How are the people, oppressed by others and by the government, supposed to react? Certainly, they do not enjoy being treated unjustly, however, they should still obey the laws. Is it to the laws of the land that command total submission or to his convictions by which he is convinced that the system is totally unjust? Therefore, how should citizens defend their liberties, without using violence or disobeying the law, if they think it’s unjust? If an individual obeys the law, he would automatically be thought of supporting the unjust system but in case he does not, he would be accused of disobeying the law. There are various controversies about whether violence is justified when liberty is threatened. Throughout history, people have had numbers of arguments on this topic.
Civil disobedience is usually thought to be an “illegal activity undertaken to protest laws that
are regarded as unjust” (Schlesinger). In order to eliminate injustice, or at least the most unjust law in the system , people may start disobeying that particular law. Thoreau, Gandhi, and King each were closely related on the concept of civil disobedience, they all thought that the government was in need of fundamental transformation. However, they did support the non-violence movements. I would not say that this was very pretentious--their resort to nonviolence did reflect their morality and religious judgements ,but this is not accurate enough to work one hundred percent. Some people think of civil disobedience as something that must be limited, no one knows to what extent or degree, civil disobedience is always in search of limits.
The tactic for violation of rights should be openness, because stimulated public is the purpose of civil disobedience. Unjust law...
... middle of paper ...
... and Education, Sept. 2010. Web. 11 Nov. 2010. .
"Lesson 3 :: Non-Violence and Mass Civil Disobedience « Dr. Martin Luther King Jr." Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Web. 16 Nov. 2010.
"Martin Luther King: The Philosophy of Nonviolent Resistance." Suite101.com: Online Magazine and Writers' Network. Web. 16 Nov. 2010. .
"The Power of Non-violence by Martin Luther King, Jr." TeachingAmericanHistory.org -- Free Seminars and Summer Institutes for Social Studies Teachers. Web. 16 Nov. 2010. .
Simkin, John. "Malcolm X." Spartacus Educational - Home Page. Web. 16 Nov. 2010. .
In Cesar Chavez’s article “He Showed us the Way”, Chavez talks about Martin Luther King’s practices, how he stands with his nonviolent teachings and how king believed hate cannot driven out hate. Chavez explains how being nonviolent helped many members of the Civil Rights Movement get what they wanted. Throughout the article, Chavez uses religious and historical allusion, to show how nonviolence can be the best route to achieve what they want.
Everyone that has been through the American school system within the past 20 years knows exactly who Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. is, and exactly what he did to help shape the United States to what it is today. In the beginning of the book, Martin Luther King Jr. Apostle of Militant Nonviolence, by James A. Colaiaco, he states that “this book is not a biography of King, [but] a study of King’s contribution to the black freedom struggle through an analysis and assessment of his nonviolent protest campaigns” (2). Colaiaco discusses the successful protests, rallies, and marches that King put together. . Many students generally only learn of Dr. King’s success, and rarely ever of his failures, but Colaiaco shows of the failures of Dr. King once he started moving farther North.
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.
In Cesar Chavez’s article, he uses many rhetorical devices to help give the reader a better understanding of how important nonviolence vs violence is. Chavez explains how Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Mahatma Gandhi have endowed reasons of nonviolence worth following.
In his magazine article, civil rights leader and social activist, Cesar Chavez, discusses nonviolent ways to further the civil rights movement and eliminate the racial inequalities that exist in the world. Through the use of rhetorical aid, including the aid of repetition, Chavez sets a powerful and inspiring tone in order to convey his message to the audience: nonviolence overcomes violence.
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”.
Despite the belief that fighting with violence is effective, civil disobedience has been tried throughout history and been successful. Fighting violence with violence leaves no oppertunity for peace to work. By refusing to fight back violently, Martin Luther King Jr. took a race of people, taught them the value of their voice, and they earned the right to vote. Henry David Thoreau presented his doctrine that no man should cooperate with laws that are unjust, but, he must be willing to accept the punishment society sets for breaking those laws, and hundreds of years later, people are still inspired by his words. Mohandas K. Gandhi lead an entire country to its freedom, using only his morals and faith to guide him, as well as those who followed him, proving that one man can make a difference. Civil disobedience is the single tool that any person can use to fight for what they want, and they will be heard. After centuries of questioning it, it appears that the pen truly is mightier than the sword.
Until the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., his life’s work was dedicated to the nonviolent actions of blacks to gain the freedoms they were promised in the Emancipation Proclamation of 1863 by Abraham Lincoln. He believed that “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere” (King, 1963). These injustices had become so burdensome to blacks that they were “plunged into an abyss of despair” (King, 1963). The nonviolent actions of the sit-ins, boycotts, and marches were so the “individual could rise from the bondage of myths and half-truths…to help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism” and ultimately lead to “inevitably opening the door to negotiation” (King, 1963). Not only was King’s approach effective with the older black generation, it was also successful with white people. They did not feel threatened when approached by King. White people gained a sense of empathy towards the plight of black freedom as King’s promise of nonviolence did not threaten their livelihood. Malcolm X viewed the world similarly to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., however; his beliefs to changing the status quo were slightly different from his political counterpart. Malcolm X realized that “anger could blind human vision” (X, 1965). In realizing this, X knew that in order to achieve racial freedom blacks had to “forget hypocritical politics and propaganda” (X, 1965). While Malcolm X was more so an advocate for violent forces against white people than King, X merely used force when it became necessary for defense. According to X, “I don’t go for non-violence if it also means a delayed solution. I am for violence if non-violence means we continue postponing a solution to American black man’s problem” (X, 1965). However, this le...
Justice is often misconceived as injustice, and thus some essential matters that require more legal attentions 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, is present up to this time in the U.S. for that purpose.
Utilizing paradox, Chavez describes the effectiveness of nonviolent protest to his audience. Recalling the achievements of MLK, Chavez claims that King “learned how to successfully fight hatred and violence with the unstoppable power of nonviolence.” This quote demonstrates
In the article, published on the tenth anniversary of the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., Cesar Chavez invokes the ideas of Dr. King and advocates for nonviolent resistance. Utilizing a determined tone throughout, he asserts that nonviolence will accomplish the goals of civil rights activists. By using contrasting diction to distinguish nonviolent action and violent action, he is able to reason for nonviolent virtues. With the use of rhetorical strategies, Chavez is able to drive his argument for nonviolent resistance. Chavez begins by recalling the power of nonviolence as demonstrated by Dr. King, who lived and taught essential ingredients for active nonviolence until the day he died.
Throughout his education, Martin Luther King Jr. tried to find a way to demonstrate his belief of racial equality with the most effective means possible. He quickly realized that the best strategy to end segregation was to use nonviolent forms of protest. At Crozer, Morehouse and Boston University, he studied the teaching of Mohandas Gandhi, who used nonviolent methods to help India claim its independence from Britain. King read several books on the ideas of Gandhi, and eventually became convinced that his methods could be employed by African Americans to obtain equality in America. King knew that any violence on the part of African Americans would lead to violent responses from segregationists, which would lead to injury or maybe even death for his followers. He had to teach his followers not to respond violently to cruel attacks from segregationists. King decided to sponsor workshops to train African Americans in nonviolent beh...
Suber, Peter. " Civil Disobedience." Earlham College, 1999. Web. 18 Dec. 2013. .
When a person's civil right to disagree with a law or with a situation moves to the point of causing others to feel unsafe or be violated of their own civil rights, then that person's civil right has quickly turned into a crime or injustice. Martin Luther King always demonstrated that true change and getting one's point across comes through peaceful resistance. When Rosa Parks resisted to move from her seat, the law was broken; however, she had a right to chose to not obey the law to make her statement. She was not acting violently or disturbing others, and her stance eventually changed the world. Civil disobedience can bring about change and is a person's right. If a person stops having choices about his or her own actions then that person is no longer human, but a puppet under a master's hand. I truly believe all the turmoil overtaking the country today is due to the misconception of civil disobedience. Civil disobedience has turned uncivil. People believe their rights are more important than other people's rights. Civil disobedience--the key word being civil--exemplifies true freedom in the United States of
In Martin Luther King Jr.’s essay entitled The Ways of Meeting Oppression he argues that the only true way to be free from oppression is to employ non violent means. Martin Luther King Jr. is a civil rights leader who led the civil rights movement in the 1960s and was undoubtedly the leader of that era. His work led to great change in the United States for the betterment of all minorities such as the March on Washington and the Montgomery Bus Boycott. His list of accomplishments is nearly endless. His work describes common methods of dealing with oppression on a societal level. He argues that those that chose to merely accept their circumstances as something ironclad, unable to be shaken from its throne of violations of human rights and disregard for life of fellow man. This mindset merely coagulates the oppression in the mind of future generations rather than dethrone it. The other most common method is through physical violence, which leads to the abused people to be treated even worse once the rebellion is quelled. King's use of rhetorical devices as well as their context in his essay paint a strong argument that the way that the oppressed deal with their