Civil Disobedience: Struggling to Join Law and Conscience - Article Example

Civil Disobedience: Struggling to Join Law and Conscience “Those who profess to favor freedom, yet deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground. They want rain without thunder and lightening. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters. This struggle may be a moral one; or it may be a physical one; or it may be both moral and physical; but it must be a struggle. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will.” (Douglass). These words are most applicable in the case of Civil Disobedience where we see an active or voluntary rejection to obey certain laws demand, orders etc. of the powerful agency without using the physical power or violence of any kind. At the very mention of the term, the nonviolent resistance movement of Ahimsa and Satyagraha, the models introduced by Mahatma Gandhi in the Indian Freedom Movement comes to our mind. The same way of resistance was adopted in the South Africa, in the American Civil Rights Movement and in every peace movement across the Globe. Martin Luther King Jr. in the 1960s implemented this method in the Civil Rights Movement in America. The American author Thoreau, in his Civil Disobedience, formulated the modern theory that contains the essence of this practice. Civil disobedience, which is “a form of protest in which protestors deliberately violate a law,” is a question of controversy considering its struggle between law and conscience. (Suber, 1999). Thus, the idea of Civil Disobedience is a great topic for discussion. There are films and plays that have dealt with the theme of Civil Disobedience to make clear the various aspects of the concept. ‘King: A Filmed Record, Montgomery to Memphis’ is “a chronicle of the struggle for racial equality and justice from 1955 to 1968 through newsreel and television coverage.” (Documentaries Titles I-P, 2007). “Emma: A Play in Two Acts About Emma Goldman, American Anarchist” by Howard Zinn tells the story of an American feminist who was ousted from the US for her forthright convictions. Both these work give us a serious topic for discussion on whether or not violence is an appropriate response to oppression and the consequence of using violence. As a noble way of resistance, the Civil Disobedience resorts to the nonviolent way of resistance. This is a grant way of thinking in which the participants are ready to meet the consequences of engaging in such an activity and they do not adhere to the violent mode of activities. There are many alternative ways against the oppression other than violent mode of protest. The nonviolent form of the Civil Disobedience is a generally accepted way of resistance all over the world and this is a proven method of fight for the human cause. Montgomery to Mephis is one of the works that contributes to this way of thinking. Martin Luther King, Jr. all through his career from the bus segregation protests in Montgomery in 1955 to the assassination in Memphis has contributed to the Civil Rights Movement following this great path of civil disobedience. Here, it is not a complete adherence to law but a strong and self motivated protest against the evil results of the law and what all practices it associate with are unflinchingly fought against. This reflects in the personal conviction of the individual and the social attitude for the better condition of the humanity. The many speeches that the great leader made, the civil rights marches that he led and the powerful example of determination that was his strength etc gives us the real spirit of Civil Disobedience. What is the role of violence in the civil disobedience movement or is it a justifiable way of practice in the name of public cause? Certainly, the violence mode is not acceptable in any form and for any cause. The great leaders of this idea did not fully recommend this form of power display. Rather they appealed for a noble form of violence in which the use of violence was not for the cause violence but for making their view known both to the authorities and to the general public. There are many of the noble examples of this type of violence. Above all, let us remember that the use of violence was not the way that attracted the Civil Disobedience resistance. The practice is a collective form of violation of public laws and their formal structure that is enforced upon by some authorities. Thus, a collective action is needed in the practice and the framework forced upon is not accepted and there is violence against the authority that enforces any such laws. In this way, there are views and opinions that justify the use of violence of some sort. This kind of response to the oppression of the ruling entities have been successfully challenged all through the years in history. Subsequently, this may be concluded that the use of violent form of resistance though not applicable always, have proved its merit. However, the Civil Disobedience does not adhere to a complete and extreme form of violence. The motif behind any kind of violence and disobedience of the law in this practice is to take certain issues to the public attention and the correction of such social evils. The insolence of the civil disobedience will be either nonviolent or violent and both the forms are treated as civil disobedience. Considering the concept of civil disobedience as nonviolent acts would mean to disregard the difficulty of finding an exact division between nonviolence and violence. Violent form of disobedience of specific laws, policies, and orders, in the present context, are also called Civil Disobedience. In certain specific contexts these violent sort of practice is accepted as an appropriate response or even the only possible response to oppression. In the fifth Scene of the second Act of the play “Emma” the protagonist remarks the special situation of the richest cities of the world where “women must sell their bodies just to stay alive… and children are crying for food.” (Zinn, 2002. p 104). She goes on to recommend for a violent mode of Civil Disobedience. “If the children need milk, let us go into the stores and take it. If families need bread, let us find out where the flour is stored and take it.” (Zinn, p 104) Her outspoken views and the plea for Civil Disobedience can be understood in the light of the role that violence plays in the practice of Civil Disobedience.  Civil Disobedience is also a result of the public or collective and individual conscience. This practice is a result of inner conviction and social commitment. Martin Luther King Jr. came forward with this type of a resistance because he was totally convinced about the need for some social activity that would assist him in his social development programs. For the same cause, he recognized the appraisal of social or collective conscience. Through his many speeches and public exhortations he managed to arouse the public conscience and this was of pertinent contribution in the practice of Civil Disobedience. The individual conscience is the key factor in such a practice and when it joins hands with the collective conscience, the social reformation takes place. In this social activity civil disobedience plays a major role as a method of social activity. The models of Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr. and others points to the same fact. In the play “Emma: A Play in Two Acts about Emma Goldman, American Anarchist” we get the clear picture of the role that individual conscience plays for the social cause. Emma has a great conviction about the issues of the society and every deed and word of hers reflects this conviction. Only a person who is self motivated only can motivate the society and lead the social activities. Martin Luther King Jr. as we find in ‘King: A Filmed Record, Montgomery to Memphis’ has the same conscience that drives him forward to the social activities. He was also motivated by the conscience, like other great leaders of the world, so that he is ready to work for the society. The chain of events that begin with the Montgomery bus boycott in 1955 bear witness to the fact that individual conscience is the root of civil disobedience. The conflict in Birmingham, the March on Washington in 1963, the three Selma voter-registration marches, the housing protests in Chicago and the Memphis sanitation men’s strike that led to his death etc. proves the role of civil disobedience in conscience formation. Thus, conscience- collective and individual – is very crucial in civil disobedience. There are many ways to view this practice – as a contributor to the society or as a threat to the order and systems of the society. There are so many who regard this form of civil activity as a major threat to the order of the society and the due process of conflict management and policy making. They argue that the law should seek to discourage and check civil disobedience for the well being of the society. They seem to forget many other social evils that threaten the social system and forget the social changes brought about by the practice in the history. There is no doubt that the practice is one of the most efficient tools of civil protest against the repression attempts of the authority. Civil Disobedience has been widely accepted as one of the pertinent methods of social action against any form of suppression and any restraint on this practice would mean a violation of civil rights. Civil Disobedience which is a kind of “refusal to obey a law or follow a policy believed to be unjust” has been an accepted practice of social activity. (Civil Disobedience, 2006). In this discussion we have come to the conclusion that the practice is an essential component of the modern civil procedures and even the violent form of the Civil Disobedience, though no originally proposed by the proponents, would be justified in certain context. We also came to agree that the individual as well as the collective conscience as closely linked with Civil Disobedience. In the modern context, we may fear the misuse of the practice in the name of Civil Disobedience but we need to consider that every type of disobedience is not Civil Disobedience. It has got definite characteristics and purpose and the attempts to discourage the practice through legal procedure cannot be appreciated. Works Cited Douglass, Frederick. Civil Disobedience Index. ACT UP. 14 Nov. 2007. . Suber, Peter. Civil Disobedience. 1999. 14 Nov. 2007. . Documentaries Titles I-P. African American Studies. University of California. 25 Oct. 2007. 14 Nov. 2007. . Civil Disobedience. Infoplease. Person Education. 2006. 14 Nov. 2007. . Zinn, Howard. Emma: A Play in Two Acts about Emma Goldman, American Anarchist. P. 104, Scene 5, Act 2. 2002. 15 Nov. 2007. . Read More