America is like a child who realizes the damages of spilling chocolate milk after the carpet has been stained. The child means no deliberate harm; in fact, he begins to cry and vows to never do it again when the mother informs him of his wrongdoing. But what if the mother kept silent? Would the child have recognized his sin or rather, would he have had discovered a new satisfaction in spilling milk? We, whether consciously or not, are the mothers of America, guarding over any potential harm towards our rights, our liberties, and our voices. In order to defend these intangible treasures we view as our own children, we turn to civil disobedience as a favorable tool. A tool often misinterpreted as a threatening weapon. Too often times is ‘civil …show more content…
For instance, a commonly heard opprobrium, as revealed by Carl Cohen in his Arguments Against Civil Disobedience, is how defiance cannot be virtuously justified, for these acts are based upon immoral foundations. Such believers further state that civil opposition reflects assumption of “the superiority of individual to social interests.” This argument portrays that selfishness is an underlying factor of disobeyers. Yet idiocy lies in this statement alongside with “selfishness” and “superiority” as –in fact –it is the opposite. Unlike the assumption that the civil disobedient belittles what the law entails, he actually values it substantially –to the point where, in contrast to what the argument presupposes, he is willing to risk negative consequences. Not to mention, the civil disobedient could not be a greater model of selflessness as Cohen states, “he knowingly does damage to his private interests and perhaps those of his family.” How, then, can civil dissent be heard as alarms towards social damage when the very genesis of it comes with good …show more content…
The contemporary protests that took place in South Korea represent the epitome of favorable civil opposition. Starting with late October, more than two million Koreans –out of the 50 million –rioted consecutively in the streets of Seoul for the resignation of their own president: Park Geun Hye. In response to this peaceful resistance, South Korea’s parliament made the decision to impeach Park Geun Hye, as she later states that she “heard grave voices of the people and the National Assembly.” In the eyes of an internal observer, this serves as a moment of nationalism yet in the eyes of an external observer, this serves as an era of unity. The protests unite hundreds of thousands of Koreans, portraying the power of democracy. Done with so with grace, protestors condemned the usage of violence and did not denounce but applauded the police for their services.The screams of determined Koreans, the shouts of the younger generation, and the cries of passionate citizens harmonize to produce not a single note but an entire melody that motioned a change in their nation’s
In 1848, David Thoreau addressed and lectured civil disobedience to the Concord Lyceum in response to his jail time related to his protest of slavery and the Mexican War. In his lecture, Thoreau expresses in the beginning “That government is best which governs least,” which sets the topic for the rest of the lecture, and is arguably the overall theme of his speech. He chastises American institutions and policies, attempting to expand his views to others. In addition, he advances his views to his audience by way of urgency, analyzing the misdeeds of the government while stressing the time-critical importance of civil disobedience. Thoreau addresses civil disobedience to apprise the people the need for a civil protest to the unjust laws created
Civil Disobedience makes governments more accountable for their actions and has been an important catalyst for overcoming unpopular government policies. To voice his disgust with slavery, in 1849 Henry David Thoreau published his essay, Civil Disobedience, arguing that citizens must not allow their government to override their principles and have a civic duty to prevent their government from using unjust means to ends. The basis for Thoreau’s monumental essay was his refusal to pay a poll tax, which subsequently landed him a night in county jail. In his passage: “If the injustice is part of the necessary friction of the machine of government, let it go, let it go; perchance it will wear smooth—certainly the machine will wear out. If the injustice has a spring, or a pulley, or a rope, or a crank, exclusively for itself, then perhaps you may consider whether the remedy will not be worse than the evil; but if it is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then, I say, break the law. Let your life be a counter friction to stop the machine...
Thoreau, Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr., and now Parkland Florida students as well as students around the world; is it true that civil disobedience is the best way for people of all ages to get their voices heard, especially for students who are fighting for gun control?(hook rhetorical) Civil disobedience has been used for centuries to protest unjust laws and legislation, as well as other government decisions that many of the public do not agree with. Thoreau was one of the first to use the term “Resistance to Civil Government” know known as civil disobedience, in which he detailed that not only was the best government the one that did the least, but that laws passed by the government were no better than the people they governed(Thoreau).
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,” written by Henry David Thoreau – originally published as “Resistance to Civil Government” in Aesthetic Papers (1849) and motivated by slavery and the Mexican-American War – discusses the hold government has on individuals in a society and the potential risks, as well as solutions, to overcoming the majority consciousness. Thoreau opens his essay with words he believes every government should live by: “That government is best which governs least.” Thoreau expresses that traditional government is often an inhibitor to the fluidity of justice and the desires of the majority, as well as the minority. As detailed, the American people have established a desire for some complicated concept to derive their government in order
There are many features of civil disobedience. Civil disobedience according to Rawls must be political in nature; agents engaged in civil disobedience must be appealing to a “common conception of justice”. It is aimed at changing the law, thus, it is a method requiring political engagement. The goal of this is to bring the law into conformity with the theory of justice. In order to make it a particularly clear case of rejecting the ou...
Civil Disobedience is a paradox. Civility and disobedience diametrically oppose one another; civility implies politeness or a regard to the status quo while disobedience is a refusal to submit to the standard. When these words are coupled together, however, they compliment one another. The purpose of Civil Disobedience is to disregard the obligation of observing a law with the intention of highlighting a need for change. Morality, Religion, and Ethics often play into the decision to willingly break a law which creates more depth behind the practical meaning phrase, because those three tend to emphasize a respect for authority and integrity. When people break the law in the name of civility, they often are asking questions like, “What must I
Justice is often misconceived as injustice, and thus some essential matters that require more legal attention 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, are present up to this time in the U.S. for that purpose. To begin with, Thoreau expresses that civil disobedience should be more implemented when the just resistance of the minority is seen legally unjust to the structure conformed by the majority. Supporting his position, Thoreau utilizes the role of the national tax in his time; its use which demoralizes the foreign relationship of the U.S.; its use which “enables the State to commit violence and shed innocent blood”; its use which supports “the present Mexican War” (Thoreau 948, 940).
The historic Women's March which was attended by millions across the world would not be considered civil disobedience in America, where such a protest is protected, but the same is not true in other parts of the world, where freedom of speech does not exist. It is one of the strengths of the US Constitution that there are ways to create change without resorting to lawbreaking, but one must never forget that the founders included those protections because of their own experience with true
While the law is meant to be universal, reformers, activists, and civil rights leaders all testify to its inconsistencies in the long and unending trial of history. Recognizing the distance between the law and morality and attempting to reconcile them requires both a realistic assessment of the current situation and a naïve optimism that, with the sheer force of democracy, it can and will improve. This explains why the most powerful and ironic motivation for civil disobedience is patriotism. Democracy opposes both tyranny and anarchy, and needs civil disobedience to sustain such a contradiction. The difference in personal and legal interpretation of the law is not the same as the difference between the subjective and the objective; instead,
Civil disobedience has long proven a positive force in American society. In the early decades of the United States, Thomas Jefferson understood why the right to rebel is written into the Constitution. When government institutions fail to act, Jefferson believed that protests could force action. Honest rebellions, as Jefferson called them, educate the public and make the concerns of the minority important to the majority. Overall, Jefferson understood that civil disobedience benefits the constitutional system. The Vietnam War protests illustrate how exactly civil disobedience can positively impact on American life.
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.
RYOO, WOONGJAE. The Public Sphere and the Rise of South Korean Civil Society. Journal of Contemporary Asia 39, no. 1: 23-35. Academic Search Premier, 2009.
Throughout the course of history people across the world have protested and fought for what they believed in. Henry David Thoreau, after spending a night in jail for failure to pay the poll tax, wrote a well-known essay titled “Resistance to Civil Government,” which was later renamed “Civil Disobedience.” Thoreau’s essay on civil disobedience would later influence generations of activists including Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Mahatma Gandhi (Mass Moments: Henry David Thoreau Spends Night in Jail). This particular essay would later influence a movement that can still be seen today.
----- "Civil Disobedience" from A World of Ideas - Essential Readings for College Readers, Lee A. Jacobus, Bedford Books, 1998, 1849(123 -146)