When should civil disobedience be condoned? Should it be condoned? Civil disobedience is defined as the refusal to obey government laws, in an effort to bring upon a change in governmental policy or legislation. Civil disobedience is not an effort to dissolve the American government, because without government our society would result in chaos. Sometimes, when there is an unjust law and the government won't take the initiative to fix it, the public must act as civil disobedients to bring awareness and fix the unjust law. An unjust law is that which is not moral and does not respect the "god-given" rights which are entitled to every person. A law which allows freedom for some but not for others, on the basis of sex, sexual …show more content…
He boldly states "that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" ( Jefferson 524). Though Jefferson and the founding forefathers meant to fight for the rights of white property owning men their goal for equality was admiral. Thomas states that all men are created equal because all people are descendents of "their Creator," of God. He states we are all sons of God and therefore we are entitled to equal treatment and rights. We are entitled to live with freedom, and the right to pursue happiness. These are our rights given to us from birth; these are our god-given rights. We would be setting the clock backwards to all the hard work our founding fathers and ancestors have strived and fought for if we don't fight for equal treatment and services for all, even if this means breaking unjust legal laws. In times where all people are not given equality, civil disobedience must take place; we must continue to work for the admiral goal which our forefathers fought for.
Civil disobedience has sometimes been characterized as an attack on our democratic government, however this notion does not hold true. Lewis Van Dusen wrote Civil Disobedience: Destroyer of Democracy, in which he declares that "civil disobedience...whatever the rationalization, is still an assault on our democratic society, an affront to our legal order" (Van Dusen). Van Dusen
Civil disobedience is defined by the Merriam-Webster Dictionary as "a refusal to obey governmental commands especially as a nonviolent means of protest."(Jacobus) We can see an example of this in U.S. history, when this theory was applied during the Civil Right Movement. The laws back then restricted African Americans from being able to attend public schools or use public restrooms that were designated as "white only." Even though they had paid taxes like everyone else, these types of segregation laws targeted minorities and made them second-rate citizens. Martin Luther King, who was sincere in exposing
Civil disobedience comes in every package under the sun. Whether it be Henry David Thoreau refusing to pay his taxes to protest the Mexican-American War or Mohammed Ali refusing the draft because he believed that they were sending him to fight for rights in another country that he didn’t have in his own. The importance of civil disobedience, particularly in those with influence over the people, is often overshadowed by opposition leaders and naysayers on the other side of the argument. But civil disobedience has kept America moving forward for over 240 years and it won’t be stopping any time soon.
Civil disobedience has always been a popular way to refute an idea in society. The most famous person that encouraged civil disobedience was Mohandas Gandhi. Gandhi was famous for encouraging this behavior stating that “an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.” Gandhi was a perfect example of how to deal with a life threatening problem in society: Oppose your unfair leaders with peace; simply disobey them, because in order for them to be “leaders” they need society. In order for them to be “leaders” they need a society that cooperates. If you take this away from unfair leaders, then they will crumble. The basic ideology behind civil disobedience that many get wrong is that there is a mutual relationship between political leaders
Brilliantly put by what many deem to be America’s greatest president of all time, Abraham Lincoln, “Let every man remember that to violate the law is to trample on the blood of his father, and to tear the charter of his own and his children’s liberty.” Civil disobedience is defined as the refusal to comply with certain laws as a form of political protest. Although many may argue that this is the sole way to keep the government in check and to make minorities heard, rational people will realize that it is not this disrespect of the law that proves the democracy of our nation.
Throughout American history are many examples of civil disobedience, and when we analyze the meaning of civil disobedience we realize that without this America would be a very different place. The Boston Tea Party, The Revolutionary War, The Civil Rights Movement are all a few major examples of civil disobedience that have shaped America into the world it is today. Civil disobedience, in a sense, is taking the law into ones own hands when they feel that the laws in place are unjust or unethical and want to change these laws to better ones own life and those of others. Sadly though, there are many lives on this Earth that cannot take the law into their hands, stand up for their rights, and change things for the better, and those lives are the
In a free society, civil disobedience can bring to light certain ideas that others might not think of with their own sets of beliefs, offering another perspective to consider when deciding just how to govern a country. Looking back in our own history, our country has been formed through civil disobedience, observing acts such as the Rosa Parks incident which had fueled the Civil Rights movements years ago; even looking as far back at the Tea Party, in which that certain event had led to our eventual freedom from Great Britain. However, in our current society, certain acts that people label as 'Civil Disobedience' are actually acts that set us back as a country in terms of acceptance and forward progress.
If we take a closer look at civil disobedience, we can better understand what it means, its goals, and its outcomes. Civil disobedience predominantly exists as direct and non-violent government defiance. Instead of voicing an opinion with a vote or a simple conversation, civil disobedience stands up for what is right using an individual’s whole influence. Therefore, some sacrifices regarding the legality of actions are made in order to preserve the integrity of the mission. In other words, why should a protester follow the law that they are trying to alter? That doesn’t make much sense, therefore civil disobedience allows unjust laws to be broken for the greater good. This method is very effective if, for example, a minority is attempting to
Civil Disobedience is a right that is afforded to all people. When Civil Disobedience is used as a method of getting your point across to the government and law officials it is ok although when things turn violent and get out of control then that is when it is bad. Carl Cohen feels that Civil Disobedience is a method that condones going against authority and promotes violence while Henry Thoreau believe that Civil Disobedience is a great way to draw attention to the wrongs that need to be made right. I believe that everyone should have the right to express themselves without fear of negative response. Recently here in Charlotte NC with the death of Lamont Scott, who was believed to be an unarmed black man killed by a cop, there was Civil
Civil disobedience has been used to peacefully protest for change for decades. The idea that it is acceptable to rebel against injustice is one that is fundamental to the very start of our nation. The American Revolution, while not a non-violent rebellion, is an example of fighting for something that is believed to be right. It is from here that the idea of civil disobedience stemmed, and from here which it grew. Henry David Thoreau illustrated the need for civil disobedience when he said, “The authority of government… [,] to be strictly just must have the consent of the governed.” The changes that have been brought about by this kind of peaceful protest have changed our world for the better. I believe that civil disobedience is something that
Although in the past there have been negative acts of disobedience, there has also been positive ones. Civil disobedience has impacted the world so much it should not be fawned upon but looked up to. It should be encouraged to help people stand against what they believe is wrong. Therefore, Civil disobedience isn’t a threat but a positive way to live.
Now, civil disobedience isn’t a common thing that occurs anymore, and people then ask the question “what is a civil disobedience action?” Well, a recent example of a modern day civil disobedience example is the transgender bill that was in the legislature not too long ago. This caused a protest that didn’t become violent with the Transgenders in South Dakota. The protest started when this bill was made public, but still passed for a brief amount of time before the governor came to realize its unjust qualities. Many transgender students in South Dakota gave the governor complimentary remarks when he denied this bill, and exclaimed that if this topic were to rise again they’d just fight back again. This was in fact a modern form of civil disobedience, and a connection of this situation to you as a person to grasp a real understanding of this topic.
History, as Karl Marx suggest, is defined by human suffering. When a man is oppressed, his natural recours is rebellion. Most ost restiance movements of the past incorporated violenve. Violence has been a mean to an end for centurys. Even today our lives are chronicled through violence and human suffering. However, a paradox ensues when revolutionaries use violence to free themselves from oppression, as a mean to an end. By replacing violence with violence, you are only contuining a destructive cycle that can in no way liberate everybody. It oppresses the oppressor and depresses the depressed. Martin Luther King jr. sought to remedy this unhealthy cycle by prescribing a new approach to rebellion. Not only did he
The political concepts of justice and how a society should be governed have dominated literature through out human history. The concept of peacefully resisting laws set by a governing force can be first be depicted in the world of the Ancient Greeks in the works of Sophocles and actions of Socrates. This popular idea has developed over the centuries and is commonly known today as civil disobedience. Due to the works of Henry David Thoreau and Martin Luther King Jr. civil disobedience is a well-known political action to Americans; first in the application against slavery and second in the application against segregation. Thoreau’s essay “Civil Disobedience” and King’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail” are the leading arguments in defining
Civil disobedience is America’s way of growing. Without historical examples, such as Martin Luther King Jr. and Rosa Parks, the United States would be stuck in antebellum ways of thought. The caveat of these national heroes was that they were peaceful. They did nothing to cause harm or damage. That made a point to their followers as well as their antagonists. In modern times, there are those that follow the rules of peaceful protesting (like the Women’s March on January 21, 2017). On the other hand, you have those who hide behind the term “civil disobedience” to cause destruction and chaos (like the UC Berkeley riots on February 1, 2017). Peaceful resistance to laws positively impacts society, but violent resistance masquerading as civil disobedience is tearing our country, once united, to shreds.
person is not they will continue to obey because at least this way they feel as if they are a