Civil Disobedience Rhetorical Analysis

1024 Words3 Pages

In 1847, Thoreau published his political essay, “Civil Disobedience,” and the controversy around the method began. Civil disobedience is a peaceful method of protest where individuals refuse to comply with certain laws because they disagree morally with something their government is partaking in and hope to spawn a change. Some people view this as a problematic way to go about encouraging change, but when someone believes that the issue is morally wrong and that it cannot be ignored, civil disobedience can often be the only way to get the attention of large governments without breaking your moral code in the process. Moreover, why should someone be forced to fall in line and support something that goes against their moral code? In the end, …show more content…

Their goal is not to harm the government but to put an end to evil and better it for everyone, so when people so strongly believe in something that they are willing to be sent to jail just to know their message has been seen, it can make onlookers start to think, is what they are fighting for really that worth it? That is when the movement can really take hold and a change can be made. Because the activists did not deny their moral code and acted civilly, more people can begin to consider their message and the movement can grow until the government has no choice but to acknowledge them. In the past, people who have attempted to use civil disobedience to send a message have been met with legal punishment, but this is unjustified. In “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” King recounts how Birmingham protesters were met by local police who allowed “angry violent dogs [to bite] six unarmed, nonviolent Negroes,” and that those who were arrested were now experiencing “inhumane treatment” (293) in the jails. People who were practicing civil disobedience and acting on their moral beliefs were met with jail …show more content…

According to John Hostetler, a scholar of Amish societies, “The Amish felt that attendance at secondary schools was contrary to their religious faith. In Wisconsin v. Yoder. the Court ruled that compulsory schooling. unjustifiably interfered with the free exercise of the Amish religion” (The Amish and the Law, 33). It took a Supreme Court case, but the ruling was that since the law went against the religious and moral beliefs of these peoples, they should not have to be controlled by these laws. The case of individuals practicing civil disobedience should be seen no differently; they see the law they are refusing to stand against as unjustifiable to their moral code and should not be forced to accept it. Practicing civil disobedience should not result in the arrest of the protesters, rather these resources should instead be used to listen to the points they are making and come to a resolution that benefits both parties. Civil disobedience is seen as controversial in democracies because it undermines the nature of democracy and there are more proper ways to go about change, some even fear that it can result in

Open Document