“You must be the change you wish to see in the world” These astonishing words that Mahatma Gandhi said made me suppose that Civil Disobedience is a Moral Responsibility of a citizen because when breaking certain laws, a citizen perhaps incorporate a good intention or a bad intention for breaking it. Citizens break the law occasionally to have their beliefs be heard so change can be assemble. Some ways that Civil Disobedience can be a Moral Responsibility would be breaking the law for the right intentions. An example of breaking the law for the right intentions could be The Salt March that Gandhi Created or, Rosa Parks standing up for her beliefs about her actions, MLK wanting equal rights with caucasian. Illegal Immigrants coming into the …show more content…
Civil Disobedience is known as breaking the law because you don 't agree with a certain law or have a peaceful protest about that law or what you believe in. An example would be when Mahatma Gandhi walked miles to the Indian ocean as the citizens gathered more and more to fight for there Indian Independence. This occasion was called the Salt March. The reason for The Salt March was a March were all the citizens from India walked with gandhi to fight back for their Independence from the British, since it was taken away from the British. Gandhi Broke The Salt Law on April 6, 1930, it sparked large as a civil disobedience against The British Raj, Salt laws, over 8000 people were jailed for supporting Gandhi 's beliefs about non violence. The reason I assume this act shows how Civil Disobedience is a Moral Responsibility of the citizen because Gandhi did what he thought was right not only for himself but for others and made a stand for the people of India and broke the law to be heard and now the country of Indian has their Independence because of his actions. Additionally this provides Moral Responsibility since Gandhi thought that Marching with the Indian people his actions would not only be the best for him but for his
Martin Luther King Jr once stated, “One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.” in his Letter from Birmingham Jail in 1963. He was invoking the principle of civil disobedience. He wasn't justifying breaking laws just because, but instead, meant that you break the law and accept your punishment, in hopes that people will come to see that the law is unethical. Civil disobedience plays an important role in how our society has been shaped up until this point.
If slaves never disobeyed the former laws defending slavery, there would still be slavery in America. As a human being, one disobeys purposely to make an impact on certain issues or events that society disagrees on and that is how progress is made. Disobedience is indeed a valuable trait that promotes social progress. In order to change or make an impact there has to be some form of disobedience.
“Individual civil disobedience was everybody's inherent right, like the right of self-defense in normal life.” - Mahatma Gandhi. Disobedience is the key to survival for society. If a civilization expects to survive happily, it must understand that it is going to have to go against its leader to ensure that the civilization gets what it wants and truly needs. Eric Fromm was a German psychoanalyst and social philosopher who wrote his eye-opening essay “Disobedience as a Psychological and Moral Problem.”
Throughout history, civil disobedience has helped societies grow and accept social reforms. The case of Martin Luther King, Jr.’s Letter from Birmingham Jail, is an important formal written statement for the need of social change. Civil disobedience has been a useful leveraging tactic in ways to draw attention to the perceived injustice. It has had huge impacts on societies in ways to create tension that
Civil Disobedience In the dictionary civil disobedience is the refusal to comply with certain laws or to pay taxes and fines, as a peaceful form of political protest, but Thoreau and Martin Luther King have their own beliefs to civil disobedience. In Thoreau’s “Civil Disobedience” he writes about the need to prioritize one’s conscience over the dictates of laws. Martin Luther King uses civil disobedience as something that effectuates change in the government. Both Thoreau and Martin Luther King has similar yet different perspectives on civil disobedience.
Civil Disobedience is a term that is held in a very stereotypical manner. When I think of the term, I think of a peaceful protest that eventually will solve the everlasting issue of governmental control regarding the people's lives. This term to me insinuates that no matter how terrible the situation at hand can be, individuals in any community like setting can ultimately be the bigger person and do no harm to anyone or anything while demoralizing a law. However in current situations, my assumption of the term has unfortunately taken a turn for the worse. Though this may be the case, I still continue to proclaim that civil disobedience sheds a positive light on communal views and how a society should handle an issue.
Both Civil Disobedience and the Gandhi article are alike based on the fact they both discuss civil disobedience, attending prison, and standing for one’s beliefs. Civil disobedience can be seen as a good thing and a bad thing depending on to what extent one is breaking the laws. Some people may break the law because they feel that it is unfair to them but others break the for the simple fact of doing what they want in order for it to benefit themselves. Laws are meant for the majority which means even if they are not pertaining to certain citizens. Thoreau targeted laws that pertained to him, Gandhi went on strike for the better of his country and people.
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.
Civil Disobedience by Thoreau is the refusal to obey government demands or commands and nonresistance to consequent arrest and punishment this had an extreme effect on Martin Luther King Jr and Mahatma Gandhi. They were fighting for different beliefs. However they both had the same believes about civil disobedience and they both end in the same place, jail. In the first place Gandhi believed that the only way to confronted injustice was with non-violent methods.
I think of law as a system we came up with in order to be able to coexist. We tend to believe that laws are incapable of erring but what happens then when these laws endanger everything you believe in. That’s why I think that sometimes is appropriate to disobey them. Civil disobedience is the active, professed refusal to obey certain laws, demands, and commands of a government as a result of moral objections, especially through passive resistance. One case in which civil disobedience would be justified is when people are discriminated against.
The central question raised by the philosophical concept of civil disobedience—the duty each citizen has to uphold the laws of the state—has been debated throughout history. In his essay On Civil Disobedience, Thoreau argued that people have a moral obligation to disobey unjust laws, posing the question of which to follow. This essay can be seen as a refutation of Socrates' claims in the Crito regarding our duty to uphold the laws of the land. The famous quote from Thoreau that emphasizes his belief that government should not meddle in people's lives more than is necessary is, "'Government is best which governs least.'" Henry David Thoreau thought that the American government was becoming corrupt and that every citizen should express their
According to Henry David Thoreau, civil disobedience is an act of willful resistance achieved by not abiding by the laws which he claimed to be hypocritical. Civil disobedience has changed societies many times by movements such as
As kids people get taught what is wrong and right from a parental figure or experiences of life teach us how to react to different situations. When we finally turn adults no one is there to remind us of what’s good and what's bad so we have to use our past experiences and our knowledge to help guide us. Each adult shapes their societies for their generation and many more generations to come. Mohandas k. Gandhi and Susan B Anthony’s speech along with the article Selma to Montgomery March on history show that civil disobedience is a moral responsibility.
Herbert J. Storing, an Associate Professor of Political Science, in “The Case Against Civil Disobedience,” writes, “One of the practical consequences of this institution [civil disobedience] is to divert disobedience and even revolution into the channel of law” (97). What Storing is saying is that civil disobedience will encourage people to break the laws and they will hide under civil disobedience to avoid the law. Also, civil disobedience might split society by creating disagreements with the people, and it could create a political instability. However, Storing fails to see that those who break an unjust law, as discussed above, do not avoid the law, in fact they show respect to the law as they willingly accept the consequences. By accepting the consequences, they show that they are not acting for their own interests but for society’s.
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. First and foremost, civil disobedience is