Disobedience In Society

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.

Erich Fromm’s essay “Disobedience as a Psychological and Moral Problem” suggests that humankind’s evolution has, and continues to rely on man’s capability to exercise disobedience. While discussing the positions of disobedience being considered a vice, and obedience being a virtue, Fromm reflects upon the history of Adam and Eve believing that “eating the forbidden fruit” was man’s first act of disobedience. This is the point that broke the bond between man and nature requiring man to be dependant upon his own powers, while rewarding him with his “complete” humanity, freedom,

If we take a closer look at civil disobedience, we can better understand what it means, its goals, and its outcomes. Civil disobedience predominantly exists as direct and non-violent government defiance. Instead of voicing an opinion with a vote or a simple conversation, civil disobedience stands up for what is right using an individual’s whole influence. Therefore, some sacrifices regarding the legality of actions are made in order to preserve the integrity of the mission. In other words, why should a protester follow the law that they are trying to alter? That doesn’t make much sense, therefore civil disobedience allows unjust laws to be broken for the greater good. This method is very effective if, for example, a minority is attempting to

There are many civil disobedient that have shown impatience with the process of democracy. The Bill of Rights provides many opportunities for demonstrations to stimulate sentiment, to dramatize issues, and to cause change. These rights are subject to limitations of time and place so as to secure the rights of others. Also, the demonstrations must not be disguised as a right because it defeats its purpose. As the civil disobedient violates a law, and voluntarily submits to its sanctions, he breaches the law but not the peace. To indulge civil disobedience is to bring on anarchy, and the permissive arbitrariness of anarchy is less tolerable than the repressive arbitrariness of tyranny. Too often the license of liberty is followed by the loss of liberty. The disobedient act of conscience doesn’t enhance democracy; it gradually destroys democracy. The non-violent acts of disobedience will give rise to more civil riot. Van Dusen said, even the noblest act of civil disobedience assaults the rule of law. Although limited to method, motive and objective, it has the effect of inducing others to engage in different forms of law breaking characterized by methods unsanctioned and condemned by classic theories of law violation. Once the civil disobedient disobeys one law, he repeatedly subverts all

It is imperative to understand that the United States of America was born through acts of civil disobedience. And because American freedoms are constantly in danger of being encroached on, it is also important that citizens are aware of the worth that civil disobedience can possess. Civil disobedience is when a person or people refuse to obey a demand or restriction by the state that conflicts with higher law and conscience. The act requires that the disobedient one accept whatever may be the consequence of refusing, whether it be imprisonment, moral condemnation, fines, even perhaps death. It should be done when one’s spiritual searching and sense of rightness permit no other response. (Day 65: Disobedient Friends – Quakers and Civil Disobedience) There have been many instances of civil disobedience throughout American history which have had a powerful influence on the legal system and society as a whole.

While growing up, our parents taught us what was right and what was wrong based on their beliefs and views. When we were younger, we were taught to follow and obey those who were older than us and possessed a higher authoritative status. One’s reasoning for being obedient includes: religious beliefs, background, and work ethics. Civil disobedience played a large role in America. Creating protests, riots, and sit-ins, America had many examples of disobedience. In America, we value our rights as citizens and individuals. We have the right to protest as stated in the first amendment of the United States Constitution, which is called Freedom of Speech. According to the Webster Dictionary, civil disobedience is said to be “the refusal to obey government demands or commands and nonresistance to consequent arrest and punishment.” Citizens are willing to accept the legal consequences associated with their disobedient actions. How does the law respond to people who engage in civil disobedience? Fining and jail time are the legal consequences enforced by authority but also there is a trend of change. I believe civil disobedience is justified simply by your own personal beliefs and the rights you attain as a citizen. The law is the law, if you disobey; the authoritative figure is responsible for giving a consequence.

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.

Through the libertarian principle of “non-aggression” people who act out against the government accepting the legal ramifications of their actions inspires others to cry out against tyranny. In The Case against Civil Disobedience the author implores civil disobedience “is an altogether secondary and derivative matter, scarcely capable of being put in a form that is not contradictory, shallow and feeble guide to action.” Was demanding the Fifteenth Amendment be upheld in society to allow for the African American vote and women’s suffrage shallow? America is a country where “all men are created equal”, the citizens not being able to exercise their right to vote freely is contradictory to the original value of the country. Martin Luther King Jr. while in jail wrote “In any nonviolent campaign there are four basic steps: collection of the facts to determine whether injustices exist; negotiation; self purification; and direct action.” King was arrested because the local court ruled his protesting was illegal in the city of Birmingham. The First Amendment of the Bill of Rights clearly states, “Congress shall make no law [...] abridging the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” This process to civil disobedience is still being used today. The Dakota Pipeline protests are legal, however 74 people have been arrested for setting up an illegal camp, since it was on private property. These people view the sacred lands, the purity of the environment is more important than using natural resources. Their actions on paper are illegal, but by following King’s process of a “nonviolent campaign” illustrate peaceful civil disobedience protects free society from the government’s hold on laws and

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.

All across history, humanity has participated in the act of civil disobedience as a means to express to a higher power their disagreement with a series of actions or legislation. Civil disobedience is the act of deliberately disobeying one or more laws in order to advocate for change (Lefkowitz 204). Approaching civil disobedience in a systematic manner is necessary, however, to ensure people’s safety and to be as civilly responsible as possible. The first step is to be patient and see of the issue will take care of itself. Upon determination that the issue is one that is progressing rather than digressing, the second step is to begin negotiation. Should negotiation not be successful, demonstrations may become part of the third step. Finally,

In history, man has always been known to disobey. As much as this sounds like a negative thing, it has actually led to much progress.

Civil disobedience isn’t uncommon in America, but the modern idea of civil disobedience has become flawed and distorted from its original intent. Currently, there are thousands of causes and ideals that are spastically flung around and just as soon forgotten. This is because the guise of civil disobedience is often abused by people simply to attract publicity. These methods of claimed civil disobedience often do little to nothing in working towards the goal that they claim to stand for, or their intensions are vague and unclear. For example, in the news, the most popular recent controversial example of civil disobedience is the kneeling during the national anthem before a football game. At its manifestation, this movement was intended to protest the inequalities in the treatment of races by the police especially in Chicago. This effectively accomplished nothing. It raised awareness but the majority of intelligent civilians were already aware of the inequalities. The flaw of this example is that the form of disobedience

Human nature encompases a series of traits that have been added to as history continues; these traits are what entitle people to who they are. Common sense seems to dictate that helpfulness, kindness, and greed would be ways to describe human nature, but another would be disobedience. An Irish author, Oscar Wilde, once voiced his view on human nature with regards to disobedience. Wilde claims “disobedience, in the eyes of anyone who has read history, is man’s original virtue”. History, where lessons are learned and instances of background and reasoning occur, is how society has grown and survived for this long. We must think of disobedience as another way to stretch a situation into a solution even if it means extending boundaries.

person is not they will continue to obey because at least this way they feel as if they are a

Civil disobedience is tantamount to raising the red signal against democracy when the latter deviates from the right course in accordance with the views of exponents. It can be considered as a kind of opposition or rather a very advanced shape of political and social resistance. Civil disobedience is not a commonplace form of political opposition, not because it is a negative form of political resistance, but because it occurs very rarely. It can be regarded as the most sophisticated case of the embodiment of democracy. Therefore, it is difficult if not impossible to imagine a democracy without the freedom of opposition including the right of civil disobedience. Freedom of