Civil Disobedience In Democracy

The civil disobedience is to describe when the public refusal to obey the law or commands of a government that violate one's personal principals without the act of violence, as an effort to induce a change in governmental policy or legislation. The purpose is to force concessions from the government or occupying power. For example, if a group of people refuses to pay taxes as a peaceful way to express disapproval of those laws they disagree with or taxes. Civil disobedience may be appropriate when a democratically elected government uses its power to discriminate against their race, sex, religion or skin color. In such a situation, people would most liking object the Laws and start a protest to show they want to be treated equally. Another point is that civil disobedience is a beneficial behavior in bringing about stability to this society. In fact, Martin Luther King Jr is the one of the most associated with nonviolent civil disobedience he saw color people getting treated unjustly and getting prosecuted because of their skin color. Another example would be the STC protest that occurred this month; six people refused to get off the bus keeping police on the scene for five hours till one in the morning. The six people got arrested but later they were released.

Civil disobedience has been discerned in numerous time periods of American history. The definition of disobedience can be interpreted when one or a group prioritizes their conscience of their beliefs over the dictation of laws through rebellion. Notable historical events of slavery and independence has been marked with the disobedience of government laws. Even though the disobedience of societal laws can undermine the corruption of the government, disobedience has undeniably steer societal progress.

As Americans, we are entitled to our right to speak out for ourselves, guaranteed to us by the First Amendment. We are entitled to hold these peaceful protests and write non-threatening letters to our representatives. As Americans, we have the right to have an influence on how the government conducts itself. These views bring me to believe that the only way to maintain our free society is to practice civil disobedience.

In the Crito by Plato, Socrates argues against civil disobedience, seeing it as an unjust act. Contrasting this view, Martin Luther King argues for civil disobedience against unjust laws, and seeing it as a responsibility of citizens. Civil disobedience is the active refusal to obey certain law, commands or requests of the government. I will argue that the view of Socrates is superior to the view of Martin Luther King on the justness of civil disobedience. Using the argument against harm, I will show that even if a law is viewed as unjust, you must not repay an evil with another evil, as evident in the Crito while contrary to ideas presented by MLK. I will also show that civil disobedience is an action in which it is probable that anarchy will

It ensures that one's voice is heard without throwing a temper tantrum or bringing on the destruction of other things or people. And it also ensures that we do not go on silently, always bitterly muttering to ourselves about how we wish things would change, but never gathering up enough courage or motivation to actually change these things. Civil Disobedience is an act of peaceful disagreement, a protest which does no harm to others but which one hopes will bring about a change which one believes is good. Now as far as the impact that civil disobedience has on a free society, I believe that it is a positive one. My reasons being that civil disobedience encourages one to use their rights to voice their opinions in a non-violent way. And yes, it has and will land some people in jail, but no one is being hurt by this. In fact it would be more harmful to society as a whole to simply sit back and hope for the best. It also does not encourage people to become harmful of others, but it does encourage them to stand up for what they believe in, which is the very thing which this country was built on. The Boston Tea Party was a form of civil disobedience which helped to start this

People's justification to engage in civil disobedience rests on the unresponsiveness that their engagement to oppose an unjust law receives. People who yearn for a change in a policy might sometimes find themselves in a dead end because their “attempts to have the laws repealed have been ignored and legal protests and demonstrations have had no success” (Rawls 373). What Rawls says is that civil disobedience is a last option to oppose an unjust law; therefore, providing civil disobedients with a justification for their cause. Civil disobedience is the spark of light that people encountered at the dead end and they hope that this spark of light will illuminate to show that an unjust law should not exist at all. Martin Luther King, Jr, in his “Letter from

Everyone has the same basic human rights in a democery society.Everyone has the same basic human rights in a democratic society. If we don 't protect human rights, everyone wont be equal.

Thousands of dedicated people march the streets of a huge city, chanting repetitively about needing a change. They proudly hold vibrant signs and banners as they fight for what they believe in. Expressions of determination and hope are visibly spread across their faces. These people aren’t using weapons or violence to fight for their ideas; simply, they are using civil disobedience. Civil disobedience is nonviolent resistance to a government’s law in seek of change. Civil disobedience is an effective way to bring about change because it is a harmless way of fighting an unjust law or idea, it can educate people about the cause, and it has been successful many times in history.

Peaceful resistance is a necessity and an integral part of a society because without the ability to peacefully resist the society is not truly free. The use of peaceful resistance has been a common way of expressing a person or group of peoples ideals since Henry David Thoreau wrote his essay called Civil Disobedience in 1849. Thoreau was a famous American writer and philosopher, and the essay talks of how he believes people need to put one’s morals and ideas over laws they may find unjust (Saxby). This is the basis and definition of what peaceful resistance is. The United States Constitution puts emphasis on the individual and if an individual believes in an ideal that goes against a law, they should be able to peacefully resist, especially

Not only does it encourage individuals to question authority no matter how high the power, but it also elucidates how man does not simply take what is told them as a primary source. They choose to dig deeper to find out the true value of what believe needs to be protested against or not. Henry David Thoreau explains that in reality "It is not a man's duty, as a matter of course, to devote himself to the eradication of any, even the most enormous, wrong; he may still properly have other concerns to engage him; but it is his duty, at least, to wash his hands of it, and, if he gives it no thought longer, not to give it practically his support. ". Through this idea, Henry indicates how individuals genuinely wish to be involved in politics. They choose not believe that the government hold the people's best intentions at heart, and choose to investigate the debates at hand on their own. Through this, the evolution of man also implies that we must not believe everything that is told and to question authority. Also, civil disobedience keeps people cognizant of what issues are going on around them and how they are

I believe that civil disobedience is good for the advancement of the American society. This a simple fact which has been proven many times by history all around the world. A few examples of important historical participants and leaders in civil disobedience include Mohandas Gandhi, Susan B. Anthony, Martin Luther King Jr., Rosa Parks and much more. Mohandas Gandhi was an Indian man who spent his life protesting the unjust anti-Indian law in Britan using, you guessed it, civil disobedience. Most importantly on March 30, 1930, when he lead a defiance march to the sea. His efforts caused India to gain its independence in 1947. This happened in the very year he went on a hunger strike. Susan B. Anthony was one of the world most famous suffragettes in American history.

I consider civil disobedience to be an easily-ignored pillar upon which our democracy was founded. In fact we are only established as a nation now because our founding fathers engaged in civil disobedience themselves. We were in a “social contract” of sorts with Great Britain and when we felt that they had not upheld their part of the contract (they did not allow us to create courts to maintain order, or to create a navy to defend ourselves, or to sustain our economy due to an inability to trade with any other countries), Thomas Jefferson concluded that it was our not only our right, but also our duty to break away. And it was Thomas Jefferson that combined all of the works of the great thinkers before him such as Thomas Hobbes, John Locke

In many instances, civil disobedience has proved successful. In the mid-1800s, Henry David Thoreau, in response to taxes supporting slavery during that time, decided to become a “tax rebel” and not pay his capital tax. Thoreau was then jailed for a night and inspired

Some people might think of destruction or immorality when the words “civil disobedience” come up, but in reality, it’s quite the opposite. Many times in the past, civil disobedience has lead to social reform and building up a better future. It’s a form of resistance that commonly centers on a person’s morals as it’s basis. It’s a powerful tool in protests that has been used many times in the past and continues to be utilized today. Civil disobedience and breaking the law to some extent go hand in hand, which brings up the question, is it justifiable? Breaking the law for a cause is definitely justifiable, if that cause is being pushed by people working for a greater good.

All human beings know about civil disobedience, some have even witnessed it throughout history. Civil disobedience is the act to fight for your rights. But there are different kinds of civil disobedient acts. One way is to simply oppose the law without breaking it. One could also break the regulation in order to make a difference. Now, I would say breaking the law is a preeminent and more potent civil disobedience.