Civil Disobedience - Report Example

Civil Disobedience The concept of civil disobedience is a long time issue and has emerged through time together with the human society. Civil disobedience is the active condemnation of the laws and commands of the government or of the ruling power. It is said that civil disobedience is commonly, though not always, a form of nonviolent resistance but rather a form of civil resistance. Civil disobedience involves a deliberate and punishable breach of legal duty. In particular, it is the expression of non-coherence to the existing rules implemented by the government, which is subjectively thought by a person to be against his or her conscience. It is the peaceable resistance of conscience. A civil disobedient, does not come to the point of bloody hostilities, but rather, the disobedient violates and does not conform with the states laws knowing that he is legally wrong, but continues to believe that he is morally correct (Van Dusen, 1969). Though the laws are against his will, he is not violent in standing in his own ground of what he believes is right, he does not keep in secret in his violation, on the contrary, he is submissive to the penalties of the law. A true civil disobedient breaches the law but not peace (Van Dusen, 1969). The disobedient, though has evaded the law, does not seek to interfere with another’s rights. The thrust of the civil disobedient’s course is not towards revolution but rather a martyrdom of conscience (Van Dusen, 1969). Civil disobedience in history was exhibited by a refusal of paying taxes to the government, as exhibited by Thoreau and the rebuttal of being flown away from prison as demonstrated by Socrates (Plato). Is Civil Disobedience a Non-conformity to the Law? Despite of the presented ideology, civil disobedience, no matter how we view it, is not above the law; it is against the law (Van Dusen, 1969). Yes, it is true what Van Dusen has stated that no man is above the law, and neither has he the right to break the law. However, civil disobedience is not about overpowering the existing law; neither has it aimed of breaking it. It is one of the ways of breaching a law which is being recognized by the concerned citizen to be faulty and something that needs to be changed for the better. it is true that the human society has achieved great in its course of what they thought of as “the right path,” and we cannot do away from the reality that the human race and the universe has laws to confirm with. This journey of human race towards the kind of government that most people of the world are enjoying is the product of the civil disobedience in the past. With this, therefore, civil disobedience is necessary to cope with the changing world. It is said that once a person disobeys one law, invariably, he always has the tendency to subvert all laws. However, no matter how humanity denies the impact of conscience, at the end of the day, the truth, if not always, but most of the time prevails. On the whole, most people around the world seek for democracy so as to have freedom, the freedom to express and demand for change when they are faced with unbearable consequences. However, the disposition that when a person feels or thinks that he is above the law, he is putting democracy beneath him, and therefore, disobedience is a sign of distrust for the democratic system, is all the time true. Since a country is democratic, the people have the voice. We cannot the possibility that relying onto anti-democratic means of protest would promote undemocratic results leading to authoritative and anarchic state governance. However, the true civil disobedient is not fighting towards the destruction of peace but rather to initiate changes in the law. Thoreau does not consider anarchy as a bad outcome of civil disobedience, and he rather considers it as one of the ideal forms of government (Suber, 1999) and is tolerable. However, the only frightening outcome is the authoritative or dictatorship form of government. Civil disobedience could be sought to continue. This antagonism is not a violation of the law, and is not a form of subverting the democracy. Though, some may think that civil disobedience is the progenitor of disorder, and disorder begets violence. However, we must also bear in mind that indeed the Constitution is not relatively perfect as it is and necessitates amendments through time. Civil disobedience is one of the keys to improvement and amendments in the existing law. Somehow, one of the modes of bringing up concerns and desired changes to the constitution is through rallies and pickets, which is merely one form of the freedom of expression. The later actions could be considered as a form of civil disobedience in the sense that the desires of the concerned citizens are brought out to the higher ranks of the government, expecting for ratifications and changes. It is one of the ways of expressing pathetically the desires that what you thought of as right path should prevail (Van Dusen, 1969). This is so because a wise man will not leave the right to mercy of chance, nor wish it to prevail through the power of the majority (Van Dusen, 1969). In addition, as what Plato recorded from the conversation of Crito and Socrates (Plato), he who is a corrupter of the law, is more likely to be a corrupter of the young and foolish portion of mankind. As such humanity must fight against this growing unwanted foolish human nature. As per observation in the society, picketing and rallying in the streets does not yield any positive result. There might have been some who have been notably successful in their goals, but mostly, members creating riots on the streets were not given mercy by the government. On the brighter side, aside from creating noise and shame on the streets, clever persons must think and come up of other ways to be heard and make their intentions reach the appropriate offices. Comparing the government set-up way back in the time of Thoreau, the government has progress and has made considerable amendments in the constitution, hence, the laws that we have at present are far from the governing laws in the past. And all this is through the undying urge of humanity towards the betterment of laws governing the society. Despite these possibilities tendered by doing one of the forms of civil disobedience, the society, especially those who riot and do violence in the streets just to pour their thoughts and feelings to the government, should also take into consideration the consequences of their actions. The concept of civil disobedience does not invite principles of general applicability. As one of Gandhi’s satyagraha (firmness in adhering to truth), only those who knew how to offer voluntary and deliberate obedience to the laws of the state has the right to practice civil disobedience (Net Industries, 2011). Chances are, indulging into civil disobedience is to invite anarchy, and the permissive arbitrariness of anarchy is hardly less tolerable than the repressive arbitrariness of tyranny. Too often the license of liberty is followed by the loss of liberty (Van Dusen, 1969). This concept could have impact in the struggle of Thoreau, wherein he judged that the laws upholding slavery and supporting the Mexican War were unjust (Thoreau, 1848; Net Industries, 2011). He chose to be put into jail than submit to the unjust laws being implemented. What Thoreau did was a justification of a true civil disobedience. He did follow his conscience of what he thought was right. However, the case of Thoreau is not so applicable to the present situation of the civil society. Indeed civil disobedience is not for general application, but rather situation-dependent. Another reason for the contradiction of the civil disobedience is that even the noblest act of civil disobedience assaults the rule of law. It creates an image inducing others to engage in different forms of law breaking characterized by methods unsanctioned and condemned by classic theories of law violation. To restipulate the reality that the government has considerably improved in its law implementation, applying the classic views and theories to the present situation is of much help. Many may clamour of the malfunctions and wrong governance, but we cannot do away from the fact that indeed, we have progressed so far. The only problem is that there are wise people in position who use their knowledge for their own satisfaction. They rebel for their own purposes. They do not dissolve themselves with the state. They are more focused on how to become rich. As what Thoreau stated, the more a person has money, the lesser is his virtue become. The opportunities of living are diminished in proportion as what are called the “means” is increased. The best thing a man can do for his culture when he is rich is to endeavour to carry out those schemes which he entertained when he is poor (Thoreau). For money makes it impossible to live honestly and comfortably. And this thinking is nowadays must we engraved into the minds of policy makers and politicians. Finally, the greatest danger in disregarding civil disobedience as a permissible strategy for hastening change is that it undermines the democratic processes. However, if the representative government does not work, it is necessary to adopt the techniques of civil disobedience. Resisting the decisions of courts and the laws of elected assemblies does not mean that democracy has failed, rather it is the expression of democracy itself - the freedom of the citizens to express their thoughts and sentiments and urge for better governance. This and the above mentioned instances will lead to the complete shift of the government, which most people would favour and hungry of the change they are after. Civil disobedience is very much helpful especially if the government is unjust and dehumanizing. For just laws uplift human beings, while unjust one degrade them. Martin Luther King has been one of the successful contributors to making civil disobedience a respected tradition (King, 1963). Conclusion Civil disobedience, if done with good intentions is of great importance to humanity. It is of great help in seeking for changes in the government. Though there are disadvantages in the practice of civil disobedience, it still has its good points which are very necessary for the improvement of humanity. Civil disobedience is for the amendment of laws but not for the obliteration of peace. It is one of the precursors of the catalysts of change, change for the betterment of humankind. References: Industries, N. (2011). Other Free Encyclopedias: Science Encyclopedia: Science & Philosophy: Chimaeras to Cluster: Civil Disobedience . Retrieved March 2, 2011, from Net Industries: http://science.jrank.org/pages/8660/Civil-Disobedience-History-Concept.html#ixzz1FOO65jG2 King, M. L. (1963). Letter from Birmingham Jail. Plato. The Crito. Suber, P. (1999). Civil Disobedience. In C. Gray, Philosophy of Law: An Encyclopedia (pp. 110-113). USA: Garland Pub. Co. Thoreau, H. D. (1848). Civil Disobedience. Van Dusen, L. (1969). Civil Disobedience. Read More