Civil Disobedience Degrades Society

798 Words2 Pages

Throughout the course of humanity, from monarchy to democracy, conflicts have been proven as a necessary reason for reform. When such conflicts happen, and negotiation is no longer a plausible choice, revolution is adopted as a final resort. A violent one, however, seems to be the dominant one throughout the history. Human perhaps loves rushing, assuming violent forces would hasten the process, sometimes with honorable intentions, but often without any seriously moral consideration of the consequences. Civil disobedience, on the other hand, was less popular in the early days, thus being believed to be less effective. Such a resort, in actuality, could be performed with great effectiveness, individually and collectively, with conscience being entirely taken into consideration to both parties of a conflict. Therefore, the act of civil disobedience, the peaceful refusal of allegiance to injustice, is the ultimate means to reach a kind of society where conscience and liberty of an individual are truly glorified. …show more content…

To a certain extent, though a broad one, the government is but an abstract procedure in which “the people have chosen to execute their will” and impose the law on themselves, like “a sort of wooden gun to people themselves”(1). Such self-imposition satisfies the idea of being safe and sound, though might just be an illusion in many circumstances. The government, therefore, “is at best but an expedient”(1), and a law, as a result, should never be made to impose any moral standard but to protect people from essential dangers. The government and society, even though has a strong tie with each other, are essentially difference. In fact, they are strongly distinguished: “Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness”(4). While law presumably express government’s protection of justice, civil disobedience expresses society’s desire for

Open Document