Why Is Civil Disobedience Effective

Civil Disobedience has been around for hundreds of years. This a practice first put into play by a man by the name of Henry David Thoreau who believed that if you didn’t agree with a rule then you should act against it in a nonviolent way, and be willing to accept any punishment that comes with it. His teachings were followed by famous activists such as Ghandi, and Martin Luther King Jr., and many others.

Civil Disobedience is defined as refusal to obey civil laws or decrees, which usually takes the form of direct action (Grolier’s Encyclopedia Online 2). Thoreau wrote that people practicing civil disobedience, break a law because they consider the law unjust. People want to call attention to its injustice. Thoreau voiced civil disobedience as, “An expression of the individual’s liberty to create change” (Thoreau 530). Years later Martin Luther King Jr. took the same idea of direct action to protest the injustices brought upon black Americans in the United States. One major example was the Birmingham bus boycott. Blacks where treated unjust and often had to give up their seats to whites, and had to listen to racial slurs made by the bus driver. King like Thoreau, did not take a violent approach, he often used sit-ins and rallies to unite the black community (Encarta

In summation, civil disobedience is a tool that has been used to improve our freedoms through the decades. It has allowed for peaceful ways for the people to stand up for something they believe in. As Henry David Thoreau said, “The only obligation which I have a right to assume is to do at any time, what I think is right.” That is what makes a society free, the ability to disagree with others,

Civil disobedience has been shown in a great amount of different ways throughout the years. Martin Luther king Jr. expressed his way of civil disobedience by taking direct action but in a calm way which was effective. He wanted the people to be aware of what was going on and open doors for better groups of people who weren't given the same rights as others. Henry David Thoreau on the other hand took action as well but in a different manner directly with the U.S. citizens and government because he wanted more individual rights for the people. Both had the same ideas but took action in different ways and at the end, ended up succeeding in their persuasive ways.

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

Martin Luther King, Jr. defines “civil disobedience” as a way to show others what to do when a law is unjust and unreasonable. As King stated in the letter from Birmingham, “Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust.” When Negros were being treated unfairly, Martin Luther King, Jr. stepped in to show people how to peacefully protest and not be violent. The dictionary definition of civil disobedience is the refusal to comply with certain laws or to pay taxes and fines, as a peaceful form of political protest (Webster Dictionary). That is what Martin Luther King, Jr. did when nothing was changing in the town after the law for public school to be non-segregated. In

From Cherokee Indians refusing to abandon their homes in 1838 to the Sit-ins of the civil rIghts movement in the early 1960s, people have been using acts of civil disobedience to stand against injustice they saw in their communities. Although there are many examples of people abusing this benefit and causing more grief and shame than progress, many have used it to their advantage to bring about positive change for the greater good of society, therefore acts of civil disobedience can positively impact a free society if they remain peaceful, respectful, and justified.

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

Civil disobedience allows citizens in the free society of the United States to express their opinions in a way that is sure to evoke governmental attention, while enlightening the public

Typically, when civil disobedience comes up, we look to the long line of heroes who put their lives on the line to help define what civil disobedience meant and how it could be successfully used in order to effect change. Gandhi, Susan B. Anthony, M.L. King and Mandela, are among the many men and women who fought great injustices in the past by taking a stand and calling attention to an unjust law. They used civil disobedience against the established order of things as a tool to not only

The human race doesn’t take injustice lying down. Over the past hundred years, there has been many examples of people taking a stand for their own rights and freedoms through acts of civil disobedience, defined as “the refusal to comply with certain laws or to pay taxes and fines, as a peaceful form of political protest”. While a quick glance at today’s society does show a much more accepting and proper view of people of every race, religion and sexuality, our world does not come without its injustices. I believe that these major injustices keep civil disobedience extremely relevant in our current, modern world.

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.

Have you ever heard of civil disobedience? It is a way of peaceful protest that has been used successfully in the past and in the present. Walkouts, boycotts, and marches are all forms of civil disobedience that have been used and are currently being used. During past four years, there have been women's rights marches, pro-choice marches, and kneeling during the national anthem. These are people that are actively trying to create a fair society themselves and for the people around them. As the real world awaits, civil disobedience is a way to live in a fair society, preserve independence, and refine your moral compass.

“A very few—as heroes, patriots, martyrs, reformers in the great sense, and men—serve the state with their consciences also, and so necessarily resist it for the most part; and they are commonly treated as enemies by it,” Henry Thoreau claimed in his essay, “Civil Disobedience.” Martin Luther King Jr. indisputably served the people of the state by his own conscience and was definitely treated as an enemy. “We want to be free!” King cried out during his “I've Been to the Mountaintop” speech. It didn't matter that it was seen as an evil act against the men in charge to him. “Civil disobedience” immensely impacted Martin Luther King and supported his views and drive that lead to the Civil Rights Movement.

Is civil disobedience effective? It has helped many groups in many different ways get their point across so they could get their own rights. There has been many cases where it shows that it has been effective. Civil disobedience is the refusal to obey the demands or commands of the government without using violence. It is usually used to force concessions from the government. Do others think civil disobedience is effective?