No one possesses the same morals or beliefs. Morality does not have a black and white answer because no one is exactly alike. Everyone has their own opinion and right to voice that opinion, and there are numerous ways of doing so. As a citizen with my own beliefs, I believe I have the right to violate laws if I feel morally obligated to. The amount of progress that America has made in such a short amount of time is astonishing. In some ways it seems as if the only way to make any headway is to speak up. If I was morally opposed to a policy or law I would go against it due to its effectiveness, individualism, and past history of the world that has made immense progress.
It is important to notice that if civil disobedience was not effective, then it would not be continually used to disobey the law. In "The Role of Civil Disobedience in Democracy” by Kayla Starr, she explains why we have the right to participate in civil disobedience. “The U.S. Bill of Rights asserts that the authority of a government is derived from the consent of the governed, and whenever any form of government becomes destructive, it is the right and duty of the people to alter or abolish it” (Starr 1). There are many examples of how effective this act of defiance could be. During the Boston Tea Party, the citizens of Massachusetts practiced civil disobedience by throwing Britain’s tea into the Boston harbor because they did not want to pay taxes on tea. Now, you can see that the Boston Tea Party played a major role in the United States becoming independent from Britain (Starr 1). Although violating the law has consequences, in this case the reward outweighed the risk. I think that by realizing the power that civil disobedience carries, we can stand up against ...
... middle of paper ...
... for your beliefs, then you are more willing to be fully committee to your cause. The progress that several individuals made was because of their nonviolent protests. Civil disobedience made a big difference in the history of the world.
Works Cited
Curtis, Jerry. "The Role of Nelson Mandela in the Fight against Apartheid in South Africa." Humanities. Humanities, n.d. Web. 06 Dec. 2013.
"Gandhi Leads Civil Disobedience." History.com. A&E Television Networks, n.d. Web. 05 Dec. 2013.
Starr, Kayla. "The Role of Civil Disobedience in Democracy." The Role of Civil Disobedience in Democracy. Civil Liberties, n.d. Web. 06 Dec. 2013.
Thoreau, Henry David. "Civil Disobedience." By Henry David Thoreau. n.d. Web. 06 Dec. 2013.
Walden, J Thomas . "Literary Analysis the Ideal of Individualism in Henry David Thoreau’s Walden." Humanities. Humanities, n.d. Web. 06 Dec. 2013.
When a citizen abides by the social contract, they initially agree to enter and be a participant of a civil society. The contract essentially binds people into a community that exists for mutual preservation. When a person wants to be a member of civil society, they sacrifice the physical freedom of being able to do whatever they please, but they gain the civil freedom of being able to think and act rationally and morally. Citizens have what is called prima facie obligation to obey the laws of a relatively just state. A prima facie duty is an obligation that we should try to satisfy but that can be overridden on occasion by another, stronger duty. When it comes to prima facie duty, this duty can be outweighed by a higher order obligation or
In response to the annexation of Texas in 1845 by the United States, Henry David Thoreau's wrote the essay, Civil Disobedience. Thoreau felt that this purely economic move by the United States expedited the Civil War, which he, and many Americans, disapproved of. In his essay, Thoreau argues that government should not be in control of the people and that the people should be able to rule themselves freely however they please. In addition, he clearly states and points out that in many instances it is best when individual rights take priority over state authority.
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.
From the onset of man fighting for freedom or his beliefs, the question has always been whether one person can make a difference using words rather than wars. Philosophically, the concept of civil disobedience would appear to be an ineffective weapon against political injustice; history however has proven it to repeatedly be one of the most powerful weapons of the common man. Martin Luther King Jr. looked at the way African Americans were treated in the United States and saw an inequality. By refusing to pay his taxes and subsequently being imprisoned for a night, Henry David Thoreau demonstrated his intolerance for the American government. Under British rule, India remained oppressed until Mohandas Gandhi, with his doctrine of non-violence lead the country to freedom.
Fender, Stephen. Introduction. Walden. By Henry David Thoreau. New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 1997. Print.
In the chapter “Civil Disobedience” by Professor David S. Meyer, he talks about many different movements and social groups that had made an impact within society. He goes over the different areas that civil disobedience covers, and gives detailed examples about how civil disobedience leads to change of some sort. Meyer explains that in order to fully understand what civil disobedience is, it has to be looked at on a different level. Many people have their own interpretation of what they think civil disobedience is. It is seen as challenging public authority, and most of the time leading to an uproar of different groups participating in civil disobedience. When social movements take action into commencing civil disobedience, they do it
If you have ever watched the news, you have an idea about what civil disobedience is. During The Great Depression, US workers lined up to help stop job loss and pay cuts. People were supporting industrial workers and trying to help with the issue by having signs and going against the government and law. That’s exactly what civil disobedience is; to contravene the government or law usually for a good purpose. In the Greek tragedy Antigone by Sophocles, Antigone shows she is a model of disobedience.
Not only does peaceful resistance positively affect a free society, it is the bedrock for its survival. When the Founding Fathers congregated to ratify the Bill of Rights, they considered those ten as unalienable because they were representative of the American people’s values. As questions about which rights are guaranteed constantly circulate, civil disobedience can be a critical reminder to lawmakers about which rights the public refuse to forfeit. In a country of such rich diversity, unanimous agreement is a profound rarity. Unrepresented citizens cannot always rely on their peers to represent the same values, and as the late Howard Zinn once stated: “Protest beyond the law is not a departure from the law; it is essential to it.” Civil disobedience grants a voice to the otherwise voiceless. Ideological minorities can voice their discontent by refusing to conform to policies that breach their moral compasses. Without civil disobedience, those unfavored ideologies would struggle to compete in the marketplace of ideas.
“An individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for the law” (King, Martin L., Jr.). When the African Americans were protesting oppression it was an act of civil disobedience. When the women’s suffrage movement happened thousands of women marched in the streets, they endured hunger strikes, and submitted to arrest to gain the right to vote (Starr).In other words, America has a long history of civil disobedience. Civil disobedience is nonviolent. It helps alleviate frivolous and harmful laws. Civil disobedience is morally justified in a democracy because
The practice of civil disobedience has long been discussed as to whether it inspires true social change, or only creates conflict within society. The peaceful resistance of Martin Luther King Jr. can be used as a primary example supporting the positive effects of civil disobedience. While the morality of his actions against the previous law of segregation can be debated, the positive influence of ending segregation is undeniable (Bill of Rights Institute). However, King’s methods of achieving this change, such as peaceful protesting and marches, should not be confused with the non-peaceful rejection of laws. While riots and violence encourage hate and separation, civil disobedience displays how society could function peacefully without the laws being opposed (Bill of Rights Institute). It is then demonstrated that the peaceful resistance to laws, or civil disobedience, positively impacts a free society.
Civil disobedience, in my opinion, is necessary in times of moral injustice or inequity. Citizens of a society need to protest against a government that does not protect them. English philosopher John Locke believed that all people are born with “natural rights” and that the only purpose of a government was to protect those rights. The success of a society I believe, depends upon the citizens to review the acts of its government and to speak out against any usurpations against its people.
I believe that civil disobedience has a positive impact on a free society. The opposition of controversial and possibly immoral laws provides a voice for the people and allows for change to occur. Civil disobedience makes us question the norms of our society in a critical analysis of our system. I also feel that those whom practice civil disobedience have a strong sense of self and social conscious. Civil disobedience has been a part of American history since the Revolutionary War. From the Civil Rights Movement, draft dodgers during the Vietnam War, protestors in the Women’s Suffrage Movement, and the Civil War. Civil disobedience has been a force of major change throughout our nation.
“Be the change that you want to see in this world.” - Gandhi. Gandhi is saying that if you want something to make a change, then you have to do something about it and fight for what you believe in. I believe that civil disobedience is an effective method of social change. Civil disobedience is breaking a law in a peaceful, non-violent way. Some people believe that civil disobedience isn't an effective method because it doesn't always work, can create time in jail, and can take a very long time. One reason why civil disobedience is effective to create social change is because it is a legal way to protest. Also, civil disobedience has the power to create a change in society, law, and government. Lastly, civil disobedience draws attention to
I believe that civil disobedience can both positively and negatively effect a society. If one peacefully protests against a law that they believe to be unjust when others are too afraid to express that belief, a very positive change can occur. However, if that person sparks a successful movement to get rid of a certain law that is otherwise commonly believed to be good, then that society would be negatively impacted. Instead of peacefully protesting, I believe that it is more effective and efficient to hold certain assemblies and such that all people can participate and share their opinions on.
I think civil disobedience is an effective means to creating change. Civil disobedience gets the message across and it can bring about change. Violence cannot fix any problem, as it leads to more violence and more hatred. On the other hand, civil disobedience is a way to show the enemy that you do not hate them, but you hate what they are doing or claiming. In addition, civil disobedience shows the opponent that you are willing to let them do anything to you, as long as there is a change brought about for the better. Also, another benefit of using civil disobedience is that people who practice it are showing that they are serious about what they want. They are prepared to go to any extremes of listening to the other party, and only for their own beliefs and against what they know is wrong. This can send a very powerful response, and bring about a positive change.