Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Arguments against Thoreau's notion of civil disobedience
Arguments against Thoreau's notion of civil disobedience
Consequencies of disobedience
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Let me begin by stating that civil disobedience is only positive when it remains peaceful. Once it becomes violent, it is infringing on the rights of others and can no longer be called civil. Our country was founded on civil disobedience. The Declaration of Independence was an act of civil disobedience, which jumpstarted the War of Independence. The first amendment of the Constitution guarantees its citizens the right to protest, and the supremacy clause in article VI, clause 2, says that the states cannot take away any rights given to a citizen by the central government. In the 2003 case of Scheidler v. Nat’l Org. for Women, Inc. the Supreme Court ruled that civil disobedience was allowed if it didn’t violate the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt …show more content…
Poet and author, Henry David Thoreau, in his essay On the Duty of Civil Disobedience said “Must the citizen ever for a moment, or in the least degree, resigns his conscience to the legislator? Why has every man a conscience then? I think that we should be men first, and subjects afterward.” Thoreau not only wrote about civil disobedience, but participated in it as well. In 1849, Thoreau was thrown in jail for refusing to pay for taxes that went toward the Mexican-American War, or slavery. When friends and neighbors came together to pay for his bail, he refused stating that in jail he felt freer than people on the outside. The U.S. Bill of Rights emphasizes that government is derived from the consent of the governed, and when that government becomes destructive it is the citizen’s duty to alter or abolish …show more content…
is bursting with examples positive and successful cases of civil disobedience. Those disobediences were the start of the most important social reforms in our country’s shared history. In 1964, after the U.S. became involved in Vietnam, nearly a thousand students held a protest rally at Times Square in New York. In 1984, a group of protesters against the U.S.’s involvement in Central America rallied in front of the San Francisco Federal Building to get an anti-war protest document signed. There are many peaceful ways you can protest a war. In the past, there has been refusal to pay for war, or refusal to enlist in the military, occupation of draft centers, sit-ins, blockades, peace camps, and refusal to allow the military recruiters on a college or high school
“All machines have their friction―and possibly this does enough good to counterbalance the evil… But when the friction comes to have its machine… I say, let us not have such a machine any longer” (Thoreau 8). In Henry David Thoreau’s essay “On the Duty of Civil Disobedience,” the author compares government to a machine, and its friction to inequity. He believes that when injustice overcomes a nation, it is time for that nation’s government to end. Thoreau is ashamed of his government, and says that civil disobedience can fight the system that is bringing his country down. Alas, his philosophy is defective: he does not identify the benefits of organized government, and fails to recognize the danger of a country without it. When looked into, Thoreau’s contempt for the government does not justify his argument against organized democracy.
There are times throughout the history of the United States when its citizens have felt the need to revolt against the government. There were such cases during the time of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Henry David Thoreau, when there was unfair discrimination against the Afro-American community and Americans refusing to pay poll taxes to support the Mexican War. They used civil disobedience to eventually get legislation to stop the injustice brought against them and their nation. Civil disobedience is defined as refusal to obey civil laws or decrees, which usually takes the form of passive resistance. People practicing civil disobedience break a law because they consider the law unjust, and want to call attention to its injustice, hoping to bring about its withdrawal.
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.
“As long as the world shall last there will be wrongs, and if no man rebelled, those wrongs would last forever,” Clarence Darrow a young lawyer who has fought on the affirmative and opposing sides of some of the most controversial issues of civil disobedience. Even though Darrow defended those that were arrested during anti-war movements he also supported allied involvement in WWI. Another example of civil disobedience in which Darrow supported was the American Underground Railroad, but Darrow is not the only important figure within the vastly growing act of civil disobedience. Harriet Tubman, one of the largest heard names in the underground railway helped lead toward the abolition of slavery here in the United States. Civil disobedience is even one of the reasons that we have the freedoms this country was f...
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
For acts of civil disobedience to be justified, those acts need to be acts of protest. Thoreau desired a change ...
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
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. The militant campaign for women’s suffrage in Britain included a variety of nonviolent tactics such as boycotts, noncooperation, limited property destruction, civil disobedience, mass marches and demonstrations. The Salvadoran people have used nonviolence as one powerful and necessary element of their struggle. There is a rich tradition of nonviolent protest in this country as well, including Harriet Tubman’s Underground Railroad during the Civil War and Henry Thoreau’s refusal to pay war taxes.
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.
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.
Civil disobedience, is often the last step that people take to bring attention to a topic or subject that they feel strongly about. Every day is full of unjust rulings that may not be to everyone’s liking. Many people fight for what they believe in even if the outcome is bleak. You are your own self and you will always have your opinion that may not match all other citizen’s. Civil disobedience has escalated to a majority of non- violent protesting, although there are some cases including violence. It is a form of rebelling against what they feel is unfair or unconstitutional. Showing civil disobedience is an act that you must be willing to accept the legal consequences, which may include incarceration.
Throughout history, there are always laws and rules; however, these rules wouldn’t evolve and progress in a government if it weren’t for civil disobedience. Throughout the course of history, especially in democracies, civil disobedience has been used to change unright laws, and it gives people the freedom to stand for what they believe in. There are countless examples of people who have protested and changed the world. In a way, it also lets people stay true to what they believe is right, whether it be for religious reasons or just because of their ethics. Civil disobedience is, and always has been, a part of society; it is not only a part of government, but it is also necessary in a democracy where people have freedom of speech and other similar rights.
Civil Disobedience Civil disobedience: “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 non-violent means” (Houghton, 2000). Although this definition seems broad enough to cover any aspect of a discussion, there is still much to be said about the subject. Martin Luther King wrote a fifty paragraph letter about the timeliness and wisdom in such an action, while Hannah Arendt managed to squeeze her definition into six (extra long) paragraphs regarding Denmark and the Jews.
Throughout Thoreau’s essay, he expressed his opinions and beliefs on the importance of civil disobedience in a society. He talked about how one must use his or her moral sense, conscience, to decide what is just and unjust. From here, Thoreau urged his readers to take action, to stop the machine from continuing its lifeless duty. His call to action is if a system is prone to corruption, the people must disobey it. This means that personal endangerment may be needed to do what is right. Going against the status quo to uphold justice and ethics is the basic message behind Thoreau’s essay.