Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Disobedience impact on society
Disobedience impact on society
Civil disobedience and its consequences to the societal development
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Disobedience impact on society
By definition, civil disobedience means to actively refuse to obey certain laws, demands, and commands of a government or of an occupying power without resorting to physical violence (Wikipedia 2007). Many of the influential people in history have felt passionately about what they believe. These passions caused them to rebel against a government or authority. Many times they felt so strongly about what they believed and how they were being treated was wrong they became disobedient. They would take physical and verbal abuse for being disobedient but would never retaliate. They believed in what they thought was wrong and tried to change the way they were governed. Albert Einstein once said 'never do anything against conscience even if the state demands it.' Albert Einstein's views seem to be reasonable. The claim by Albert Einstein is accurate because people should stand up for what they believe, they should know when they are right and their government is wrong, and they should trust in themselves and their own beliefs. People in this world must stand up for what they believe because many people will take advantage of their power and infringe their rights. When Einstein said what he said about civil disobedience that you should trust a person?s conscious and not his government he was telling people to make a stand. A prime example of standing up for what you believe in and not bowing to a law or demand that a person doesn?t think is right would be Sophocles Antigone she didn?t stop trying to bury her brother because she believed it was the right thing and she stood up for herself ?I shall rest, a loved one with him whom I have loved, sinless in my crime, for I owe a longer allegiance to the dead than to the living: ... ... middle of paper ... ...cience?? He believed that conscience should tell a person what to do not just a majority vote. To follow a government blindly ruins people they should only trust what they believe is right. 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.
Civil disobedience has its roots in one of this country’s most fundamental principles: popular sovereignty. The people hold the power, and those entrusted to govern by the people must wield
In 1968, Martin Luther King Jr passed away from a sniper’s bullet. He gave us thirteen years of nonviolent protest during the civil rights movement of the 1950’s. Before I can give my opinion on the history of race relations in the United States since King’s assassination in 1968 strengthened or weakened his arguments on the necessity and value of civil disobedience? You should know the meaning of civil disobedience. The word civil has several definitions. “The one that is intended in this case is "relating to citizens and their interrelations with one another or with the state", and so civil disobedience means "disobedience to the state". Sometimes people assume that civil in this case means "observing accepted social forms; polite" which would make civil disobedience something like polite, orderly disobedience. Although this is an acceptable dictionary definition of the word civil, it is not what is intended here. This misinterpretation is one reason the essay (by Henry David Thoreau that was first published in 1849) is sometimes considered to be an argument for pacifism or for exclusively nonviolent resistance”.
He thought the government had too much power over the people and wanted them to rebel (1-4). He saw that the people obeyed because they felt they were supposed to and were too afraid to do anything about it. The law he was opposing was that the people should pay taxes because they lived on the land and they were a part of that society so they had to pay whenever and whatever they were told by the government.... ... middle of paper ...
In the past in this country, Thoreau wrote an essay on Civil disobedience saying that people make the law and have a right to disobey unjust laws, to try and get those laws changed.
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.
Civil Disobedience is when one breaks the law to prove a point or bring about a potential moral change. This can include just changing the way society thinks about a certain subject. Throughout history, Civil Disobedience has been effectively used to bring about drastic change in not only the way people think, but also their actions. It was Henry David Thoreau who coined the term in the 1848 because he did not believe he should pay taxes that went to the war against Mexico or supporting the Fugitive Slave Law, both of which he saw as immoral. A key factor in Civil Disobedience is that the offender should generally be willing to accept the punishment for it, as it shows how they still have respect for the authority; the priority is simply change (“Civil Disobedience”).
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.
Civil disobedience, is often the last step that people take to bring attention to a topic or subject that they feel strongly about. Every day is full of unjust rulings that may not be to everyone’s liking. Many people fight for what they believe in even if the outcome is bleak. You are your own self and you will always have your opinion that may not match all other citizen’s. Civil disobedience has escalated to a majority of non- violent protesting, although there are some cases including violence. It is a form of rebelling against what they feel is unfair or unconstitutional. Showing civil disobedience is an act that you must be willing to accept the legal consequences, which may include incarceration.
But, regardless of the fact that people relate this topic in many different ways, they always seem to end up with the same basic principles: civil disobedience is the resolve of a just conscience; it is a means through which mountains can be moved quietly and strategically; and if applied correctly, it can permanently alter the course of a single individual or an entire nation. In ancient times those who chose to undertake the perilous act of civil disobedience—the early Christians who defied the Roman Empire, Socrates, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego—did not do so lightly, for in these times such acts were generally met with an immediate and often painful death (King, 2000). In effect, it took a strong conscience to resort to such actions. This same ideal held true in more recent times, as demonstrated by Denmark in their defiance of Nazi ideals and Martin Luther King Jr. in his actions against racial segregation in the United States. Against such powerful forces as these, there must exist a force... ...
I think there are always times when disobeying a law is morally justified. "They are sometimes unfair and repressive; common sense, social custom, and religion already provide enough guidance; and morality can never be legislated" (Kessler 154). Thoreau argued that any given law is not as high or not above what you believe in or what your conscious tells you is right. "We all have a moral duty to obey our consciences" (Kessler 154). I believe it is very clear how I stand on the subject of civil disobedience. After researching this topic and formulating my own opinions I have learned a great deal about my morals and myself. It simply shocks me when I think of the accomplishments of people like King, Gandhi, and Thoreau.
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 inspire millions to resist their human condition, he did so without resorting to violence. Through his pragmatic and ethical approach to civil rights reform, Martin Luther became a revolutionary revolutionist.
...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.
Identify an example in this country of civil disobedience that you feel was justified and explain why? Civil disobedience means, a group's disapproval to abide by the law because they place confidence that the law is corrupt. Civil disobedience is a refusal to obey unjust laws, or in other words, defying the law because you don’t agree with it. Civil disobedience is usually displayed in a peaceful way. Although, if a person commits civil disobedience they should be prepared to face the aftermath of their actions, such as jail (Audio English, 2013).
“Civil disobedience and rebellion becomes a sacred duty of a person when the state becomes lawless and corrupt”. These are the words spoken by Mahatma Gandhi; a leader of the independence movement in the British ruled India. Civil disobedience is disagreeing with the government in a peaceful way whereas rebellion is doing the same thing in a violent way. These actions are provoked when the people don’t like something that the government is doing. They are necessary ways to help protect people’s treasured rights, to publicize an issue and overthrow an unjust government or gain independence. For these reasons, civil disobedience and rebellion are both equally necessary to obtain an effective democracy.