Dissent or Content: The Effect of Rebellion on Society
In Civil Disobedience, Henry David Thoreau asked, "Unjust laws exist; shall we be content to obey them, or shall we endeavor to amend them, and obey them until we have succeeded, or shall we transgress them at once?" (Barone). Dissent means to hold a different opinion than what is traditionally believed. America was founded on dissent during an armed rebellion, but the question is whether or not rebellion is necessary in contemporary society. Although rebels do not comply or conform to the standards in a community, provoking disagreements, dissent is necessary in advancing society and stimulating change as seen in Albert Camus’ fictional novel, The Stranger.
Dissent against conformed
…show more content…
America over time has adopted and organized 27 amendments to regulate people’s actions as legal or illegal. The word “amend” literally means to change; therefore, the government is based off of amended rules and changes. Without activists, it is likely that America’s government would not have been amended to the ideals society follows today. However, these activists make it difficult to establish a national character without conflict. In the Stranger, Meursault becomes momentarily agitated with his lawyer saying, “He didn’t understand me, and he was sort of holding it against me. I felt the urge to reassure him that I was like everybody else, just like everybody else” (Camus 66). Meursault briefly feels pressured to conform; his lawyer persuades him to abandon his own ideas to better the outcome of his trial. Since the 1950s cultures have become accustomed to mass media and mainstream middle class, encouraging conformity. Alexis de Tocqueville in Democracy in America, wrote, "I know of no country in which there is so little independence of mind and real freedom of discussion as in America” (Barone). Tocqueville utilizes a negative connotation to emphasize his support for individualism over conformity. Supported by the first amendment, the freedom of speech is given to all American citizens; however, conformist ideals have oppressed individuals for many years. Americans are afraid to speak their mind or stand out, because they are condemned for it. Barone characterizes America by saying, “not only did insistence on a strict self-reliance soften as the 20th century progressed, but many came to fear our rugged individualism was melting into a mediocre conformity.” It is important for society and the individual that the focus transitions back to individual freedom so America, once a great prospering nation, is not characterized as “mediocre” in every day society.
One of these faults that Tocqueville discusses is the influence that democracy has on America. Democracy gives everyone the chance to have their say in their government. Americans believe that democracy is a great thing. However, Tocqueville discussed the influences that this worship of democracy has created. For instance, Tocqueville states how Americans did not consider philosophy to be important and have no philosophical school of their own. Yet, even without much attention paid to philosophy, Americans all think similarly. This similar philosophy is using the same method of depending on their own understanding and opinion to make decisions. Tocqueville believed that this method is used by Americans because of an aversion they have to accepting things solely because authorities say to and instead they the need to think for themselves. Instead of accepting what the authorities say, Americans believe that nothing is impossible to understand and everything can be explained through using a person’s own judgment about things. This reliance on a person’s judgment also leads to Americans having a distrust of all things supernatural. Tocqueville’s observations here seem to be quite critical and appear to look at American’s reverence for their j...
Alexis de Tocqueville's visit to the United States in the early part of the nineteenth century prompted his work Democracy in America, in which he expressed the ability to make democracy work. Throughout his travels Tocqueville noted that private interest and personal gain motivated the actions of most Americans, which in turn cultivated a strong sense of individualism. Tocqueville believed that this individualism would soon "sap the virtue of public life" (395) and create a despotism of selfishness. This growth of despotism would be created by citizens becoming too individualistic, and therefore not bothering to fulfill their civic duties or exercise their freedom. Tocqueville feared that the political order of America would soon become aimed at the satisfaction of individual needs, rather than the greater good of society. Alexis de Tocqueville viewed participation in public affairs, the growth of associations and newspapers, the principle of self-interest properly understood, and religion as the only means by which American democracy could combat the effects of individualism.
When it comes to civil rights, there are two pieces of literature commonly discussed. One of these pieces is Henry David Thoreau’s persuasive lecture On the Duty of Civil Disobedience. In this work, Thoreau discusses how one must combat the government with disobedience of unjust laws and positive friction to create change. The second piece is the commonly known article Letter From a Birmingham Jail by Martin Luther King Jr.
Courage to Dissent helps readers understanding of the Civil Rights movement. Brown-Nagin wrote about the issue that was going on during this time when it pertains to politics, housing, public accommodations, and schools. It highlighted major issue that was a problem in America but especially Atlanta, Georgia. Atlanta at this time became a huge stomping ground for African American leaders because of the massive wave of blacks that lived in the city as well as the issue that needed to be address to end segregation. The NAACP began to expand their leadership into smaller components. A lot of local black officials became extremely involved in Atlanta. The city wanted faster results, which focus on local activist and not head officials of the NAACP.
In Democracy in America, Alexis De Tocqueville explains the dangers of democracy and explains the virtues that temper these dangers. In this paper, I will look at two issues Tocqueville discussed extensively in late 19th century American democracy and posit what Tocqueville may say about these issues today. The points I will discuss are materialism and religion. In a democracy, such as America, the individual’s opportunity to succeed makes him more likely to become attached to material and money. However, in Tocqueville’s Democracy in America, this danger is tempered by religion, which quenches the lust for material by reducing its importance in comparison to good mores. These two elements of American democracy are a small portion of the “Habits of the hearts” of Americans; they are two ideas that complement each other to make democracy appealing and possible anywhere and everywhere. Is this the case today? Is the American’s relationship to materialism and religion similar today to what it was when Tocqueville visited America?
In Martin Luther King Jr’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” he cites conscience as a guide to obeying just laws and disobeying unjust laws. In the same way, Henry David Thoreau wrote in his famous essay, “Civil Disobedience,” that people should do what their conscience tells them and refuse to follow unjust laws. The positions of the two writers are very close; they both use a common theme of conscience, and they use a similar rhetorical appeal to ethos.
Everybody wants to be accepted, yet society is not so forgiving. It bends you and changes you until you are like everyone else. Society depends on conformity and it forces it upon people. In Emerson's Self Reliance, he says "Society is a joint stock company, in which the members agree, for the better securing of his bread to each shareholder, to surrender the liberty and culture of the eater." People are willing to sacrifice their own hopes and freedoms just to get the bread to survive. Although the society that we are living in is different than the one the Emerson's essay, the idea of fitting in still exists today. Although society and our minds make us think a certain way, we should always trust our better judgment instead of just conforming to society.
History has encountered many different individuals whom have each impacted the 21 in one way or another; two important men whom have revolted against the government in order to achieve justice are Henry David Thoreau and Martin Luther King Jr. Both men impacted numerous individuals with their powerful words, their words carried the ability to inspire both men and women to do right by their morality and not follow unjust laws. “On the Duty of Civil Disobedience” by David Henry Thoreau along with King’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail”, allow the audience to understand what it means to protest for what is moral.
Thoreau wrote "Civil Disobedience" in 1849 after spending a night in the Walden town jail for refusing to pay a poll tax that supported the Mexican War. He recommended passive resistance as a form of tension that could lead to reform of unjust laws practiced by the government. He voiced civil disobedience as "An expression of the individual's liberty to create change" (Thoreau 530). Thoreau felt that the government had established order that resisted reform and change. "Action from principle, the perception and the performance of right, changes things and relations; it is essentially revolutionary" (Thoreau 531).
Martin Luther King and Henry David Thoreau each write exemplary persuasive essays that depict social injustice and discuss civil disobedience, which is the refusal to comply with the law in order to prove a point. In his “Letter from a Birmingham Jail,” King speaks to a specific audience: the African Americans, and discusses why he feels they should bring an end to segregation. Thoreau on the other hand, in “Civil Disobedience,” speaks to a broader, non-addressed audience as he largely expresses his feelings towards what he feels is an unjust government. Both essays however, focus on the mutual topics of morality and justice and use these topics to inform and motivate their audience to, at times, defy the government in order to establish the necessary justice.
One of the greatest feelings in the world is going against the grain of society and the universal fear to be different than the rest. Whether you are sparked by your own fire, or someone else’s, breaking the status quo to be diverse enhances progress. Oscar Wilde once said, “Disobedience, in the eyes of anyone who has read history, is man’s original virtue. It is through disobedience that progress has been made, through disobedience and through rebellion.” This quote sparks interest due to disobedience often containing a negative connotation. However, in this quote disobedience is honorable, and to be called disobedient is a compliment. According to Wilde, disobedience is beneficial and without it, social progress could not be made. Without
In his essay, “Resistance to Civil Government,” often times dubbed, “Civil Disobedience,” Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862) argues against abiding to one’s State, in protest to the unjust laws within its government. Among many things, Thoreau was an American author, poet, and philosopher. He was a firm believer in the idea of civil disobedience, the act of refusing to obey certain laws of a government that are felt to be unjust. He opposed the laws regarding slavery, and did not support the Mexican-American war, believing it to be a tactic by the Southerners to spread slavery to the Southwest. To show his lack of support for the American government, he refused to pay his taxes. After spending a night in jail for his tax evasion, he became inspired to write “Civil Disobedience.” In this essay, he discusses the importance of detaching one’s self from the State and the power it holds over its people, by refraining from paying taxes and putting money into the government. The idea of allowing one’s self to be arrested in order to withhold one’s own values, rather than blindly following the mandates of the government, has inspired other civil rights activists throughout history such as Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Both these men fought against unjust laws, using non-violent, yet effective, methods of protest. From these three men, we can learn the significance of detaching ourselves from the social norm; and instead, fight for our values in a non-violent way, in order to make a change in our government’s corrupt and unjust laws.
Henry David Thoreau was an American philosopher lived in 19th century, when young and feeble American society was not powerful as nowadays. His illustrious work called as “Civil disobedience” demonstrated his polar point of view towards unjust government. Objection to pay taxes, protests, follow own conscience are only some of the methods of disobeying. His main point is that any man, who treats himself as a conscience man, should differentiate laws in order to determine which law is right or wrong, and consequently no to obey that unjust law. I mostly agree with this statement, and this essay will show how does he reach such conclusion and will provide arguments for and against to this statement.
As a transcendental work, “Civil Disobedience” maintains the idea of how Henry David Thoreau discusses how the government’s limitations can stop people’s moral freedom from expanding. This reflects ideas of transcendentalism because it understands the ideas of individual freedom and encourages citizens to take a stand against the government. As a transcendental writer, Henry David Thoreau focuses on individual right and freedom that has been controlled by the government. In presenting the government as a controlling force, Thoreau explains his lack of faith in the government and that people should fight back for their individual rights.
Thoreau's Civil Disobedience talks about politics, government and the issues concerning these areas today. "Government is best which governs least." This motto means that the government should not have complete power over the people. The people's opinion is what matters the most. Individualism is stressed throughout his writing. To stand up for what you believe in and not bend backwards for the government is necessary. He speaks of Slavery and the war in Mexico and how is must be put to a stop. The people are responsible for this happening. Many people opposed these things yet did nothing to change it. Allowing yourself to be a part of injustice makes you a part of the negativity. Paying taxes to a corrupt government makes you just as bad as they are. You are supporting a negative cause by doing so. No matter what you must stay true to your values and morals. Life is short and you need to make your time worth something. When you find something to be wrong, speak out. Thoreau states that you should not run from the result of your rebellion. Face the consequences to sh...