Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
An essay on civil disobedience
Cases of civil disobedience
Cases of civil disobedience
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Bri’Ana Jones
January 30, 2015
English III
3rd Period
Title
“Disobedience is the true foundation of liberty. The obedient must be slaves,” as stated by Henry David Thoreau. Civil disobedience has been going on for numerous of years. It has impacted America in many different ways. This has all been through the people. Some of the ways it impacted people are through voting, public humiliation, and just and unjust laws. So therefore, this can cause a lot of problems.
To begin, civil disobedience had impacted voting. Martin Luther King Jr. once stated, “Throughout the state of Alabama all types of conniving methods are used to prevent Negros from Negro registered to vote despite the fact that the Negro constitutes a majority of the population.” All types of methods are used to prevent them from being able to become registered voters. Whites felt as though blacks should not have the same privileges as them. Blacks meant nothing to the Whites.
…show more content…
Public humiliation is defined as an action that allows an individual’s personal embarrassment to be publicly known. For example, in the story The Scarlett Letter, Hester Prynne was forced to wear the letter A on her chest. Another example is in Tiger Woods Scarlett Letter- Live behind Public Humiliation when his wife carries the humiliation of his infidelity. “Public humiliation comes to us all, and never so surely as when we're just a little bit pleased with ourselves and feel, just for once, that everything is going our way,” said Kate Reardon. There are multiple ways that people can be and still are public
Black Lives Matter. Women’s Marches. In today’s society, we need not look far to see various examples of civil disobedience. Yet, there is still much opposition on the people’s right to speak up - to fight for their rights. Why is this so, when our country seems to have evolved into what it is today, precisely because of it? It is my firm belief that while the United States of America remains a free society - a democracy run by the people - the protesting of unjust laws and traditions will always have a uniquely positive impact in the country.
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.
Due to that the opposition towards this was heavily influenced. There was, also the denying of voting for women. There was the use of “property qualifications to prevent poor black and white men from voting” (Hine 174). Ensuring the denying of voting to black people, since most of the black community was poor and would never gain enough profit to demonstrate they were capable of voting. Stripping them from their legal right to vote, no matter what circumstances money wise they were in. Due to “the egalitarian movement to remove property qualifications” (Hine 174) the disfranchisement began. According to white race voters the allowing of the black race vote would corrupt the system. Since they “would be encouraged to try to mix socially with white people” (Hine 174). Due to that there was the threat that the voting of the black race would position them in the election to office. Demonstrating the racism there still was. And the unequalness of freedom that African Americans had. Since all the rights they were entitled to were denied to them. Making them feel that the freedom they were enjoying of wasn’t
In Thoreau's "Civil Disobedience," he uses a hyperbole to support his belief that "one person can make a change," an idea still relevant today. Thoreau uses many forms of literary techniques such as multiple hyperbole, emotional appeals, and paradoxes. Thoreau uses these to sustain his ideas on civil disobedience. He believes if you believe in something, and support something you should do whatever it takes to help the cause. Many people in today's society believe to just go with the flow, rather than living like Thoreau has, and supporting his own beliefs no matter what the consequence. Henry David Thoreau had a lot of personal authority, he was all about his own independence. Many different people believed in being a non-conformist, and Thoreau was one of them, and he very well showed how much he supported it. Thoreau was not the only nonconformist, they're many people who followed his beliefs and they refused to be bound by anybody, or anything they did not support. Other non-conformists were Gandhi, Galileo, Malcom X and many more.
Civil Disobedience occurs when an individual or group of people are in violation of the law rather than a refusal of the system as a whole. There is evidence of civil disobedience dating back to the era after Jesus was born. Jesus followers broke the laws that went against their faith. An example of this is in Acts 4:19-20,”God told the church to preach the gospel, so they defied orders to keep quiet about Jesus,” In my opinion civil disobedience will always be needed in the world. The ability to identify with yourself and knowing right from wrong helps to explain my opinion. Often in society when civil
“Throughout Alabama all sorts of devious methods are used to prevent Negroes from becoming registered voters.” Negroes make up the majority population in the counties of Alabama “Not a single Negro is registered to vote.” Political segregation also affects the Negroes from using their First-Amendment rights. Dr. King peacefully exercises the First-Amendment, yet he is sent to jail for “Parading without a permit.” Dr. Martin Luther King does not mind spending time in jail because of simply not having a permit, “But such an ordinance becomes unjust when it is used to maintain segregation and to deny citizens the First-Amendment privilege of peaceful assembly and protest.”
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 ...
In our country’s history, Civil Disobedience has had positive effects upon legislation and societal norms. The First Amendment of the United States Constitution states five basic forms of expression that are to be protected by the government: Speech, Press, Assembly, Religion, and Petition. The Founders, in essence, created a means by which the average citizen can achieve political and social change. Justice William J. Brennan Jr. stated in 1989 that, “If there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that government cannot prohibit the expression of an idea simply because the society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable.”* When citizens speak out or
Henry David Thoreau, a philosopher and creative artist as well as an anti slavery activist, wrote his short story “From Resistance to Civil Disobedience”. In this story he’s arrested for not paying his state taxes. At the time the state was engaged in the Mexican-American War that was not only fought over boundaries expanding slavery but was also enacted by President Polk under his own decision. Thoreau thought the war was too aggressive and without just reason.
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. received a Nobel Prize and was honored by the President of the United States for his contributions to society. On the other hand, he was prosecuted, convicted, incarcerated, and had his sentence reaffirmed by the Supreme Court. These explanations seem rather contradictory. If what he did was noble, why was he jailed for his actions? When we take into account these manifestations of the government's attitude towards Martin Luther King, we can safely make the assumption that the government is not always justified in the laws that it creates. Our government's original purpose was to keep order and ensure freedom to its people. As history has shown us, as in the case of African Americans, the government will expand its role and take away liberties of the few. The individual is justified in acting out in civil disobedience when the government restricts the liberties of the individual.
Civil Disobedience is a deliberate violation against the law in order to invoke change against a government policy. Civil disobedience can come in the form of running a red light or j-walking, or in more noticeable methods such as riots. Coined by American author and poet Henry David Thoreau, the term has developed to define the act of disobeying a law one sees as unfit or unjust. Usually the purpose of civil disobedience is to gain public attention to a perceived injustice and appeal to or gain support from the public in a non-violent way. The idea is to force the government to negotiate or else continue with the unwanted behavior; or in simpler terms, to “clog the machine” (“Civil Disobedience”). It is believed by many that the act of civil disobedience is justifiable in a democratic government like that of the United States. A Democracy is defined as a form of government controlled by elected representatives or by the people themselves. However, in order to have a stable government, it must be built on a stable society. Societal welfare is the general good for the public and how its members take action to provide opportunities and minimum standards. According to societal welfare, which is the sake of the emotional and physical well-being of the community, the laws must be abided and civil disobedience is morally unjust in our society. Once any member of the society questions the affairs of the state, the state may be given up for lost (“Jean Jacques Rousseau”).
Civil disobedience has been around for a long time. In Bible times Christians would disobey laws that would go against their beliefs, such as the law that they couldn’t preach. (Acts 4) Christians still disobey laws in many countries that do not let them practice their faith, some end up in jail or killed.
By definition, civil disobedience means to actively refuse to obey certain laws, demands, and commands of a government or of an occupying power without resorting to physical violence (Wikipedia 2007). Many of the influential people in history have felt passionately about what they believe. These passions caused them to rebel against a government or authority. Many times they felt so strongly about what they believed and how they were being treated was wrong they became disobedient. They would take physical and verbal abuse for being disobedient but would never retaliate. They believed in what they thought was wrong and tried to change the way they were governed. Albert Einstein once said 'never do anything against conscience even if the state demands it.' Albert Einstein's views seem to be reasonable. The claim by Albert Einstein is accurate because people should stand up for what they believe, they should know when they are right and their government is wrong, and they should trust in themselves and their own beliefs.
(Article 1) To start off, public humiliation is a form ridicule which is a complete mockery. This is a way of degrading someone and their position while people gather to taunt, tease, and verbally abuse one emotionally. When an individual is humiliated for what he or she has done, it already hurts them deep down inside which causes them to feel
I do agree that civil disobedience negatively impacts a free society. Many look at this as peaceful protest, no harm done to each opposing party, although this type of protest has a deeper impact than you would think. If a large group of people go on strike to oppose a business, it stops the business from making money and stops people from shopping at that store location. Since the protesters aren't causing any harm, the police can not use physical force to remove the people from this location, since they would be on a public location. This causes a major problem because the protesters either get what they want, or they get removed by force by the police and even if it was legal, the public eye will shame the law enforcers and look down upon