Philosophy Of Civil Disobedience

Improved Essays
In Oscar Wilde argues that disobedience is man’s original virtue. Meaning that he believes disobedience is a good thing and through disobedience progress is made. History has proven that Wilde’s assertion holds true. Throughout history civil disobedience has been the catalyst for social progress, reform, and the questioning of the statuesque.
Back in the colonial era of America this exact concept of disobedience. Was what sparked the idea of freedom and self-governance, instead of passive submission to a tyrannical king, and an unsympathetic Parliament. Civil disobedience was performed when our founding fathers threw tea into the Boston harbor. In protest against the British government stating “No taxation without representation.” It was also this concept of civil disobedience that fueled the revolutionary war, that disobedience in the face of authority was the only
…show more content…
Events like the Montgomery Bus Boycott, Freedom summer, and the march on Washington were against a system that was inherited ably wrong. The protestors believed that colored people were being mistreated as second-class citizens. So, they protested, boycotted, and marched in defiance of the system. During the Montgomery Bus Boycott people protested the bus system because of their policy of racial segregation. The protest was sparked when a black woman Rosa Parks was arrested for refusing to give up her seat to white passenger. Eventually the boycott was successful and the supreme court ruled that laws requiring busses to be segregated was unconstitutional. Their protests, boycotts, and marches in defiance were necessary and was the ultimate reason for the social change in America. If they had not disobeyed their cause wouldn’t’ve gotten any attention. They kept fighting against what many felt was wrong at the time. Nevertheless, through their civil disobedience the status-quo was changed and social progress was

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    Each philosopher has their own opinion on civil disobedience and whether they agree with civil disobedience or not. Every philosopher states why the agree with it or why the don't. Agreeing with civil disobedience is ok when there are unjust laws that force people to break certain laws. However, if there are not unjust laws there should not be a reason why laws are being broke. Civil disobedience is also known as the refusal to obey certain laws or governmental demands for the purpose of influencing…

    • 512 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    contradiction in his reasoning with regard to civil disobedience. Socrates remains firm in Defence of Socrates that he would continue to practice philosophy despite the court’s judgement, whereas his stance in Crito emphasizes the importance of obeying the laws of the city no matter what. While Socrates changes his perspective on civil disobedience between the two texts, there is a much larger and important contradiction between the values of philosophy and those of the state. In this paper, I will…

    • 1491 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Although the significance of Thoreau’s philosophy in this sphere and how he has become a source of inspiration for many activists and thinkers, however, the problem with his theory is the exaggerated scepticism regarding the outcomes of the democratic process. Also, an excessive reliance on individuality and individual conscience at the expense of collective will. Thoreau’s approach regarding democracy, government and civil disobedience is quite ideal and not suitable for the actual world we live…

    • 956 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays