Precis - Salt March

In the article "Salt March: Indian History" (2016), Kenneth Pletcher argues that the Britain's Salt Acts, an act taxing Indians for using salt, was both "regressive" and an injustice to the Indian people. Pletcher supports this theses by showing the reader that 1.) the act was set up to help the British monopoly on imported goods, and 2.) the act negatively affected the "poor" Indians who couldn't afford paying a tax on salt. The purpose of the article was to inform, and convince, audiences that the Salt March was in response to an unjust law, and that in the end the march accomplished it's original mission. In order to help first time readers of the subject understand his point of view, Pletcher uses very pointed words to paint the picture of the event, such as "monopoly", "expensive", and "regressive" while describing the tax, and using opposite language like "rail", "civil disobedience", and "nonviolent protest" to describe the Indians.