The thick, heavily construed, complex, confusing polysyllabic words that would never escape the tongues of any ordinary individual, are the rules and laws we find tucked away in libraries filled with dozens upon dozens of volumes. They are what we as a society have deemed morally wrong, and thus must be associated with consequences. These aren’t meaningless books that get locked in library for mere vanity, yet they are the symbolic representation of what we as a society wish to strive for; peace. So when one is asked with the question on whether, “When is civil disobedience is ever justified ?”, the answer is a resounding ‘never’. Civil Disobedience has become the glorified word for criminals, and delinquents to condone their disrespect to society, and criminal activity. Yet in a world where we live, it has become too often synonymous for activism. Simply put breaking the law, no matter reason spurs increased animosity towards the government, and places the entire social system and society in a state of panic.
We have laws to tell us right from wrong. Laws reflect the belief of what population as a whole think, should and should not take place within the confines of our state, and are a direct representation of the people who they subordinate. So when an individual decides to break the law in the
…show more content…
These activist created change the correct way; through the political system and minds of society, not through brute force and criminal acts. While people like Malcolm X, were able to enlist change through brute force tactics at times, it was also well documented the lives and businesses lost by these methods. The gist, is that civil disobedience just creates more tension in a probably already volatile
Our disobedience enstils the passion our contemporary society continues to have for what we feel is just. Peaceful resistance to unjust laws benefits a free society by giving the American people a voice in government. History and contemporary media has proven that protesting our governmental ideals is a strong and powerful means of changing the government. Martin Luther King Jr. protested the horrendous treatment of African-Americans in the 1960s by bringing people together in order to end racial segregation in the United States. King included in his Letter From Birmingham Jail that "an unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law.”
Martin Luther King Jr once stated, “One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.” in his Letter from Birmingham Jail in 1963. He was invoking the principle of civil disobedience. He wasn't justifying breaking laws just because, but instead, meant that you break the law and accept your punishment, in hopes that people will come to see that the law is unethical. Civil disobedience plays an important role in how our society has been shaped up until this point.
In a free society, civil disobedience is used to nonviolently protest laws against injustices to create positive change. Change is accomplished with the best intention and through nonviolent
He explains civil disobedience as “that it is more important to develop respect for the right, rather than a respect for the law, for people’s obligations are to do what's right”. There are many different people who show civil disobedience in
Civil disobedience has been a topic of discussion throughout the last two articles we have read in class. Martin Luther King Jr’s, Letter from a Birmingham Jail, and Plato’s, Crito, start with MLK and Socrates in jail. King tells of how he is an extremist to end oppression and gain freedom for African Americans. He did what he believed was right and protested in response. Socrates, on the other hand, is arguing as to why he will accept his punishment of death because he disobeyed the government.
All of these people attempted to utilize the concept of civil disobedience to fix an issue, without involving a fight. Even though, if one group of people believe in peaceful protest, the opposing party may not. Like Gandhi said, to accomplish this, one must prepare himself to take abuse. These people have shown the world that things can be fixed without a conflict. Sometimes making the best choice may feel wrong, but surpassing that, and taking a huge step to bring change, makes you a true hero.
The idea of civil disobedience in the hope of making a valuable contribution to one’s cause is an extremely controversial topic. When working towards a common goal, what is considered justifiable and what is considered too far? Many will attest that there is a fine line between standing for your cause and simply committing criminal acts; however, for many Americans, this line is extremely blurry and cannot truly be defined. As young Americans, we are taught that the glorious land and country we live in is unrivaled by any other nation.
In The Case Against Civil Disobedience, Storing goes as far as to state that “civil disobedience is obsolete”, and that involvement in the political process is the only way a citizen should bring about change. Civil disobedience, he argues, makes a mockery of the open society established. After all, if citizens had a problem with a democratic regime, shouldn't they take it up with the government through the voice they legally have? Why instigate cynicism about the system by ignoring the laws created by it? Liebman’s article Civil Disobedience: A Threat to Our Society leaves no reader surprised by its argument that laws should be followed “whether we agree with the particular statute or we don’t”.
Morris I. Leibman, a Chicago Lawyer, stated in his article, Civil Disobedience: A Threat to Our Law Society, that “civil disobedience under [the] circumstances is at best deplorable and at worst destructive”. Although some
As kids people get taught what is wrong and right from a parental figure or experiences of life teach us how to react to different situations. When we finally turn adults no one is there to remind us of what’s good and what's bad so we have to use our past experiences and our knowledge to help guide us. Each adult shapes their societies for their generation and many more generations to come. Mohandas k. Gandhi and Susan B Anthony’s speech along with the article Selma to Montgomery March on history show that civil disobedience is a moral responsibility.
Herbert J. Storing, an Associate Professor of Political Science, in “The Case Against Civil Disobedience,” writes, “One of the practical consequences of this institution [civil disobedience] is to divert disobedience and even revolution into the channel of law” (97). What Storing is saying is that civil disobedience will encourage people to break the laws and they will hide under civil disobedience to avoid the law. Also, civil disobedience might split society by creating disagreements with the people, and it could create a political instability. However, Storing fails to see that those who break an unjust law, as discussed above, do not avoid the law, in fact they show respect to the law as they willingly accept the consequences. By accepting the consequences, they show that they are not acting for their own interests but for society’s.
Civil Disobedience Thousands of dedicated people march the streets of a huge city, chanting repetitively about needing a change. They proudly hold vibrant signs and banners as they fight for what they believe in. Expressions of determination and hope are visibly spread across their faces. These people aren’t using weapons or violence to fight for their ideas; simply, they are using civil disobedience.
The formula for deliberate disobedience The question of our moral obligation to obey the law isn't as simple as a yes or no answer. Each end of the argument requires a great deal of consideration and justification. It’s like learning chemistry. There are constants in which we guide the majority of our formulas by which in result end with the correct answer 90.3% of the time. However, when one specific factor meets another there is a drastic change as to which steps you take to reach the correct answer.
When law fails to perform its function properly and in accordance with principles defined; dysfunction of law occurs. For instance, if a powerful in the society is convicted by
What I will explain to you in this article will, how we are connected with the law and I hope, make you see sense in the importance of our laws in the society we live in. To be against the importance of laws in our society would show one to be ignorant and naïve. I encounter the law on a daily basis when I am driving. I have to follow the speed limit of each road, I have to signal before changing lanes, my vehicle must be in good condition in order to safely drive and I must obey all road signs as they are set in place to ensure the safety of everybody.