8.7 Global Resistance to Established Power Structures After 1900

AP World 8.7 Global Resistance After 1900 Summary

After 1900, people responded to wars, colonial rule, and authoritarian governments in very different ways. Some leaders like Mohandas Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr., and Nelson Mandela used nonviolent resistance to push for change, while militarized states and violent movements often made conflicts worse. This topic is about comparing those reactions and explaining why people chose the strategies they did.

Why This Matters for the AP World History Exam

This topic gives you flexible evidence for comparison and causation questions across the modern era. The big idea is that the 20th century was full of conflict, but individuals, groups, and even states reacted to that conflict in opposite ways: some worked to reduce it through nonviolence, others intensified it through repression or terrorism.

On the exam, you can use these examples to:

• Compare violent and nonviolent reactions to existing power structures.
• Explain causes and effects of resistance movements during and after the Cold War.
• Build arguments about how states and movements responded to global conflict.

Because these examples sit at the end of Unit 8, they connect well to decolonization, Cold War proxy conflicts, and the rise of new states, which makes them useful for essay evidence that ties multiple topics together.

Key Takeaways

• Reactions to power structures after 1900 ranged from peaceful resistance to violent repression and terrorism.
• Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr., and Nelson Mandela are key figures associated with nonviolence and civil disobedience as tools for political change.
• Some states and militaries responded to conflict in ways that intensified it, including authoritarian regimes that used repression to stay in power.
• Some movements deliberately used violence against civilians to pursue political goals.
• Cold War rivalries and decolonization shaped many of these movements, so connect this topic to Units 7 and 8 when building arguments.

Intensified State Repression and Militarized Violence

Some governments and militaries responded to 20th century conflicts by escalating violence rather than reducing it. These are examples you can use to show how established power structures used repression to stay in control.

Spain: Francisco Franco

Francisco Franco came to power during the Spanish Civil War (1936-1939) and ruled as a dictator until his death in 1975. He shut down opposition through executions, imprisonment, and censorship.

• His regime targeted regional identities, including Catalans and Basques, suppressing their languages and cultures.
• A secret police network enforced loyalty to the regime.
• Only Roman Catholicism was officially tolerated, and political dissent was punished harshly.

Franco's rule shows how a militarized state used extreme nationalism and violence to suppress democratic resistance and cultural diversity.

Uganda: Idi Amin

Idi Amin ruled Uganda from 1971 to 1979 as a violent military dictator.

• Amin expanded the military and used it to persecute ethnic groups, including the Acholi and Lango.
• In 1972, he expelled tens of thousands of Asians from Uganda, seizing their businesses and giving them to his supporters.
• His regime is estimated to have caused hundreds of thousands of deaths through executions, disappearances, and torture.

Amin's fall in 1979 left Uganda in political and economic chaos, showing the severe impact of militarized leadership.

Chile: Augusto Pinochet

Augusto Pinochet took power in Chile through a military coup in 1973, removing the democratically elected socialist president Salvador Allende.

• His regime (1973-1990) reversed land reforms and privatized industries.
• Thousands of opponents were tortured, executed, or "disappeared," often by the National Intelligence Directorate (DINA).
• Pinochet justified his actions as protecting Chile from communism, which lined up with U.S. Cold War interests.

Pinochet's dictatorship is an example of how Cold War politics often supported authoritarian repression in the name of anti-communism.

Militarized Arms Trade and Conflict Proliferation

During the 20th century, global arms trading expanded quickly. Many nations increased military spending, stockpiled weapons, and supported proxy wars. Instead of stabilizing regions, this militarization often escalated violence and strengthened authoritarian regimes.

• The Cold War led to large weapons exchanges, especially between the U.S., the USSR, and their allies.
• Proxy conflicts, such as in Vietnam, Angola, and Afghanistan, were fueled by foreign arms supplies.
• Non-state actors, including guerrilla and terrorist groups, also gained access to advanced weapons.

The military buildup and weapons trade intensified global conflict and undercut efforts at peaceful diplomacy or rebuilding.

Violent Political Movements

Some resistance movements turned to violence and terrorism to pursue political goals, often targeting civilians and state institutions.

Shining Path (Peru)

The Shining Path (Sendero Luminoso) was a Maoist insurgent group that launched a violent campaign against the Peruvian government in the 1980s.

• Led by Abimael Guzman, the group aimed to create a communist society.
• The movement targeted rural communities, assassinated local officials, and bombed infrastructure.
• Civilians often suffered the most, caught between rebel forces and government counterinsurgency.

By the late 1990s, the group was largely broken up due to government crackdowns and loss of public support, though some members stayed active.

Al-Qaeda

Al-Qaeda, founded by Osama bin Laden, is a terrorist organization that emerged in the late 1980s during the Afghan resistance to Soviet occupation.

• Al-Qaeda later focused on the United States and its allies, accusing them of supporting corrupt regimes in the Muslim world.
• The group planned and carried out the September 11 attacks in 2001, causing nearly 3,000 deaths.
• Its ideology comes from a narrow extremist interpretation and does not represent mainstream Islam.

In Islamic thought, jihad refers to spiritual or moral struggle. Violent interpretations like Al-Qaeda's are rejected by the vast majority of Muslims.

Nonviolent Resistance and Civil Disobedience

Other individuals and movements chose nonviolent protest to challenge established power structures and push for social or political reform. Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr., and Nelson Mandela are the figures most directly tied to nonviolence in this topic.

Mohandas Gandhi

Mohandas Gandhi led India's nationalist movement against British colonial rule through nonviolent resistance.

• His tactics included boycotts, peaceful marches, and civil disobedience.
• The Salt March (1930) protested British salt taxes and became a global symbol of defiance.
• His philosophy of Satyagraha (truth-force) emphasized moral strength over physical force.

His leadership helped secure Indian independence in 1947 and inspired later movements for justice around the world.

Martin Luther King, Jr.

Inspired by Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr. became a leading figure in the American civil rights movement during the 1950s and 1960s.

• He organized sit-ins, marches, and the Montgomery Bus Boycott to protest segregation.
• He emphasized the power of nonviolence to expose injustice and force change.
• He delivered the "I Have a Dream" speech in 1963, calling for racial equality and unity.

King's leadership helped push major civil rights legislation forward in the United States.

Nelson Mandela

Nelson Mandela led resistance to apartheid in South Africa through the African National Congress (ANC).

• He started with nonviolent methods, then supported sabotage against infrastructure after peaceful efforts were met with repression.
• He spent 27 years in prison and became a symbol of anti-apartheid resistance.
• Released in 1990, he negotiated an end to apartheid and became South Africa's first Black president in 1994.

Mandela emphasized reconciliation rather than revenge and worked to build a multiracial democracy.

How to Use This on the AP World History Exam

Comparison

This topic is built for comparison. Practice grouping these examples by strategy: nonviolent resistance (Gandhi, King, Mandela), state repression (Franco, Amin, Pinochet), and violence against civilians (Shining Path, Al-Qaeda). When a prompt asks you to compare reactions to power structures, you can pull from more than one category to show similarities and differences.

Causation

Be ready to explain why people chose certain strategies. Nonviolent leaders often faced colonial or segregated systems where moral pressure and global attention could work. Authoritarian regimes often used repression to hold power during Cold War rivalries. Connecting cause to choice makes your analysis stronger.

Free Response

For essay evidence, tie this topic to decolonization and Cold War conflicts. For example, you can link nonviolent independence movements to Unit 8 decolonization, or link authoritarian repression to Cold War anti-communism and proxy wars. Specific names, dates, and outcomes make your evidence more convincing.

Common Trap

Do not treat every resistance movement as nonviolent or every authoritarian leader as the same. The point of this topic is variety: people and states reacted to conflict in opposite ways, and your job is to explain that range, not flatten it.

Common Misconceptions

• Resistance after 1900 was not all peaceful. Nonviolence is one important strand, but many movements used violence, and many states responded with repression.
• Mandela was not strictly nonviolent the whole time. He began with nonviolent methods and later supported sabotage after peaceful efforts were suppressed, which is an important nuance for comparison.
• Authoritarian regimes were not always anti-communist or always communist. Some, like Pinochet, repressed leftists, while others claimed leftist ideology, so identify each regime's actual stance instead of assuming.
• Al-Qaeda's ideology represents an extremist minority view, not mainstream Islam, and conflating the two is both inaccurate and a common analytical mistake.
• Increased military spending and arms trading did not automatically create stability. In many cases it intensified conflict and supported repressive governments.

Comparing Global Resistance Strategies

Related AP World History Guides

• Unit 8 Overview: Cold War & Decolonization
• 8.1 Setting the Stage for the Cold War and Decolonization
• 8.5 Decolonization After 1900
• 8.2 The Cold War
• 8.3 Effects of the Cold War
• 8.4 Spread of Communism After 1900