Our government is one that is intended to represent the people, it is after all by the people, for the people. With this thought in mind, when one considers peaceful protest and civil disobedience it is natural to assume that these acts are being carried out because the "perpetrators" are committing these deeds in order to represent themselves more accurately than their current legislation does. The ability to perform these acts is not only a positive impact, it rarely negatively impacts others, or rather, these people who carry out civil disobedience are the ones themselves being most affected by both their actions and what they are claiming to be unfair and unjust legislation. Common misconceptions regarding civil disobedience are that the
…show more content…
The core meaning behind an act such as civil disobedience is to not submit to injustice, and to have your voice be heard and represented. However recently some "protesters" have been resorting to violence and destruction as their means of civil disobedience. The fundamental principles of true civil disobedience, and not blatant disrespect for the law, are as follows: peaceful, non-violent assembly/protests, using your freedoms to make a statement towards those who use legislature as control (boycotts, marches, etc.), not allowing injustice to pervade your life, especially that which is genuinely limiting your ability to pursue that which has been granted to your through the United States Constitution. Recently there has been some debate on what constitutes "violence", in the aims of portraying riots as protests [2]. I feel it is within my scope to say that property damage can be considered a violent act [3], due to the fact that it can deter someone from pursuing that which they are constitutionally assured. It comes down to this: the government is meant to represent the people, however, it is also required to be held accountable by the people, for without the people, there would be no government to begin
The core meaning behind an act such as civil disobedience is to not submit to injustice, and to have your voice be heard and represented. However recently some "protesters" have been resorting to violence and destruction as their means of civil disobedience. The fundamental principles of true civil disobedience, and not blatant disrespect for the law, are as follows: peaceful, non-violent assembly/protests, using your freedoms to make a statement towards those who use legislature as control (boycotts, marches, etc.), not allowing injustice to pervade your life, especially that which is genuinely limiting your ability to pursue that which has been granted to your through the United States Constitution. Recently there has been some debate on what constitutes "violence", in the aims of portraying riots as protests [2]. I feel it is within my scope to say that property damage can be considered a violent act [3], due to the fact that it can deter someone from pursuing that which they are constitutionally assured. It comes down to this: the government is meant to represent the people, however, it is also required to be held accountable by the people, for without the people, there would be no government to begin