In order to protect citizens’ rights and liberties, the United States of America has a democratically run government. Freedom of speech allows citizens to express themselves and protest when there are social issues. The law prohibits protesters from violating the rights and freedoms of others. Throughout history, protests have taken many forms, from non-violent acts like petitions, stickers and songs to boycotts, strikes, marches, sit-ins and memes. Violence is also a form of protest, such as bombings, terrorism or murder.
The use of both violent and nonviolent protests is used to change social norms and laws. Civil disobedience, on the other hand, is the most widely used form of demonstration. Civil disobedience, a non-violent form of protest, is used to bring attention to an unjust or outdated law or its need for reform. In order to support their cause, people who practice this form often violate laws and infringe upon others’ rights. It is a problem that affects many discourse communities.
Civil disobedience was seen in history at protests like the Boston Tea Party and American Revolution. It has also been observed during LGBT rights movements, Women’s Suffrage Movements, and Women’s Suffrage Movements. In Athens, Socrates’ controversial teachings on youth led to the imprisonment of the philosopher. This was the first example of civil disobedience. Socrates refused to leave his cell in prison, despite Crito’s arguments.
Socrates supported his decision to oppose civil disobedience with many points, such as ideas like a Social Contract, utilitarianism, or self-interest. He said that obeying the state would be in the best interest of the citizens, as disobeying the state would undermine its authority. It is essential that the government’s laws and functions are valid.
In the event that rules are ignored, then government functions and consequences will be rendered useless. Socrates said that breaking a government law is not acceptable because it will harm all parties involved. As an Athens citizen, he received education, protection, and nurturing.
Socrates, in Plato’s “Crito”, explains, “Anyone who dislikes us and our city, who wishes to emigrate, may do so, while retaining all his property.” If he remains in Athens, but has knowledge of how we govern and do justice, then he is bound to follow our orders. Socrates was free to leave Athens if the Athenian laws were not respected.
But he still remained an Athens citizen and had to accept the consequences for breaking the law. Socrates as an Athens resident who obeyed the law, accepted the punishment for his crimes. He would be a bad role model for his pupils and ridiculed by Athenians had he fled from prison. In this situation, civil disobedience would not have been chosen. Socrates was aware of the consequences and took responsibility for his actions.
Martin Luther King Jr. actively promoted civil disobedience in his protests against racial inequality in America. He said that civil disobedience is necessary to stop violence and change oppressive laws. He said that disobeying unjust laws was acceptable if done with respect and the punishment is paid without any conflict. King used civil unrest to highlight the injustices of segregation, and also to convince his clergymen that the laws oppressed many people.
Martin Luther King told the clergyman in “Letter From Birmingham Jail” that it was time to change segregation laws now, not later. They thought that the change would come in due time and it wasn’t a good thing to force change too early. King thought that it was time to change and that many steps needed to be taken in order for civil disobedience to become a viable option. King said that in any nonviolent movement, there are four steps.
Collection of facts in order to identify injustices.
negotiation,
self-purification,
Direct action
We’ve done it all in Birmingham” (281). King assessed whether Birmingham had a strong racial divide and attempted to bring about change through discussions with authorities and legal actions. King attempted to negotiate a change with merchants who refused to comply. But none of the options King tried worked. He decided civil disobedience would be his next step in changing America’s oppressive laws.
Lewis Van Dusen Jr. was a lawyer, writer, and military officer with a distinguished record. He discussed both sides, including the laws and protestors. The protestors see it peacefully, but lawmakers see it deliberately as disobedience.
Van Dusen says that while civil disobedience may be done with the best of intentions, it undermines the democratic system of government. When protestors take matters into their own hand, they violate others’ rights and disturb the democratic process. The protestors send out a message indicating that America’s democracy and justice system are failing.
Van Dusen says in his book “Civil Disobedience-Destroyer of Democracy” that civil disobedients have a moral and political responsibility because they don’t interact with the democratic system as an active member. He explains protestors who use non-violent approaches to speed the process of changing laws. However, he says this separates these people from democracy.
Van Dusen asserts that “civil disobedients who abstain from democracy participation due to a lack of belief, help achieve their own gloomy forecast.” They contribute to the creation of their own social and political foundation. They help create failure by foreseeing it. Citizens who abandon democratic change show a lack of faith in government when they stray away from them. The lack of participation in democratic processes is what they believe will lead to failure. All members of the society would be able to contribute to democracy and make changes. The government will also function as required to bring about the necessary changes.
Civil disobedience has remained a contentious political and moral issue. There are differing opinions from authoritative sources in America, including Lewis Van Dusen (Lewis Van Dusen), Martin Luther King, Plato. The government is not sure how to deal with non-violent protests. The American people want to see a change in the country and are willing to do anything it takes to bring it about.
Comments are closed.