Was Martin Luther King Justified In Civil Disobedience

During the late 1950s and 1960s the southern states in America were segregated. Black and white people were separated from bathrooms to schools and therefore, blacks had to use their installments or they would be punished by whites. While this was happening, two African American men, Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X, wanted segregation to come to an end. So they proclaimed their ideas and started to form groups to protest against segregation in America. Consequently, Martin Luther King Jr’s civil rights philosophy made the most sense during the 1960s because integrated schools was the goal, nonviolence could have a huge impact on the enemy and nonviolence was the only practical strategy.

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

During the 1950's through the 1960's the civil rights movement was taken place in America. This movement was lead by Martin Luther King Jr. Although, what King did was amazing, I am astonished in how he achieved it. King was able to bring equality to the African American Community through non-violent protests. For a long time in my life I thought to get what you want in life you had to be behind the gun and not in front of it. But now, I see that violence only creates violence and true change comes from non-violence. I am writing this paper to argue that Martin Luther King's non-violent protest are more successful than violent protest.

Civil disobedience is a way of protesting in a peaceful manner, and willing to suffer to receive what they want. To illustrate, in an interview with Dr Martin Luther King, Jr., he was speaking about civil disobedience in a democratic society. He mentioned that if a person wants to achieve something they need to be willing to go against the law or expressing something else in a peaceful manner, which they must be willing to suffer, so that they can achieve what they want. It is clear from the above that if someone wants to express civil disobedience, they need to be willing to oppose the laws, but in a peaceful manner which may result in them suffering. Also, another example to prove how this is correct, in an articles previously read in the

Civil Disobedience is an important moral responsibility of a citizen, however it should not get to the level of illegal activity under any circumstances, because great reform can be brought peacefully not violently. In the title named "On Civil Disobedience" by Mohandas K. Ghandi once said: “No country has ever become or will ever become, happy though victory in war”(Mohandas K. Gandhi , 148). Even that long ago, when war was at high, and people embraced it, he knew that the only thing war brought was death, and depression among civilians. This method of civil disobedience has only resulted into more wars, and no real solutions. The most efficient way to the be civilly disobedient is to be peaceful, but willing to stand up for your cause.

It's easy to get angry and/or violent protests confused with civil disobedience. Many overlook the effectiveness of civil disobedience and see it as just another way to protest the government but civil disobedience has a long history. A few examples of civil disobedience include Rosa Parks’ famous refusal to move from the back of the bus in 1955; the interracial marriage between Richard and Mildred Loving in 1958; and most recently, the protest against the Dakota Access pipeline construction. In each instance, people stood up for what they thought was just and right.

Peaceful resistance is necessary for social change. The founders of the United States believed in this idea when writing the Declaration of Independence. John Locke, an enlightenment thinker who our founding fathers took ideas from, came up with the idea of the social contract. This is the agreement that a government and its people have and when citizens feel their government is wronging them then they have the right to revolt. Civil disobedience is a form of expressing the social contract and the consent of the governed. Why is it wrong to peacefully show the government why "we the people" are upset with it?

Civil disobedience is the act of disobeying governmental commands in a peaceful, non-violent, form of protest. Throughout history, peaceful protest have had a positive impact on free society. Peaceful protest have had the biggest impact during the Civil Rights Movement. During this time, many people have led non-violent protest for their rights, including well known African-American Activist, Martin Luther King Jr.. He was most famously known for his speech, I Have a Dream. In the 1950's, the Jim Crow Laws were passed. These laws allowed the dicrimination on people based on their race. Martin Luther King Jr. was a protester who fought against these laws. In his attempt to gain civil rights for blacks, he was arrested. He wrote a letter during his jail period called, the Letter from a Birmingham Jail. Even while King was being treated as a felon, he still continued his protest with the many people who read the letter. His attempt for justice was strongly successful towards the Civil Rights Act in 1964. King was assassinated four years later by James Earl Ray in 1968.

Civil disobedience can mean many things to many people. To some people it could mean a non-violent means of protesting or attempting to achieve political goals; however, in the eyes of people like Martin Luther King Jr it could be different. He stated that “one has the moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws”. Martin Luther King Jr prove this by doing many non-violent protest during his time, to fight against segregation. The meaning of civil disobedience is a bit different in Henry Thoreau’s eyes. He explains civil disobedience as “that it is more important to develop respect for the right, rather than a respect for the law, for people’s obligations are to do what's right”. There are many different people who show civil disobedience in

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.

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.

Martin Luther King Jr is the most iconic civil rights leader in history. If anyone is unsure of his significance, they could simply take a trip to Washington, D.C to view his magnificent monument. Dr. King in the 1950s and 1960s, led protests and spoke on numerous occasions about injustice and segregation within the African American community. Although he had many Anti- Racism protest, his most legendary took place in Birmingham, Alabama. While in Birmingham, Dr. King was arrested which led to him writing a detailed letter to the city clerk. In Sr. Kings letter, he called for many changes within the city, the most eye popping to me were his calls for direct action, just laws instead of unjust laws, and the role of southern churches.

Civil Disobedience is an effective method of change that has been used throughout history against unjust laws.

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.

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.