The Necessity Of Civil Disobedience

The Boston Tea Party was a political protest that took place on December 16, 1773 in Boston Harbor in Boston, Massachusetts. The Sons of Liberty led by Samuel Adams, dressed as Mohawk Indians destroyed an entire shipment of tea sent from the East India Company by throwing chests full of tea into the Boston Harbor. George Hewe’s, an eyewitness of the event writes in his journal, “In about three hours from the time we went on board, we had thus broken and thrown overboard every tea chest to be found in the ship, while those in the other ships were disposing of the tea in the same way, at the same time.” (Hewes). The Sons of Liberty, a secret group formed by the 13 colonies to protect the rights of the colonists, protested in opposition of the Tea Act implemented on May 10, 1773. The Tea Act was an act placed by the British Parliament in order to raise revenue for Great Britain that required tax on

BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS- November of 1773 an event happened that changed the colonist’s lives forever. During this time the Tea Act was taking place. This helped the British East Tea company by enabling them to send tea straight to the colonies, whereas they usually had to send the tea to England, then on to the colonies. The Parliament thought the colonist would like this change, but because they had to pay the duty, or import tax, which did not sit well with them, they were not so gracious with this decision. They started boycotting English goods, including the tea. Later in the month of November the Sons of Liberty dressed up as Indians and went on the ship containing the tea, and dumped hundreds beyond hundreds of boxes of tea off of the boat.

In 1771, group of colonist protested many years of increasing British oppression, by making an attack on merchant ships that were being brought in at Boston Harbor. Due to this, the British then close down the ports, bringing even harsher penalties on the colonies. This famous act of American colonial resistance was to protest taxation without representation that the British were enforcing. British Parliament imported goods with the passage of the Tea Act, many of the colonies denied tea shipments, but the merchants in Boston refused to acknowledge this Patriot revelry. On December 16, 1773, the Sons of Liberty and Samuel Adams; who was a leader

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

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.

Martin Luther King Jr., the most important Civil Rights leader, once said “One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.” Martin Luther King Jr. was one of the most influential individuals in United States history, and is still recognized today for his peaceful approach on change. He believed that it was the peoples’ job to point out the flaws of society, and hold the government accountable for them. Many say that it is not the peoples’ responsibility to take this kind of action; however, no one has the leverage that the people do. The heart is to the body as the citizens are to the country. Without the active engagement of the people in the system, the country would fall flat of its responsibilities. With the absence of civil

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 has been used by the people to get the attention of their government and to hopefully inspire change. Civil disobedience is an act of refusal by a large group of people against certain laws. From Ghandi to Martin Luther King Jr, people have used civil disobedience to enact change. While the concept of civil disobedience has been around for centuries, it hasn’t been called civil disobedience until recently. Protest, rallies, boycotting and worker strikes are forms of civil disobedience. Civil disobedience has been used for social change too. For example, the suffragettes, Rosa Parks and marches to legalize gay marriage have had social ramifications. Civil disobedience can be used to change laws, it publicizes important changes but it can be overshadowed by violence. Civil disobedience is a good way to change laws because it’s usually peaceful, brings attention to controversial laws and brings about social change.

How does the social responsibility of intellectuals to demonstrate civil disobedience differ from Lincoln and MLK’s time and today as demonstrated by Black lives matter and Antifa

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.

Peaceful resistance to laws positively impacts a free society because it empowers the people to speak out, it serves as a reminder that government is in the hands of the citizens, and it is the courageous way to publicize one’s opinion without violence. The evidence of the positive impact of Civil Disobedience is deep in the roots of American History, written on the sweaty brows of the feather-bedecked Patriots hoisting tea overboard in Boston; and sung in notes of the song, “We Shall Overcome”, by protesters being beaten and arrested at Selma. The very founding of America was an act of Civil Disobedience, as our forefathers penned the Declaration of Independence, defying Britain’s law and control. Over and over throughout history, groups have

Would you fight for what you believe in no matter the denouement? Would you go against the odds, disobey society and the law to improve the lives of others? In the words of Oscar Wilde, disobedience is a valuable human trait that leads to social progress. Disobedience results in freedom, equality, and civil rights.

Civil disobedience is a positive, non-violent way to draw attention to something that you care about. Peaceful resistance has a positive impact on our society overall. This is part of American culture and people’s expectations for those living in a free country where the right to protest is built into our fundamental belief system from a young age. We grow up understanding that there are ways to draw attention to our concerns, beliefs, or values when we feel the

The question whether or not civil disobedience is justifiable in a democracy has been a controversial matter among thinkers and politicians. Views vary from almost absolute support to the legitimacy of civil disobedience in democratic societies to conservative support and to the rejection of the idea.