Pros And Cons Of Civil Disobedience

Words: 663
Pages: 3

One of America's defining attributes that sets it apart from other countries is that it gives its citizens the right to assemble and complain to the government about issues that they feel are unjust. In America's history, proponents of social change have used that right to justify resisting laws that go against what they believe in, and they have accepted the consequences that come with breaking the laws. Peaceful resistance to laws positively impacts a free society because it limits the government from taking a tyrannical approach, it shifts the power from the government to the people, as it should be, and it allows for the advancement of society.

A government is nothing more than those in charge of it and the majority voice that has asked for the decrees set forth by it. As stated in Henry Thoreau's essay "Civil Disobedience", "A corporation of conscientious men is a corporation with a conscience." (Thoreau 1849). In other
…show more content…
Martin Luther King Jr. once said that "freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed." (King, Jr. 1963). Change does not come suddenly, but progressively, and society cannot advance as long as people stay quiet about certain issues, hoping that they will change by default. Some people will say that civil disobedience is unnecessary because "Specific disobedience breeds disrespect and promotes general disobedience. Our grievances must be settled in the courts and not in the streets." (Leibman 1964). An aspect of this statement is true, but how often does a court listen to the grievances of the minority, who are often discouraged from speaking out against unjust systems? As an illustration, imagine the families in Nazi Germany that provided refuge for Jews. What would going to a court provide for them? Immediate