Social Conformity And Civil Disobedience

Oscar Wilde believed rebellion was necessary for social progress and confided in disobedience being an essential human trait. In order to experience modification, you rebel against the discriminating laws that bring problems to you and your people. Furthermore, when awareness is given to an issue, there is extensive social progress being taken place.

Civil disobedience is present in our day to day lives. During the civil rights protests occurring in Birmingham, AL, Eugene Connor was the Commissioner of Public Safety who publicly attacked African Americans with fire hoses and dogs. The Boston Tea Party was a rebellion which led to major tax reformation. Another moment in history of disobedience would be the Civil Rights movement. Oscar Wilde claims social progress is promoted through disobedience and rebellion which is valid.

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

In Thoreau 's essay Civil Disobedience he makes the point that bystanders are just as bad as criminals and that people should stand against unjust crimes even if it means going against the law. And to some extent I do agree because in the past people have broken unjust laws and have created change. A well-known example would be when Rosa Parks sat on the bus in the "White-only" seating area, which lead to important events that helped push the Civil Rights movement forward. But I think that it depends on which laws they choose to break and how far they choose to go with it.

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,

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

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.

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.

Throughout life, in any society we develop a sense to conform and adjust to our surroundings but why? Our values in our society determines our norms and why we do the things we do. I recently sought out to break these social conformities that violated the values, and norms we hold as a society. Every society is different and, in every society there are different and similar values, norms, sanctions folkways, and mores. Breaking them up and analyzing them we began to understand why these terms and values are so important to us.

Without leaving the social order and societal norms Chris McCandless could not have fully achieved non-conformity and therefore could not achieve individualism. Henry David Thoreau is the author of “Civil Disobedience” who explains the importance of non-conformity. In the excerpt the author is conveying that non-conformity cannot happen in society because the government is brainwashing the people and restricting them from thinking for themselves. Thoreau states, “The mass of men serve the state thus, not as men, but as machines, with their bodies” (3). This quote stated by Thoreau means that the people are the machine not being able to think and only the government can control them causing them to conform to the societal norms.

Throughout history, protesting certain causes has been a predominant method in defying the government. This protesting has come to be called civil disobedience. Merriam-Webster dictionary defines civil disobedience as the “ refusal to obey governmental demands or commands especially as a nonviolent and usually collective means of forcing concessions from the government”. Though these refusals may be done in honor of the betterment of people’s lives, it still negatively impacts a free society. Civil disobedience comes down to opinion.

One of the many necessities in establishing a free society is granting the people within it the right to change how they live. If citizens of a free society declare a law unfit for their lifestyle, they should not be denied the right to demand the legal means for that change be provided, nor should the right to advocate that change be denied. Though civil disobedience is not legally supported, it positively affects a free society because it is an earnest, often respectful, and—most importantly—nonviolent expression of discontent with the law. Peaceful resistance shows effectiveness in its promise for the future of a society that often outweighs the consequences of the short term.

For some, conformity is an unthinkable evil in American society. All individuals living within a community conform in some way to social norms, yet to label someone a conformist is akin to labeling them ignorant and unoriginal. However, conformity - and its associated impacts - are as integral to the functioning of society as the principles of nonconformity. Conformity is often positively utilised to induce positive social change nationally and internationally. It prompts dissemination of workload, provides protection (‘strength in numbers’), and encourages strict rule enforcement. Although less appreciated than non conformists, conformists and their resulting principles play a vital role in the smooth conduction of society.