When I was told to pick a topic that was problematic and related to civil disobedience, I immediately thought of an event that got more media coverage than anything else in August of 2016. Headlines resembling phrases like “Disrespect to Our Great Nation”, “Black Lives Matter Advocate Crosses Line”, and “Footballer Disrespects Military”. Other headlines included ones like “Football Player Takes a Stand by Taking a Knee”, and “NFL Player Uses Platform for Social Justice”. The national anthem in sports has traditionally been known and characterized with celebrities, and elaborate performances. However, in August of 2016 Colin Kaepernick changed that by taking a knee in protest for the mistreatment and oppression of people of color. Initially, …show more content…
Civil disobedience, to me, is any action that civilly disobeys or refuses to conform to government or societal rules/laws. In America, the national anthem is very traditional where people almost always stand, take off their hats, and place their hands on their heart. It’s an unwritten rule in our society that one conforms to this tradition. Colin Kaepernick disobeyed this rule. He kneeled, bringing attention to him for not following suit. Kaepernick’s actions reminded me directly of a quote from Henry David Thoreau’s civil disobedience. “Those who, while they disapprove of the character and measures of a government, yield to it their allegiance and support are undoubtedly its most conscientious supporters”. (Thoreau, 54) This quote illustrates Kaepernick’s protest as an act of civil disobedience. Despite opinions surrounding his actions and what they meant, people must concede that his actions were indeed civil. He kneeled peacefully and quietly. After researching more into that question and exploring Civil Disobedience by Henry David Thoreau more elaborately, I now conclude that I do believe that Kaepernick’s actions can be classified as civil …show more content…
This question is much more complex than the former. So, I decided to start trying to come up with a definition for patriotic. This led me directly to where most people go to find definitions, a dictionary. I went to my trusty internet, google searched patriot, and landed on dictionary.com. This page gave me a list of definitions that immediately made me question my former understanding of patriotism. Growing up I always associated military members with patriots almost exclusively and I still think that the true basic definition of patriotism is loving your country. However, the two definitions on dictionary.com altered how I thought of patriotism. According to dictionary.com, “a patriot is a person who loves, supports, and defends his or her country and its interests with devotion, or a person who regards himself or herself as a defender, especially of individual rights, against presumed interference by the federal government.” (dictionary.com) Both definitions are relevant to Kaepernick’s actions. I specifically think the second definition is useful to explore thoughts on Kaepernick’s behavior as patriotic or
The issue of being unpatriotic during the National Anthem was raised by people when NFL quarterback, Colin Kaepernick decided to kneel during the national anthem before a preseason game. Later, Kaepernick addressed the media by saying this act was a stance against “police brutality on people of color”. By raising the
Following recent cases of police brutality and racial oppression, many public figures are taking it upon themselves to stand against the issues. In this matter, Colin Kaepernick has been in the spotlight since his protest during a preseason game in August, where he took a knee during the National Anthem. In the articles “The Colin Kaepernick Effect; Another Athlete Stands Up For Social Issues” by LA Watts Times Sports Writer, Amanda Scurlock and “Colin Kaepernick’s Critics Called Him an Idiot. Who’s the Idiot Now?” by Slate Executive Director, Josh Levin, the authors talk about how Colin Kaepernick’s peaceful protest has had many positive and negative backlash. Kaepernick has received much support from not only his fans, but also people such
If you are a big football fan then you might have noticed at the beginning of the season,that a player for the San Francisco 49ers, did not stand for the national anthem. The player's name is Colin Kaepernick. To some it might not have been a big deal, but to others it was a major controversy. They couldn't understand why Kaepernick did not stand for the anthem. From an online article by Steve Wyche, Kaepernick explains why he didn't stand for the anthem. “I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color," Kaepernick told NFL Media in an exclusive interview after the game. "To me, this is bigger than football and it would be selfish on my part to look the other way. There are bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder." () Kaepernick is referring to all the police shooting of African Americans that have been happening. Since Kaepernick started sitting out for the anthem others in the NFL and in other sports have also started to sit out for the anthem. The issue starts with the black
In the great era of foundational philosophers, two stand out, Plato and Thoreau. Each had their own opinion on various topics, especially on civil disobedience. Plato’s life span was approximately 428-348 BC. Plato wrote numerous works throughout his lifetime, however we will be focusing on one, the Crito. Thoreau’s life span was 1817-1862. To help us determine what civil disobedience means to both of these philosophers we will first look at a general definition. According to Merriam-Webster civil disobedience is defined as “refusal to obey governmental demands or commands especially as a nonviolent and usually collective means of forcing concessions from the government.” This definition will act as a springboard to compare and contrast both of their thoughts on the topic. We will determine, according to Plato and Thoreau, when we are called to engage in civil disobedience and when the moral parameters of civil disobedience are pushed too far.
Civil disobedience is being disobedient to certain laws in a peaceful, but active manner. So the person who commits civil disobedience must actively rejects to follow certain laws of government and peacefully accept the consequences. For example, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. is a typical example of modern civil disobedience. He actively rejected to follow
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.
Civil disobedients is refusing to follow certain laws, as a way of political protest. The Boston Tea Party is an good example of a group of people being disobedient. The colonist were protesting against the unfair tax placed on tea. So they dumped 3 ships worth of tea into the ocean. Prudence Crandall and Fred Korematsu are two less known examples of people being civil disobedients. These two may not be well know but, they impacted the civil right movement.
According to the American heritage dictionary “Civil Disobedience” is 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. In “Civil Disobedience” Thoreau stated “That government is best which governs least, and I would like to see it acted up more rapidly and systematically” (pg227). Thoreau did not believe that the government should have the final say on everything. The citizens of this country should have rights in the decision making process and the opportunity to think for themselves also. Thoreau says that government does not, in fact, achieve that with which we credit it: it does not keep the country free, settle the West, or educate. Rather, these achievements come from the character of the American people, and they would have been even more successful in these endeavors had government been even less involved.
Football games are no longer enjoyable because politics has made its way to the stadiums taking the joy away when a person sees their favorite player kneeling. They can’t know or understand why they are choosing to kneel so to them they see no reason to respect it. What if that player themselves had served, lost a loved one in the military, or have known someone to be a victim of a social injustice like police brutality? Where’s the
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”.
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 is a refusal to follow certain rules and is usually shown through a peaceful form of protest. The Moratorium March was somewhat a civil disobedience event because although it started as a peaceful anti- war movement, violence was unavoidable. The vast majority of demonstrators were peaceful; however, a conflict broke out at the Justice Department when demonstrator’s started throwing rocks and bottles, which the police responded to with tear gas canisters (Leen). According to Henry David Thoreau’s statement in his essay “Civil Disobedience,” “If the machine of government…is of such a nature that it requires yo...
In the Theory of Justice by John Rawls, he defines civil disobedience,” I shall begin by defining civil disobedience as a public, nonviolent, conscientious yet political act contrary to law usually done with the aim of bringing about a change in the law or policies of the government”.
Likewise, violent protests raise awareness in a negative and oftentimes irrational light. Following the tragic shooting of Michael Brown in the fall of 2014***, countless riots shed light on a new twist on a century-old issue; race in America. The man shot was an African-American, unarmed, young adult. He was shot by a white police officer who believed the young man to be a threat to his safety. His death became the catalyst for the modern Black Lives Matter movement’s stance on equality in American justice systems. While the movement places an emphasis on a need for change, much like Martin Luther King did in the 1960’s, the mass riots from Ferguson, Missouri to Baltimore, Maryland contradict civil disobedience. The riots caused hundreds of vandalisms, countless injuries of police officers in both cities, and created fear for the movement. Awareness for the issues were raised because of this movement, but the violent initial spark of it derailed the solid proof of the need for change. This further proves the necessity that civil disobedience is on a free society; peaceable expression of views has a heavier weight when it comes to altering the course of a
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.