Question

Gandhi and Mandela both talk about what they believe should happen to achieve "social justice." Define social justice, based on what you read in their speeches (see specifically the italicized introduction to Gandhi's speech, and paragraph 5 from Mandela's speech). Then, explain the difference in how Gandhi and Mandela believe their people should handle how they accomplish social justice.

You may want to include one or more of the following in your essay:
• Word Choice
• Historical Context
• Active v. Passive Resistance

Answer 1

Social justice, as defined by Gandhi and Mandela through nonviolent struggle, emphasizes human dignity, rights, and duties, with Gandhi stressing passive resistance and Mandela allowing room for more active forms of protest.

Step-by-step explanation:

Defining Social Justice

Mohandas Gandhi and Nelson Mandela were pivotal figures in their respective nations' struggles against oppression, with unique philosophies on achieving social justice. While Gandhi's speech highlighted passive resistance or nonviolence (ahimsa) as a means to establish social justice, which involves respect for human rights and duties as well as minimal government intervention, Mandela's approach, although also primarily nonviolent, acknowledged the necessity of more active resistance in some instances. Gandhi's word choice and historical context underpin his commitment to nonviolence, exemplified by a variety of peaceful protest strategies.

Gandhi's stance on social justice was heavily influenced by the recognition of individuals' dignity and the balance between rights and duties, advocating for a society that not only recognized political freedom but also social and economic freedom through nonviolent change. Mandela, influenced by activists such as Martin Luther King Jr., understood social justice in terms of a broader struggle against multiple societal ills like racism, poverty, and militarism, requiring a dynamic approach to institutional reform and achieving justice.

In their quests, both leaders utilized nonviolent strategies, such as rallies, sit-ins, marches, petitions, and boycotts, reflecting their shared belief that social justice could be achieved without resorting to violence. Their movements, therefore, embodied an ethos of nonviolent activism aiming to inspire the radical reconstruction of society and recognition of systemic flaws. Despite differing in their emphasis on active versus passive resistance, the fundamental goal for both was the establishment of a just society defined by equal rights and freedom from oppression.