Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Womens suffrage campaign
Womens suffrage campaign
Arguments against civil disobedience
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Womens suffrage campaign
“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 …show more content…
“ There are as many views as there are different aspects of civil disobedience...the difference of views appears to be infinite. But there is general consensus that at least one common factor can be found, and that is, a willingness to respect and accept the relevant legal system. That is the marked difference between civil disobedience and open revolt or armed revolution,” ("Democracy Can 't Exist without Respect for the Rule of Law"). There are many differences between revolution and civil disobedience. Civil disobedience is nonviolent and respectful to the law. Armed revolution is a fighting against the government with weapons and an intent to destroy the government. Many may say that civil disobedience is a slippery slope and it will lead to revolution. Civil disobedience is very respectful and the only reason it is happening is because there are unjust laws. The people who participate in civil disobedience or peaceful protests are displaying respect for their government by helping it become better, rather than trying to overthrow …show more content…
In the social contract a government upholds the people and the people uphold it. In a way civil disobedience is upholding the social contract because it keeps the government organized and running well. Civil disobedience is nonviolent and respectful towards the government. Without civil disobedience women would not be able to vote and African Americans would still be extremely oppressed. Civil disobedience is necessary for an organized civilization. To put it plainly Howard Zinn once said “to begin the process of change, to stop a war, to establish justice, it may be necessary to break the law, to commit acts of civil disobedience,” (Zinn,
Civil disobedience is being disobedient to certain laws in a peaceful, but active manner. So the person who commits civil disobedience must actively rejects to follow certain laws of government and peacefully accept the consequences. For example, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. is a typical example of modern civil disobedience. He actively rejected to follow
Civil disobedience has its roots in one of this country’s most fundamental principles: popular sovereignty. The people hold the power, and those entrusted to govern by the people must wield
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.
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
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 ...
Civil disobedience differs from revolution in that you are being nonviolent, conscientious, and willing to accept legal consequences of their action. Civil disobedience is breaking of a law or laws, to bring attention to the public of its injustice and their motive is to force a change, to make the law just. Civil disobedience is done selflessly, not due to self-interest, but with the community’s best interest at heart. Civil disobedience is only an act against unjust laws, or laws that are thought to be unjust, and thus should be made just.
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
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.
When nonviolent civil disobedience occurs, the participating citizens are attempting to bring about positive change to the system--change which has not (and may not have) been brought about by words alone. Given that this constitutional republic is intended to be representative of its citizens in accordance with its fundamental laws, citizens are undoubtedly justified in striving for representation for the public will. This is put succinctly by David Thoreau in the poem Civil Disobedience: “It is not desirable to cultivate a respect for the law, so much as for the right.” The government should enact the will of its people, and where people see a law as being unjust this disposition is voided. A purportedly representative governing body should be brought to consider the will of its people in earnest, and peaceful demonstration is the next step where words alone
The use of civil disobedience is a respectable way of protesting a governments rule. When someone believes that they are being forced into following unjust laws they should stand up for what they believe in no matter the consequences because it is not just one individual they are protesting for they are protesting for the well-being of a nation. Thoreau says ?to resist, the government, when its tyranny or its inefficiency are great and unendurable.? People should only let wrong and right be governed by what they believe not the people of the majority. The public should always stand for what is right, stand when they think a government is wrong, and trust in their moral beliefs.
With all of this taken into consideration, including laws such as freedom of speech, it only makes sense that civil disobedience is right and justified. With setbacks from people getting out of hand during protests, it is the best to realize that whilst practicing freedom, denizens of any given place should know the laws and never break them. Lastly, civil disobedience should be allowed and practiced safely, because it has always been around and has often resulted in the improvement of society. As with every law, there will always be setbacks and obstacles that need to be recognized, however, in the end, civil disobedience does more good than bad.
Many people choose to use violence in their own ways to achieve the goals they have set upon themselves. But are there situations where violent disobedience is ever justified? You might be thinking, what is violent disobedience? Violent disobedience is the act of breaking a rule placed upon oneself, ready to accept any punishment that is to come to thee. You could violently disobey anyone such as the police, your parents, and even yourself. I believe only in certain situations one should be allowed to violently disobey an order give to him or her. No matter, one must accept ones hardships with outstanding stoicism to be able to succeed in controlling your actions for the greater good.
The United States of America is a nation that values freedom above all, yet it fails to allow a portion of its population to be free. For centuries, African American slaves endured severe physical and mental abuse under the hands of their masters. The demise of slavery was followed by the end of the Civil War. Even though African Americans were finally emancipated, they were still unable to enjoy their newly granted freedom due to the unwillingness of white Americans to accept them as their equals. Being an African American in the U.S meant being denied basic Civil and Human Rights: the right to vote, social freedom, and equality. In order to ensure these rights for all, many great leaders, such as the late Martin Luther King Jr., rose to help
Civil disobedience is a threat to our free society as one small example can snowball into a much larger issue within our society. Rosa Parks used civil disobedience in a very effective way but a bank robber could use civil disobedience to explain that he was gaining rights for the poor, much like Rosa Parks did for the African American community. The problem here lies in where can you draw the line with civil disobedience. You could argue that a good argument is needed to justify someone breaking a law, but any argument can be fabricated to expose only the good details that aid there side of the argument. Civil disobedience could even end up in murder where a person decides it is in the best interest of the community to eliminate a person preventing them from doing damage. However, they broke the law by
After the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s, women getting the right to vote because of the 19th amendment, and the ever-growing freedoms to practice various religions wherever and however, many would say that today in 2015 we are in the most accepting and tolerant time in history. However, that doesn’t mean everything is okay and everyone gets along. Many groups of people are victims of discrimination every day and those who don’t face discrimination often try and justify poor treatment of the discriminated by saying they don’t face judgement and unequal treatment. This issue is often brought up in the Presidential debates because it is such a big issue effecting millions of people each day and the voters want to know how the candidates view and plan to resolve these problems. One Presidential hopeful, Bernie Sanders, has shared his beliefs and he has