Civil Disobedience Essay
“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win”, said Mahatma Gandhi. Civil disobedience is public the refusal to obey certain laws and is done non-violently. This form of protest has been a method of political/social change since the beginning of time. Many leaders, such as Gandhi, M.L.K. Jr., and others have used civil disobedience to create change in society. Although civil disobedience has its faults, it is still an effective method of change. Civil disobedience is an effective method of social change because it makes the opposing look bad to the public eye, accepting punishment willingly expresses devotion to a cause, and it influences others to join a cause - making it stronger.
First of all, civil disobedience is effective because it makes the opposing force look bad to the public eye. For instance, the Amritsar massacre was a massacre that took place in Jallianwala Bagh. General R.E.H. Dyer and the British government had unfairly banned many things - including public meetings. In spite of this, about 20,000 Indians were in the walled garden of Jallianwala Bagh listening to someone publicly speaking about Gandhi's message. Dyer ordered 50 Indian soldiers to open fire on the crowd. Hundreds were either dead or …show more content…
wounded. The public pinned the British government as the “bad guy” and Dyer was forced to resign. Many Indians who were loyal to the British Raj joined the Indian National Congress. When the British government harmed a crowd of people being non-violent, they got bad publicity and were in the wrong. People thought that the massacre was inhumane and unnecessary. This massacre ended up taking the Indian people one step closer to freedom from England.
In addition, civil disobedience is an effective way of bringing social change because willingly accepting punishment expresses devotion to a cause. For example, Rosa Parks getting arrested led to the end of segregation on public facilities. In 1955, Rosa Parks had refused to give up her seat to white passengers on a bus in Montgomery, Alabama. When the bus began to fill with these white passengers, the driver moved the “colored” a few rows back. Rosa had refused to move out of her seat and instead said, “I don’t think I should have to stand up”. The driver called the authorities had her arrested. This spurred the Montgomery Bus Boycott and other attempts to end segregation. Rosa Parks’ arrest expressed without words that she was devoted to her cause and that she would take the consequences that came with was she thought was right. Her devotion then led to other events that eventually succeeded in ending segregation on public facilities.
Lastly, civil disobedience is a useful way of changing society because it influences other to join a cause, making it stronger.
The Sit-In movement is a great example of this. On February 1, 1960, four African American college students walked up to a whites-only lunch counter at the Woolworth’s store in North Carolina and asked for coffee. When they were refused service, the students continued to sit there. Despite threats, the students sat and waited to be served. The action of these four college students influenced others and they began doing the same. Sit-ins soon became a strong movement. After the number of people participating began to increase, the sit-ins became one more piece to the puzzle of
equality.
Civil disobedience means “the refusal to obey laws in a non-violent manner”. Civil disobedience is an effective method of social change because it makes the opposing look bad to the public eye, accepting punishment willingly expresses devotion to a cause, and it influences others to join a cause - making it stronger. And although one may say civil disobedience is ineffective because it takes longer, civil disobedience has been quicker than violence in some cases. For example, it took around 100 years for segregation in the United States to end, but Christians and Muslims fought for over 200 years for Jerusalem. Equality and social change have been fought for throughout the generations, but using violence makes one no better than their oppressor. Even though civil disobedience has its faults, would you rather become the oppressor or take inspiration from successful events in the past and keep persevering with a clear conscience and dignity?
First of all, civil disobedience is effective because it makes the opposing force look bad to the public eye. For instance, the Amritsar massacre was a massacre that took place in Jallianwala Bagh. General R.E.H. Dyer and the British government had unfairly banned many things - including public meetings. In spite of this, about 20,000 Indians were in the walled garden of Jallianwala Bagh listening to someone publicly speaking about Gandhi's message. Dyer ordered 50 Indian soldiers to open fire on the crowd. Hundreds were either dead or …show more content…
wounded. The public pinned the British government as the “bad guy” and Dyer was forced to resign. Many Indians who were loyal to the British Raj joined the Indian National Congress. When the British government harmed a crowd of people being non-violent, they got bad publicity and were in the wrong. People thought that the massacre was inhumane and unnecessary. This massacre ended up taking the Indian people one step closer to freedom from England.
In addition, civil disobedience is an effective way of bringing social change because willingly accepting punishment expresses devotion to a cause. For example, Rosa Parks getting arrested led to the end of segregation on public facilities. In 1955, Rosa Parks had refused to give up her seat to white passengers on a bus in Montgomery, Alabama. When the bus began to fill with these white passengers, the driver moved the “colored” a few rows back. Rosa had refused to move out of her seat and instead said, “I don’t think I should have to stand up”. The driver called the authorities had her arrested. This spurred the Montgomery Bus Boycott and other attempts to end segregation. Rosa Parks’ arrest expressed without words that she was devoted to her cause and that she would take the consequences that came with was she thought was right. Her devotion then led to other events that eventually succeeded in ending segregation on public facilities.
Lastly, civil disobedience is a useful way of changing society because it influences other to join a cause, making it stronger.
The Sit-In movement is a great example of this. On February 1, 1960, four African American college students walked up to a whites-only lunch counter at the Woolworth’s store in North Carolina and asked for coffee. When they were refused service, the students continued to sit there. Despite threats, the students sat and waited to be served. The action of these four college students influenced others and they began doing the same. Sit-ins soon became a strong movement. After the number of people participating began to increase, the sit-ins became one more piece to the puzzle of
equality.
Civil disobedience means “the refusal to obey laws in a non-violent manner”. Civil disobedience is an effective method of social change because it makes the opposing look bad to the public eye, accepting punishment willingly expresses devotion to a cause, and it influences others to join a cause - making it stronger. And although one may say civil disobedience is ineffective because it takes longer, civil disobedience has been quicker than violence in some cases. For example, it took around 100 years for segregation in the United States to end, but Christians and Muslims fought for over 200 years for Jerusalem. Equality and social change have been fought for throughout the generations, but using violence makes one no better than their oppressor. Even though civil disobedience has its faults, would you rather become the oppressor or take inspiration from successful events in the past and keep persevering with a clear conscience and dignity?