Positive Influence On Civil Disobedience

When your human rights are being stripped, it is a great way to change society, as we see in Gandhi’s peaceful revolt. However, in many cases it is not necessary. It would do even more damage, especially if there are other, safer and more human ways for addressing concerns. Laws would be threatened as well as American infrastructure and economy. Through this, civil disobedience requires us to examine the situation. It requires intelligent people to sacrifice something for the greater good, and when it is necessary. The people thinking about disobeying must ask the question “is the law I am being pushed under unjust?” before performing the act. As Gandhi once said “An unjust law is itself a species of violence. Arrest for its breach is more so. Now the law of nonviolence says that violence should be resisted not by counter-violence but by nonviolence. This I do by breaking the law and by peacefully submitting to arrest and

The  Civil Rights Movement is a substantial example of civil disobedience for the reason that  they were peacefully protesting while accepting their consequences.  On the other hand, people today believe that they're protesting peacefully however, peace can lead to violence and take away the credibility of their cause. Causing destruction in their community, where civil disobedience impacts society negatively because the situations get out of hand that cause chaotic cases which involves brutality.

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.

Civil disobedience is defined by the Merriam-Webster Dictionary as "a refusal to obey governmental commands especially as a nonviolent means of protest."(Jacobus) We can see an example of this in U.S. history, when this theory was applied during the Civil Right Movement. The laws back then restricted African Americans from being able to attend public schools or use public restrooms that were designated as "white only." Even though they had paid taxes like everyone else, these types of segregation laws targeted minorities and made them second-rate citizens. Martin Luther King, who was sincere in exposing

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

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.

Our nation was built on civil disobedience and it has always been a privilege we have held high. It is for this very reason why the First Amendment of our Constitution outlines the right to a peaceful protest among other rights most important to us. But over time, some members of our nation have lost sight of this liberty and see peaceful resistance as nothing more than groups of people who have no respect for the law. But civil disobedience is not doing whatever you want, whenever you want. Civil disobedience is actively protesting what is morally wrong and is the way to a more free and just society.

In social class we reviewed past history of protesting that people did to bring about change. African Americans where not in slavery, but still had to endure racial laws and segregation that divided them from whites. blacks had to sit at the back of the bus and couldn't use the same restrooms, resturances nor drink water from the same water fountain. this amazing woman named “rosa park”, was doing a peaceful stand to not give up her seat to a white man that later made history as being a peaceful protest that many African Americans people came to her defense with boycotts and protesting. according to the martian Luther kings article that while protesting for rosa parks

There is a fine line between standing up for something you believe in and taking it too far and being disrespectful. In 1955 when Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat to a white man she stated her difference of opinion in a positive way. Parks acted out against the “Jim Crow laws that enforced racial segregation in the South”. She wasn’t the only one that saw the separation; she was just the first one to take a stand for her beliefs. Yes, she was punished and taken to jail for committing a crime, but by her refusing to move she started a “381-day-long boycott of public buses”. If Parks would have been disrespectful in a violent manner, she would not have accomplished anything. By going about it in a way that wasn’t disrespectful, her actions speak louder than her voice would have ever been heard. Just one year later the Supreme Court ruled that the bus segregation was

Furthermore, a person who acts with civil disobedience means, in the words of Martin Luther King Jr., “One who breaks an unjust law… openly, lovingly…, and with a willingness to accept the penalty”. In other words, civil disobedience is respectfully breaking a law that is disagreed with, and then openly accepting the consequence. During the world’s history,

According to Carl Cohen, one of the most prominent defenses of opposing civil disobedience is “civil disobedience implies contempt for the law”. This is a fallacious claim that can be debunked when taking into consideration such action isn’t performed without the intention of bettering the justice system. For example, Rosa Parks did not get arrested simply to display her contempt for an unjust set of laws; instead it was her desire to see an improvement that drove her to experience the ordeal. Her statement “you must never be fearful about what you are doing when it is right” is evidence that she was acting solely from her conscious. Another frequently used argument against civil disobedience is its comparison to vigilantism. This erroneous reasoning can be repudiated when taking into consideration that some ordinances are immoral and unreflective of a society’s ethics. Free will is an essential component of a democratic nation, and peaceful resistance is an extension of free will. The logic behind the citizens perpetuating this argument is, they would rather see a compromise of free speech than a compromise of law and

Civil disobedience is an active refusal to adhere to the set of rules established by the government. There are copious amounts of people who believe that civil disobedience negatively impacts our now free society. However, on the other hand there are many people that consider civil disobedience has a way of change for the greater good in a community and acknowledge the positive impact of it throughout a society. Civil disobedience actions clearly demonstrate the positive impact in our free society.

A fair and equal law is what everyone desires. Having to fight for equality is not fair. Civil disobedience was an action which an individual does not follow a certain law or laws. Most historians used civil disobedience back then to fight against the strict government. It is important for people to take a stand on issues of justice in society. People should stand up for what is wrong so it could bring equality, change, and peace.

In the late afternoon of January 30, 1948, the 78-year-old Gandhi, weakened from repeated hunger strikes, clung to his two grandnieces as they led him from his living quarters in New Delhi’s Birla House to a prayer meeting. Hindu extremist Nathuram Godse, upset at Gandhi’s tolerance of Muslims, knelt before the Mahatma before pulling out a semiautomatic pistol and shooting him three times at point-blank range. The violent act took the life of a pacifist who spent his life preaching nonviolence. Godse and a co-conspirator were executed by hanging in November 1949, while additional conspirators were sentenced to life in