once again, another person who fought for freedom, but why were Gandhi's methods so different? Why didn't he fight for freedom by starting revolutions like Che or resort to terrorism like the FLQ? Why did Gandhi chose to have peaceful protests? Simple, Gandhi saw freedom differently than Che and the FLQ, he saw freedom through acceptance and understanding. At the age of 18 Gandhi left to study in London England in 1888 where he began to read the sacred texts of other religions from around the world. Gandhi created organizations that were a part of the government to fight things the government did that would oppress the people of the country his was born in. . In 1893 he left for South Africa and was appalled by the discrimination to Indian immigrants which was what started Gandhi's fight against oppression and discrimination. One of the first things Gandhi protested to was a bill that England wanted the would strip the people of India of their right to vote. He failed to stop the bill from being passed but drew international attention to the injustice. Gandhi would then start many protest which in some cases, lasted for years and more often than not get arrested. Gandhi became more spiritual during World War 1 and wore nothing more than a simple loin cloth and shawl. Gandhi set up peaceful protest against the crown in 1919 when the British Government enacted the Rowlatt Act which allowed the British authorities to arrest anyone suspected of sedition without trial. This resulted in a British officer ordering his men to open fire on the unarmed protesters killing nearly 400 people. Gandhi would set up many more protests before being killed January 30, 1948. Gandhi cause a lot of change in the government in both England and India without ever resorting to violence. Gandhi fought for the freedom of the people of India, for peace and to eliminate discrimination. And yet despite all this, despite using only peaceful means, he was still killed for what he believed in because they disagreed with what he was doing. Freedom, one of the things Gandhi fought for had ended up being what killed him simply because someone thought freedom was different than what Gandhi wanted.
 |
|
Martin Luther King Jr, both a Baptist minster and a civil-rights activist, who had a large impact on race relations during the mid-1950's.
In the spring of 1963, Martin organized a demonstration in downtown Birmingham, Alabama. City police used dogs and fire hoses on the people who attended and arrested Martin. Later that year, Martin organized another demonstration at the Lincoln Memorial with more that 200,000 people attending. It was here that Martin had his famous "I have a dream" speech. Martin would hold several other marches before his assassination on April 4, 1968. Martin Luther King Jr held peaceful protests in order for people of color to be treated the same white people and to have the same rights and freedoms as white people. Like Gandhi, he went with the more peaceful option of protest rather than fighting. Once again, Martin was killed much like Gandhi because his idea of freedom for all men regardless of color rather than just white was different than someone else's idea of freedom and killed him.
As shown by all four of these events/people the idea of freedom varies wildly and the method for achieving freedom varies with it. Some are similar while others are completely opposite of each other and conflict each other despite being about freedom, the same general idea, two very different interpretations. Can there truly be freedom and peace if the idea of freedom itself is so conflicted? No one knows what true freedom is because of this. Freedom is a word that is unique to each person because each person defines it.
Works Cited
"Che Guevara-Military Leader." www.biography.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Jan. 2016.
<http://www.biography.com/people/che-guevara-9322774>.
"Mahatma Gandhi." www.biography.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Jan. 2016. <http://www.biography.com/
people/mahatma-gandhi-9305898>.
"Martin Luther King Jr." www.biography.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Jan. 2016.
<http://www.biography.com/people/martin-luther-king-jr-9365086>.
"The October Crisis." www.cbc.ca. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Jan. 2016. <http://www.cbc.ca/history/
EPISCONTENTSE1EP16CH1PA4LE.html>.
For the October Crisis, do you think that their idea of terrorism, but believed to be a revolution by them actually could have succeeded in a new type of freedom for Quebec, and if you do, what do you think the outcome would have been? A freer Quebec or a more distant world?
ReplyDelete