Does peaceful resistance to laws positively or negatively impact a free society? To answer this question effectively we must analyze both sides of the table, to ensure that the correct decision is made. First, let us look at the positive impact to a free society. If someone disagrees with how something is being run, be it because of the fact that it violates a constitutional right or process, then the process of peaceful resistance is very essential to preserving the functionality of a free society. As John Cassidy says "he (who) uncovered questionable activities that those in power would rather have kept secret. That's the valuable role that whistle-blowers play in a free society..." This explains why these whistle-blowers are so important …show more content…
If an individual has access to the inner workings of the government and said individual does not agree with the process of the government due to it violating their own personal morals, and decides to distribute such information to rally support for their actions as well as against the government, which in doing so leads to the threat of even deaths of government operatives, start protests against the government, to change the process and to ensure it aligns with their moral code, can cause a very negative impact on the free society. As Jeffrey Toobin says "The American government, and its democracy, are flawed institutions. But our system offers legal options to disgruntled government employees and contractors. They can take advantage of federal whistle-blower laws; they can bring their complaints to Congress; they can try to protest within the institutions where they work." This emphasizes the importance of some secrets remain just that, secrets. If said secrets were common knowledge then they could be utilized to preform unconstitutional acts, even put lives of innocents in danger, for some effect or personal gain.This would remove the process of government and cause a form of free society to be ineffective and
Peaceful resistances to unjust laws both positively and negatively impact a free society. After there has been enough national attention over these protests, large opposition can ensue violence. No matter how careful, meaningful, or powerful the peaceful protestors are there has been a backlash of violence from many different parties. Civil disobedience has been a predominant way minorities have fought for their rights. Women and African Americans have been protesting since the beginning of the United States through civil disobedience.
unjust” (Banks 1). “Principle four – accept suffering without retaliation for the sake of the cause to achieve the goal – this characterizes that nonviolent resistance is a willingness to accept suffering without retaliation, to accept blows from the opponent without striking back; accept the violence, if necessary; but to never inflict violence on another” (Banks 2). “Principle five – avoid internal violence of the spirit, as well as, external physical violence – a nonviolent resister not only refuses to fight or shoot his opponent, but he also refuses to hate him; at the center of nonviolence stands the principle of love for one another” (Banks 2). “Principle six – the universe is on the side of justice – this basic fact pertaining to nonviolent resistance is that it is based on the conviction that the universe is on the side of justice which is positive peace, consequently, the believer in nonviolence has a deep faith in the future and therefore, can accept suffering without retaliation. There is a creative force in this universe, that by whatever name we decide to call it, it works to bring the disconnected aspects of reality into a harmonious whole; a universal wholeness for each of us to share with one another and that nonviolence is both the means and the end” (Banks 3). Dr. King also had a couple of
Though, I feel strongly that no law should be broken, I do see purpose in the peaceful disobedience provided you are willing to suffer the consequences. Therefore I would have to agree that it positively impacts a free society. We are all under strict laws and it is our freedom to either obey or not, with the latter resulting in consequence. Take for instance, the protest against injustice, the harmless act that took place in the Negro movement with Martin L. King. Not to mention the fact pointed out in Arguments against Civil Disobedience, sums up the fact that if we do not argue a point, another point would never be made. Not all situations are to be defended but some should. It is like a growth among us, which completely leads me to disagree with (as mentioned in the attacks), self-law making. There must be a form of discussion taking place (within certain levels of citizens) in order to advance in changes to laws as they were originally written. That is what makes us a free society.
Peaceful resistance to laws has a positive impact on society. Because it's not harming anybody and they're standing up for what they believe in and they have equal rights to every one else. One example was Rosa Parks. At the time, blacks had to go to the back of the bus and one day she decided she was going to stay in the front of the bus because she was tired. She was also making a statement that people should be able to sit wherever they choose to.
Peaceful resistance to laws positively impacts our free society. It allows us to make our voices heard and spread a message if there is a law that we find is either unfair or goes against our protected freedoms. Peaceful resistance has helped our country grow on multiple occasions. It has always been a part of our countries history and is well protected by our First Amendment rights. Due to this, There is little to know doubt that peaceful resistance has positively effected the lives of many Americans.
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.
Does peaceful resistance to laws positively or negatively impact a free society? In your answer, incorporate the principles and specific examples (including current events) that support your conclusion.
Peaceful resistance to laws positively impacts a free society because it arouses concern and opens the eyes of law makers and others who are obliged to follow them.
Peaceful resistance to laws positively impact a free society, because all committed acts of civil disobedience, all but in very different cases. Have shown a positive impact amongst the people by proving to everyone and the government that every U.S citizen has the freedom to fight for their rights and freedom and not let anyone disrespect their human morals.
In my opinion, peaceful resistance to laws positively impacts a free society. The whole point of a "free society" is where the people have a say and are able to stand up for what they believe in. If a law seems unjust to them, they should have the right to protest it or disobey it, as long as it is done peacefully. Martin Luther King is one of the most influential leaders in history. Without his non-violent protests and civil disobedience, the unjust laws of segregation might still be in place. One of my favorite quotes from MLK's "Letter From Birmingham Jail" is when
Peaceful resistance to laws positively impacts a free society. Peaceful resistance to allowing voices to be heard. It also allows people to fight for the rights that they believe in. In some cases it is a fight for equality and in other cases liberty. These are just two of the reasons why people participate in peaceful resistance to laws.
Does peaceful resistance to laws positively or negatively impact a free society? I think that peaceful resistance positively impacts a free society. Many people used civil disobedience to prove a point in a situation that they believe needs to be changed. There are people such as Henry Throeau, Gandhi, Martin Luther King and Rosa Parks. Many people say that Henry Thoreau is the backbone to civil disobedience. Thoreau was arrested in 1846 for refusing to pay six years of poll taxes in protest of slavery and the Mexican American War. Thoreau believed that individuals could be free only if their actions were true to their own beliefs, with or without the support or approval of the community. Thoreau inspired Gandhi first and then MLK to follow, but these two leaders are responding to more pressing circumstances and responding as members of subjugated classes of people sharply defined by the social markers of race and ethnicity. Another important person who used civil disobedience is the same person who said "You must be the change you wish to see in this world" -Mahatma Gandhi. Gandhi used nonviolent civil disobedience to protest racial pass laws in South Africa and in India's Independence struggle, including the famous Salt
Peaceful resistance to laws positively impacts a free society. America itself was built on the concept of adapting to meet the changing needs of society; its government outline was created so that the people could change laws when they needed to be changed, although the process is slow so as to avoid laws that are poorly thought out or do not represent the views of most American citizens. At several points in American history, there are times where only a few groups were fairly represented in government, and therefore, the needs of all the people were not represented accurately and we could not get the change we needed to happen. This is where civil disobedience comes into play - by peacefully and respectfully disobeying unjust laws that oppress American citizens, we get the attention of government officials who can do something to change the laws and right the wrongs that have been committed. Some well-known examples of this are the Women’s Suffrage movement and the Civil Right movement, as well as some recent examples, such as the Standing Rock protesters. By using peaceful protesting, we draw attention to injustices and garner the support and strength to say “no more”.
Peaceful resistance and civil disobedience are acts that can shape a nation. These acts are used to peacefully protest laws or recent events that were unjust or proper justice was not given. Sometimes these acts are required in order for a change to be made to an unjust law or event. Often times these acts can be seen as bad or violent, but they aren't. As long as they are peaceful, these acts are not bad. Peaceful acts of protest invoke thoughtful consideration of the event or law the protest is calling attention to. In the end, civil disobedience and peaceful resistance can positively impact the nation in which they are being demonstrated in.
Peaceful resistance to laws positively impacts a free society. Rather than having violent movements and harming citizens, it is better to peacefully resist. Once a violence is used, the resistance to the law becomes nulled. People tend to not follow a violence protester. Once a violent riot starts, chaos is everywhere. People forget what they are truly fighting for. They unconsciously run away with the fear of getting harmed and dare not to go back. A peaceful resistance on the other hand leads citizens to join and support. People are able to see what they are fighting for and their real intentions. They are able to stand and cause no problem to people passing by as they are showing their support through silent voices. Many famous activists and leaders are for nonviolence. Mahatma Gandhi, a primary leader of India’s independence