Civil disobedience in simple terms is when you refuse to obey the laws that the government lays out for you. It is possible to make a positive impact on this free nation. There is a huge difference between civil disobedience and violent protesting. Civil disobedience is simply doing things, non-violently, to show that you don’t agree with government policies. Boycotting, or not paying your taxes are forms of peaceful resistance to laws and policies.
Henry David Thoreau expressed, “That government is best which governs least,” from his essay, “Civil Disobedience.” I think what Thoreau means by this is that America works best when the government has little say in what we do. Thoreau personally hated government control and spent most of his time in the forest to live out a simpler life, which was his way of peaceful resistance to governing laws. His example is expressed to let people know that there is a way of living without conforming to government rules, and it is possible to live in peace without obedience. …show more content…
The problem is that it can be both positive and negative, depending on the situation. Living in a free society, we are able to do things freely to express how we feel about things. In the 1st Amendment, we are told that we have the right to protest, speak out, and assemble freely, so why should we say that peaceful resistance could have a negative impact? At the same time can resisting laws have a negative impact over time? Laws are placed to be carried out for the good of the country. There are many people who might not agree with government policies, but to run smoothly we need
Henry David Thoreau expressed, “That government is best which governs least,” from his essay, “Civil Disobedience.” I think what Thoreau means by this is that America works best when the government has little say in what we do. Thoreau personally hated government control and spent most of his time in the forest to live out a simpler life, which was his way of peaceful resistance to governing laws. His example is expressed to let people know that there is a way of living without conforming to government rules, and it is possible to live in peace without obedience. …show more content…
The problem is that it can be both positive and negative, depending on the situation. Living in a free society, we are able to do things freely to express how we feel about things. In the 1st Amendment, we are told that we have the right to protest, speak out, and assemble freely, so why should we say that peaceful resistance could have a negative impact? At the same time can resisting laws have a negative impact over time? Laws are placed to be carried out for the good of the country. There are many people who might not agree with government policies, but to run smoothly we need