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 orientation, religious beliefs & non-beliefs, race, age, etc is an unjust law. Civil disobedience is justified when its goal is to obtain equal rights and service for everyone, without causing physical damage to people and their property, and without breaking the just laws that are already enforced. Furthermore it should only be practiced when the government fails to uphold justice and fix laws that don't allow everyone the equal rights already given to some.
An attribute in the progression of humanity in American history has been to stand against injustices for the better and equal treatment for all. A prevalent symbol of this struggle has been the Declaration of Independence written by Thomas Jefferson. One can say that the many immigrants migrated and continue to flee from their countries to the United States of America for better, more equal living opportunities. After freeing themselves from the British Parliament on a quest to gain independence, our forefathers established the US as a land...
... middle of paper ...
...rom the Declaration of Independence to the civil rights movement, civil disobedience has been a great tribute to the progression of humanity in striving for equal treatments, only when it does not physically harm others, nor their properties, and also when it does not contravene an already enforced just law. Those who follow civil disobedience properly, find it necessary, like King and his followers, to endure struggle and conflict in order to correct an injustice. Those true civil disobedients find strength of non violence which comes from their willingness to take risks without threatening others, or their properties. They see civil disobedience as an attribute which can help them when law and justice don't go hand in hand. Civil disobedience when used improperly can hurt many people, however when used properly can help gain equal rights and justice for all.
Mahatma Gandhi, a prominent leader in the independence movement of India once said, “Civil disobedience becomes a sacred duty when the state becomes lawless and corrupt.”(brainyquotes.com) Gandhi states that protest and civil disobedience are necessary when the authority becomes unscrupulous. This correlates to “Declaration of Independence,” by Thomas Jefferson; “Civil Disobedience,” by Henry David Thoreau; and “Letter from a Birmingham Jail,” by Martin Luther King Jr., because all three leaders felt that civil disobedience was important to help protest against an unjust ruling. Jefferson stood up to the injustice of the king by writing the Declaration of Independence and urged others to stand up for the independence of America. Thoreau exemplified
Civil Disobedience, as stated in the prompt, is the act of opposing a law one considers unjust and peacefully disobeying it while accepting the consequences. Many people believe this has a negative impact on the free society because they believe civil disobedience can be dangerous or harmful. Civil disobedience does not negatively affect the free society in a dangerous manner because it is peaceful and once it becomes harmful to the free society then it is not civil disobedience. Thoreau believed civil disobedience is an effective way of changing laws that are unjust or changing things that as a society and to the people does not seem correct. This peaceful act of resistance positively impacts a free society. Some examples are Muhammad Ali peacefully denying the draft and getting arrested. These men believed that what they saw was wrong and they did something about it but they did it peacefully.
In Thoreau's "Civil Disobedience," he uses a hyperbole to support his belief that "one person can make a change," an idea still relevant today. Thoreau uses many forms of literary techniques such as multiple hyperbole, emotional appeals, and paradoxes. Thoreau uses these to sustain his ideas on civil disobedience. He believes if you believe in something, and support something you should do whatever it takes to help the cause. Many people in today's society believe to just go with the flow, rather than living like Thoreau has, and supporting his own beliefs no matter what the consequence. Henry David Thoreau had a lot of personal authority, he was all about his own independence. Many different people believed in being a non-conformist, and Thoreau was one of them, and he very well showed how much he supported it. Thoreau was not the only nonconformist, they're many people who followed his beliefs and they refused to be bound by anybody, or anything they did not support. Other non-conformists were Gandhi, Galileo, Malcom X and many more.
Civil Disobedience occurs when an individual or group of people are in violation of the law rather than a refusal of the system as a whole. There is evidence of civil disobedience dating back to the era after Jesus was born. Jesus followers broke the laws that went against their faith. An example of this is in Acts 4:19-20,”God told the church to preach the gospel, so they defied orders to keep quiet about Jesus,” In my opinion civil disobedience will always be needed in the world. The ability to identify with yourself and knowing right from wrong helps to explain my opinion. Often in society when civil
Civil disobedience has been around for a long time. In Bible times Christians would disobey laws that would go against their beliefs, such as the law that they couldn’t preach. (Acts 4) Christians still disobey laws in many countries that do not let them practice their faith, some end up in jail or killed.
Henry David Thoreau, a philosopher and creative artist as well as an anti slavery activist, wrote his short story “From Resistance to Civil Disobedience”. In this story he’s arrested for not paying his state taxes. At the time the state was engaged in the Mexican-American War that was not only fought over boundaries expanding slavery but was also enacted by President Polk under his own decision. Thoreau thought the war was too aggressive and without just reason.
Civil disobedience is the refusal to obey civil laws in an effort to induce change in governmental policy or legislation, characterized by the use of passive resistance or other nonviolent means. The use of nonviolence runs throughout history however the fusion of organized mass struggle and nonviolence is relatively new.
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. received a Nobel Prize and was honored by the President of the United States for his contributions to society. On the other hand, he was prosecuted, convicted, incarcerated, and had his sentence reaffirmed by the Supreme Court. These explanations seem rather contradictory. If what he did was noble, why was he jailed for his actions? When we take into account these manifestations of the government's attitude towards Martin Luther King, we can safely make the assumption that the government is not always justified in the laws that it creates. Our government's original purpose was to keep order and ensure freedom to its people. As history has shown us, as in the case of African Americans, the government will expand its role and take away liberties of the few. The individual is justified in acting out in civil disobedience when the government restricts the liberties of the individual.
The use of civil disobedience is a respectable way of protesting a governments rule. When someone believes that they are being forced into following unjust laws they should stand up for what they believe in no matter the consequences because it is not just one individual they are protesting for they are protesting for the well-being of a nation. Thoreau says ?to resist, the government, when its tyranny or its inefficiency are great and unendurable.? People should only let wrong and right be governed by what they believe not the people of the majority. The public should always stand for what is right, stand when they think a government is wrong, and trust in their moral beliefs.
Even though there was optimism in the United States in the mid-eighteen hundreds, the country faced problems for which there were no easy answers. Writers faced many problems as well, due to different situations within the people and the country. Even though finding inspiration may have been hard to come by, it greatly benefited the people in growing their ability to write.
Thoreau’s Civil Disobedience is a piece that denounces the role of government and promotes the individuality of man. He argues that government rarely proves itself to be useful, and that anything achieved under the influence of that government could have been even greater had the system not been involved, evident in paragraph 2, “Yet this government never of itself furthered any enterprise, but by the alacrity with which it got out of its way. It does not keep the country free. It does not settle the West. It does not educate. The character inherent in the American people has done all that has been accomplished; and it would have done somewhat more, if the government had not sometimes got in its way.” (Thoreau, lines 12-16) He states that the American government derives its power from the majority, not the strongest group, and not necessarily the most moral. Thoreau wants us to believe that we the people should follow what we think to be ethically just, not what the government and the majority force upon us. In my opinion, I agree with Thoreau in the aspect that we need a more improved form of government, however I disagree with the type of government that Thoreau wishes for. He believes we work better without restraint and that we must command our individual respect, but I heartily argue the opposite; a society must have order and an infrastructure, we need a system to oversee the problems that we cannot solve as humans with individual mindsets. I do not believe that the government should have the right to pry into our lives without solid evidence, but I do believe that we need a fair and balanced administration that is required to look after its’ peoples’ well being.
Justice is often misconceived as injustice, and thus some essential matters that require more legal attentions than the others are neglected; ergo, some individuals aim to change that. The principles of civil disobedience, which are advocated in both “Civil Disobedience” by Henry David Thoreau and “Letter from Birmingham Jail” by Martin Luther King Jr. to the society, is present up to this time in the U.S. for that purpose.
Recently on a trip to St. Louis, my family and I drove through the town of Ferguson, Missouri. This city was the site of several violent protests over the alleged unequal treatment of black Americans by the Ferguson police force. A year after the events had ended, the destruction in the area was still evident with several boarded up storefronts and business. These types of protests are seen fairly regularly on the nightly news due to social injustice concerns from one side or the other. Violent protests are seemingly out of the question for most Christians, however, at what point does civil disobedience become an appropriate course of action for a Christian?
Disobedience to laws and governments that we the people see as wrong is a deep-seated part of our culture. It hearkens back to the Revolutionary war which the colonies used to create this great country from a previous government that the people saw as tyrannical. But this kind of disobedience, even being somewhat rare, can be seen in many cases throughout history. A step up from this is civil disobedience. Civil Disobedience can even be found as far back as Jefferson's time when he would advocate for "threat of revolution" and forms of changing the government that were placed in the constitution like "elections, amending process" and more (Rebellion, Revolution, and the Constitution). The same document even cites him as believing that unsuccessful
Civil disobedience is a threat to our free society, as one small example can snowball into a much larger issue within our society. Rosa Parks used civil disobedience in a very effective way, but a bank robber could use civil disobedience to explain that he was gaining rights for the poor, much like Rosa Parks did for the African American community. The problem here lies in where you can draw the line with civil disobedience. You could argue that a good argument is needed to justify someone breaking a law, but any argument can be fabricated to expose only the good details that aid their side of the argument. Civil disobedience could even end up in murder where a person decides it is in the best interest of the community to eliminate a person, preventing them from doing damage.