Analysis Of Civil Disobedience: Fantasy Mirrors

Historian, playwright, and social activist, Howard Zinn expresses, “Protest beyond the law is not a departure from democracy; it is absolutely essential to it.” Even in a democratic government, injustices and hardships often arise. As a result of these problems citizens must find the power within themselves to make a change and start protest even if methods are thought to be unjust or unlawful. The idea that protest is crucial to a functioning society can be found in, “Letter from a Birmingham Jail”, The Crucible, and Civil Disobedience, which all demonstrate the effects of conforming to society's standards and letting the oppressed continue to undergo pain and misfortune. “Letter from a Birmingham Jail”, was written by Martin Luther King jr. after he was arrested during a protest. The letter discusses his true feelings and thoughts towards members of the clergy and encourages them to support him further on his journey to end racial inequality. Henry David Thoreau was a recluse who tried to further himself from society and went as far to consider himself a martyr. In Civil Disobedience, Thoreau scolds the general population in an attempt to change their thoughts on social issues like slavery, and urge them to take a stand, and protest against the government. Around the time of the McCarthy Trials, famous playwright Arthur Miller wrote The Crucible, although the play takes place in the 1600s it is meant to relate to the McCarthy trials that happened in the 1950s. Throughout the piece Miller continuously explains what happens when a group of people blindly follow the government and refuse to take a stand. In the end, as seen in the works these influential people, as well as Howard Zinn, it is clear that without protest severe consequences occur and change does not happen. Overall Martin Luther King jr., Henry David Thoreau, and Arthur Miller all warn against the convenience of submitting to an unjust status quo, and argue that the only way to be a good citizen is to risk personal comfort and protest the injustice in defense of the greater good.

The point of the essay is to encourage the reader to act upon their opinions. Thoreau believes that simply having an opinion or casting a vote doesn’t cause change in the world, so it is important that people take the necessary steps to fix the problems they face as a society.

Reading Henry David Thoreau’s essay Civil Disobedience (1849) I find a parallelism between his thoughts and the coming of age of the United States as a nation. This piece was originally delivered as a speech before the Concord Lyceum in January of 1848 on the subject "On the Relation of the Individual to the State", and published under the title Resistance to Civil Government in Elizabeth Peabody's Aesthetic Papers, in May 1849. Thoreau wrote it from a personal experience: in 1846 he had been imprisoned for not paying his taxes as a protest for the actions of the government because he opposed slavery and the Mexican War. This essay is part of the literary period called The

Brilliantly put by what many deem to be America’s greatest president of all time, Abraham Lincoln, “Let every man remember that to violate the law is to trample on the blood of his father, and to tear the charter of his own and his children’s liberty.” Civil disobedience is defined as the refusal to comply with certain laws as a form of political protest. Although many may argue that this is the sole way to keep the government in check and to make minorities heard, rational people will realize that it is not this disrespect of the law that proves the democracy of our nation.

Throughout history protesters have said that civil disobience is the peaceful resistance of conscience. Civil disobedience was once the route to the democratic ways of our founding fathers of the United States of America. Van Dusen views civil disobedience as a physical attack to our democracy. I believe civil disobience is a negative force in our democracy that may lead to the destruction of our government because laws are disobeyed, causing new laws to come to order that follow the protester’s actions. I too have completed acts of civil disobedience, and I think my actions contribute to the negative force in a democracy. Civil disobedience began as a revolution for many rebels but eventually allowed ordinary citizens to damage the government

What is civil disobedience? Civil disobedience is the opposing of a law one finds unjust by refusing to follow it and accepting the consequences. So many people have performed acts of civil disobedience from Martin Luther King Jr. to everyday people. But what people did as civil disobedience a hundred years ago is completely different today. It is such an important part of a free society because it helps to define what a free society is, shows the true meaning of freedom of speech, and shows the government that citizens are not willing to follow an unjust law without violence.

Civil Disobedience is classified as the refusal to comply with certain laws or to pay taxes and fines, as a peaceful form of political protest. This idea was brought into focus in the essay “Resistance to Civil Government (Civil Disobedience)” by American transcendentalist Henry David Thoreau. Thoreau’s opinion on the subject was that the government was involved in everyone’s business, trying to make the country better yet they had the opposite effect. His opinion was that there is a need to prioritize one’s conscious over the dictates of law. Though there are many things that Thoreau touches on, the three main issues that he discussed were The Mexican war, slavery, and the taxes that he was protesting against.

America was founded on a principle of civil disobedience. With the signing of the Declaration of Independence, the Founding Fathers set forth a powerful precedent. The Declaration said in part, that when institutions of government becomes destructive or abusive of unalienable rights, it is the right of the people to alter it or to abolish it. The history of our nation tells us that civil disobedience is a civic responsibility, and in the alleged words of Thomas Jefferson, “Dissent is the highest form of patriotism”. From the Boston Tea Party to the Stonewall Riots, the United States Constitution and advances in racial, social, and gender equality support the idea that peaceful resistance positively contributes to a freer society, and a more equitable America.

Civil disobedience is often not the most effective, safe, or the most viable option, but what happens if it is the only option. Should people be punished for speaking their voice and correcting an injustice against them even though it is illegal? According to harvard professor Johns Rawls most acts of true civil disobedience are morally justified. Although civil disobedience being illegal, it is morally justified in a democracy because it protects the legitimacy of a democracy, gets rid of unregulated unjust rule of majority, and sometimes is the only way for a group to be heard.

I believe that peaceful resistance to laws both positively and negatively impacts a free society. Civil disobedience is the refusal to obey certain laws and government demands one considers unjust, and accepting the consequences. The first amendment prohibits Congress to enact any law that would intervene with any person's civil rights. Though everybody knows this, why are there discussions about what people can and cannot refuse to do. Some people refuse to do things because it goes against their faith, which as stated earlier is allowed according to the first amendment. While others refuse to see what is right in front of them, in the very center of the Declaration of Independence.

All over social media, especially Twitter, the Missouri State football team announced that they would not play in any further games until the current President Tim Wolfe was to resign or be fired. The situation sounds harsh but the reason for it is there has been racism around the campus and no one is doing a thing about it. This protest has made a huge impact and attention to the school as well as the President. I believe that what they were doing as a team was very powerful. If I were the president I would have done things a little differently.

Civil disobedience signifies "refusal to obey common laws with an end goal to actuate change in administrative strategy or enactment, portrayed by peaceful means", speculations on this term have been around for quite a while. Eminent figures like Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. have took up and lectured their own particular speculations on common noncompliance. The two have there claim reasons why to rehearse common defiance however there view on it is in comparative way. Mahatma Gandhi needed to prevent South African government from making all Indians enroll with Registrar of Asiatics. Martin Luther King Jr. needed to stop the isolation of the minorities individuals in southern parts of America. While both men battled for various

In the twenty first century, civil disobedience is the only way to further our constitution to fit the unique needs of our society today. The media and the Internet influence the lives of every citizen in America every day and allow people to communicate with so many that otherwise would never be able to communicate with, leading to more opportunities of disputes and disagreements. When laws were written a long time ago, the framers had no idea the world would evolve this way, so obviously the framers could not write laws that fit needs regarding the new society. When a law is not fit any more or a revision is needed, people need to somehow show how the law or revision is needed and to spread the word via social media. Peacefully disregarding

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.

Disobedience is human nature. Whether it be disobeying your parents at home or your boss in the workplace, it tends to happen throughout our lives. Is it wrong to disobey people? Not at all. Without disobedience, it wouldn’t make you a human being with free will and flaws. Disobeying is somethings everyone does-- especially Americans throughout history, and without doing it, the United States would not be the country it is today.