Why Is Civil Disobedience Bad

534 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Civil disobedience by thoreau essay

Civil Disobedience
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.
In 1966 Muhammad Ali was arrested for refusing to be drafted to the war. His boxing license was stripped from him and his boxing …show more content…

This is a reason why most people believe that civil disobedience is bad. Civil disobedience is not dangerous because once someone breaks a law and harms others then it is not civil disobedience. Civil disobedience will be peaceful and will not intentionally harm anyone. Thoreau explained in his essay that he “asked for, not at once no government, but at once a better government.” This shows that in civil disobedience is only used to change government laws for the benefit of the people. Thoreau also says “I think that we should be men first, and subjects afterwards.” He believes the law made them subjects and he wanted all men to truly be free, so with civil disobedience he did show he disagreed with the law. With civil disobedience people may show how unjust the laws are because people were being arrested for not

Show More
Related

  • Rhetorical Analysis Of David Thoreau's Civil Disobedience To The Mexican War

    1646 Words  | 4 Pages

    In 1848, David Thoreau addressed and lectured civil disobedience to the Concord Lyceum in response to his jail time related to his protest of slavery and the Mexican War. In his lecture, Thoreau expresses in the beginning “That government is best which governs least,” which sets the topic for the rest of the lecture, and is arguably the overall theme of his speech. He chastises American institutions and policies, attempting to expand his views to others. In addition, he advances his views to his audience by way of urgency, analyzing the misdeeds of the government while stressing the time-critical importance of civil disobedience. Thoreau addresses civil disobedience to apprise the people the need for a civil protest to the unjust laws created

    Read More

  • Thoreau and King, Jr.

    680 Words  | 2 Pages

    Thoreau wrote "Civil Disobedience" in 1849 after spending a night in the Walden town jail for refusing to pay a poll tax that supported the Mexican War. He recommended passive resistance as a form of tension that could lead to reform of unjust laws practiced by the government. He voiced civil disobedience as "An expression of the individual's liberty to create change" (Thoreau 530). Thoreau felt that the government had established order that resisted reform and change. "Action from principle, the perception and the performance of right, changes things and relations; it is essentially revolutionary" (Thoreau 531).

    Read More

  • The Pros And Cons Of Civil Disobedience

    705 Words  | 2 Pages

    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

    Read More

  • Transcendentalism In Henry David Thoreau's Civil Disobedience

    1620 Words  | 4 Pages

    The two main things that Thoreau argues for in “Civil Disobedience” are the idea of a limited government and the individual’s right to resist an unjust government. By following their “Manifest Destiny”, American settlers were ignoring the rights of the land’s original owners and inhabitants. This can be observed in the bloody conflict between America and Mexico, the Mexican-American War, which ended in the annexation of Texas and Mexico losing a lot of its American territory. The war was even more offensive in Thoreau’s eyes because it allowed Texas to be a slave state.

    Read More

  • Thoreau’s Act of Civil Disobedience

    522 Words  | 2 Pages

    For acts of civil disobedience to be justified, those acts need to be acts of protest. Thoreau desired a change ...

    Read More

  • Henry David Thoreau's Views

    1203 Words  | 3 Pages

    According to the American heritage dictionary “Civil Disobedience” is 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. In “Civil Disobedience” Thoreau stated “That government is best which governs least, and I would like to see it acted up more rapidly and systematically” (pg227). Thoreau did not believe that the government should have the final say on everything. The citizens of this country should have rights in the decision making process and the opportunity to think for themselves also. Thoreau says that government does not, in fact, achieve that with which we credit it: it does not keep the country free, settle the West, or educate. Rather, these achievements come from the character of the American people, and they would have been even more successful in these endeavors had government been even less involved.

    Read More

  • Civil Obedience And Henry David Thoreau's Civil Disobedience

    1338 Words  | 3 Pages

    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

    Read More

  • The Moratorium March

    763 Words  | 2 Pages

    Civil disobedience is a refusal to follow certain rules and is usually shown through a peaceful form of protest. The Moratorium March was somewhat a civil disobedience event because although it started as a peaceful anti- war movement, violence was unavoidable. The vast majority of demonstrators were peaceful; however, a conflict broke out at the Justice Department when demonstrator’s started throwing rocks and bottles, which the police responded to with tear gas canisters (Leen). According to Henry David Thoreau’s statement in his essay “Civil Disobedience,” “If the machine of government…is of such a nature that it requires yo...

    Read More

  • Rawls and King on Civil Disobedience

    773 Words  | 2 Pages

    In the Theory of Justice by John Rawls, he defines civil disobedience,” I shall begin by defining civil disobedience as a public, nonviolent, conscientious yet political act contrary to law usually done with the aim of bringing about a change in the law or policies of the government”.

    Read More

  • The Pros and Cons of Civil Disobedience

    1017 Words  | 3 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Civil Disobedience as a Method of Protest

    875 Words  | 2 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Letter To Birmingham Jail, By Henry David Thoreau

    426 Words  | 1 Pages

    The yearning for freedom eventually manifests itself, and that is what has happened to the American Negro.” This quote directly supports civil disobedience leading to successful change. On the other hand, while MLK calls for civil disobedience, Thoreau explains why it is useful. To make sure his point is clear, he explains how civil disobedience is only beneficial when it is necessary as he says ““I do not wish to quarrel with any man or nation. I do not wish to split hairs, to make fine distinctions, or set myself up as better than my neighbors. I seek rather, I may say, even an excuse for conforming to the laws of the land.” By saying this he shows that he believes in civil defence only when there is an injustice in the system that calls for it. More specifically, to explain how the people have the right to disobey a system in order to make change Thoreau says “Can there not be a government in which majorities do not virtually decide right and wrong, but conscience?- in which majorities decide only those questions to which the rule of expediency is applicable?” With this being said, he is saying that the people who are being oppressed have every right to stand up and make change even by being

    Read More

  • Civil Disobedience Is An Unjust Law

    761 Words  | 2 Pages

    “Must the citizen ever for a moment, or in the least degree, resign his conscience to the legislation? Why has every man a conscience, then? I think that we should be men first, and subjects afterward. It is not desirable to cultivate a respect for the law, so much as for the right.” Those words by Henry David Thoreau encapsulate that civil disobedience positively impacts a free society because it promotes protection of natural rights. This is proven with the following syllogism. First, governmental protection of natural rights is essential for a free society. Second, civil disobedience promotes governmental protection of natural rights. Finally, therefore, civil disobedience positively impacts a free society.

    Read More

  • Muhammad Ali Research Paper

    1050 Words  | 3 Pages

    Also, when Ali was convicted of draft dodging he was stripped of all his titles, his license to box in New York State, and almost his

    Read More

  • Civil Disobedience: The Boston Tea Party

    543 Words  | 2 Pages

    Depending on the situation, civil disobedience can either negatively impact or positively impact a free society. For example, the Boston Tea Party, which occurred in 1773, was a form of civil disobedience. The Boston Tea Party was a protest against having to pay taxes. A group of just over 100 people participated in this act in Boston, gathering together on ships, and protesting by simply throwing tea overboard. Hence the name, "Boston Tea Party." This act of civil obedience didn't necessarily disturb anyone's peace, but it did start a revolution, and it did cause thousands of dollars in damage, in their currency, at the time. According to the online article, "Boston Tea Party Facts," the damage that was done would be worth around $1,700,000 in today's United States currency. In that case, the Boston Tea Party in fact would have negatively impacted the "free society." Only due to the fact that it caused quite a bit of debt in their time.

    Read More

More about Why Is Civil Disobedience Bad

Open Document