No one possesses the same morals or beliefs. Morality does not have a black and white answer because no one is exactly alike. Everyone has their own opinion and right to voice that opinion, and there are numerous ways of doing so. As a citizen with my own beliefs, I believe I have the right to violate laws if I feel morally obligated to. The amount of progress that America has made in such a short amount of time is astonishing. In some ways it seems as if the only way to make any headway is to speak up. If I was morally opposed to a policy or law I would go against it due to its effectiveness, individualism, and past history of the world that has made immense progress.
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 ...
... middle of paper ...
... for your beliefs, then you are more willing to be fully committee to your cause. The progress that several individuals made was because of their nonviolent protests. Civil disobedience made a big difference in the history of the world.
Works Cited
Curtis, Jerry. "The Role of Nelson Mandela in the Fight against Apartheid in South Africa." Humanities. Humanities, n.d. Web. 06 Dec. 2013.
"Gandhi Leads Civil Disobedience." History.com. A&E Television Networks, n.d. Web. 05 Dec. 2013.
Starr, Kayla. "The Role of Civil Disobedience in Democracy." The Role of Civil Disobedience in Democracy. Civil Liberties, n.d. Web. 06 Dec. 2013.
Thoreau, Henry David. "Civil Disobedience." By Henry David Thoreau. n.d. Web. 06 Dec. 2013.
Walden, J Thomas . "Literary Analysis the Ideal of Individualism in Henry David Thoreau’s Walden." Humanities. Humanities, n.d. Web. 06 Dec. 2013.
When a citizen abides by the social contract, they initially agree to enter and be a participant of a civil society. The contract essentially binds people into a community that exists for mutual preservation. When a person wants to be a member of civil society, they sacrifice the physical freedom of being able to do whatever they please, but they gain the civil freedom of being able to think and act rationally and morally. Citizens have what is called prima facie obligation to obey the laws of a relatively just state. A prima facie duty is an obligation that we should try to satisfy but that can be overridden on occasion by another, stronger duty. When it comes to prima facie duty, this duty can be outweighed by a higher order obligation or
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
In 1968, Martin Luther King Jr passed away from a sniper’s bullet. He gave us thirteen years of nonviolent protest during the civil rights movement of the 1950’s. Before I can give my opinion on the history of race relations in the United States since King’s assassination in 1968 strengthened or weakened his arguments on the necessity and value of civil disobedience? You should know the meaning of civil disobedience. The word civil has several definitions. “The one that is intended in this case is "relating to citizens and their interrelations with one another or with the state", and so civil disobedience means "disobedience to the state". Sometimes people assume that civil in this case means "observing accepted social forms; polite" which would make civil disobedience something like polite, orderly disobedience. Although this is an acceptable dictionary definition of the word civil, it is not what is intended here. This misinterpretation is one reason the essay (by Henry David Thoreau that was first published in 1849) is sometimes considered to be an argument for pacifism or for exclusively nonviolent resistance”.
In response to the annexation of Texas in 1845 by the United States, Henry David Thoreau's wrote the essay, Civil Disobedience. Thoreau felt that this purely economic move by the United States expedited the Civil War, which he, and many Americans, disapproved of. In his essay, Thoreau argues that government should not be in control of the people and that the people should be able to rule themselves freely however they please. In addition, he clearly states and points out that in many instances it is best when individual rights take priority over state authority.
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.
From the onset of man fighting for freedom or his beliefs, the question has always been whether one person can make a difference using words rather than wars. Philosophically, the concept of civil disobedience would appear to be an ineffective weapon against political injustice; history however has proven it to repeatedly be one of the most powerful weapons of the common man. Martin Luther King Jr. looked at the way African Americans were treated in the United States and saw an inequality. By refusing to pay his taxes and subsequently being imprisoned for a night, Henry David Thoreau demonstrated his intolerance for the American government. Under British rule, India remained oppressed until Mohandas Gandhi, with his doctrine of non-violence lead the country to freedom.
Fender, Stephen. Introduction. Walden. By Henry David Thoreau. New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 1997. Print.
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.
In the chapter “Civil Disobedience” by Professor David S. Meyer, he talks about many different movements and social groups that had made an impact within society. He goes over the different areas that civil disobedience covers, and gives detailed examples about how civil disobedience leads to change of some sort. Meyer explains that in order to fully understand what civil disobedience is, it has to be looked at on a different level. Many people have their own interpretation of what they think civil disobedience is. It is seen as challenging public authority, and most of the time leading to an uproar of different groups participating in civil disobedience. When social movements take action into commencing civil disobedience, they do it
“ 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
From boycotts to pamphlets, speeches to marches and tea parties to sit-ins: there are multitudes of examples of non-violent protests that have led to positive changes in our country. Some of these have even set precedents for other countries to strive for. Some, unfortunately, turned violent and as Jefferson warned us unsuccessful rebellions usually results is a loss of rights for those who protested. I found it interesting that Jefferson said essentially that a little revolution is worth it however: “If the happiness of the mass of the people can be secured at the expense of a little tempest now and then, or even of a little blood, it will be a precious purchase” (3). While events like Shays Rebellion and John Brown’s raid, ended in bloodshed, and alerted our country, I personally believe more in the value of peaceful protest like in the influential writings of Thomas Paine or in Stowe’s Uncle Tom’s
Civil disobedience, although an often positive thing, can have very negative impacts on a free society. Peaceful protests often only contain people with the same opinion. This can make it
I believe that civil disobedience has a positive impact on a free society. The opposition of controversial and possibly immoral laws provides a voice for the people and allows for change to occur. Civil disobedience makes us question the norms of our society in a critical analysis of our system. I also feel that those whom practice civil disobedience have a strong sense of self and social conscious. Civil disobedience has been a part of American history since the Revolutionary War. From the Civil Rights Movement, draft dodgers during the Vietnam War, protestors in the Women’s Suffrage Movement, and the Civil War. Civil disobedience has been a force of major change throughout our nation.
“Be the change that you want to see in this world.” - Gandhi. Gandhi is saying that if you want something to make a change, then you have to do something about it and fight for what you believe in. I believe that civil disobedience is an effective method of social change. Civil disobedience is breaking a law in a peaceful, non-violent way. Some people believe that civil disobedience isn't an effective method because it doesn't always work, can create time in jail, and can take a very long time. One reason why civil disobedience is effective to create social change is because it is a legal way to protest. Also, civil disobedience has the power to create a change in society, law, and government. Lastly, civil disobedience draws attention to
I think civil disobedience is an effective means to creating change. Civil disobedience gets the message across and it can bring about change. Violence cannot fix any problem, as it leads to more violence and more hatred. On the other hand, civil disobedience is a way to show the enemy that you do not hate them, but you hate what they are doing or claiming. In addition, civil disobedience shows the opponent that you are willing to let them do anything to you, as long as there is a change brought about for the better. Also, another benefit of using civil disobedience is that people who practice it are showing that they are serious about what they want. They are prepared to go to any extremes of listening to the other party, and only for their own beliefs and against what they know is wrong. This can send a very powerful response, and bring about a positive change.