Sioux Tribe Research Paper
It has been over 400 years since white settlers came to America and claimed land originally belonging to the Native Americans. Indigenous peoples of America, including the Sioux tribe, have suffered continuously because of the settlers and eventually their government. The Sioux tribe is recently taking a stand by protesting the plan for the construction of an oil pipeline in North Dakota that could seriously jeopardize the water supply of the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation. This pipeline also would cross through sacred ancestral lands of the Sioux tribe. Leaders of the Sioux tribe explain that they did not properly communicate with the people planning for the pipeline. Since spring, protesters have gathered peacefully to show their disagreement with the pipeline plan, but recently blocked the pathway for construction, which led to violence. The Sioux tribe have an inherent sense of duty to perform a
…show more content…
civil act of disobedience in order to protest what they think is unjust. It is civil duty to properly break the law when necessary. Thomas Jefferson’s The Declaration of Independence, Henry David Thoreau’s “Civil Disobedience,” and Martin Luther King Jr.’s Letter from Birmingham Jail are extremely significant historical writings that explain the civil duty to break the law by disclosing how, when, and why to break the law. Protesters, like the people of the Sioux tribe and other activists, should look to these writings in order to properly perform their civil duty. Jefferson clarifies the civil duty to properly break the law in The Declaration of Independence. First, Jefferson states that “a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.” This means that a citizen needs to have a good, just reason why he or she is going to break the law, and explain these reasons to mankind before breaking the law. This is an act of humility needed in order to gain mankind’s respect and support before properly breaking the law. Second, Jefferson expresses that “It is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.” Jefferson explains it is a mankind’s duty to rebel against an unjust government. This notion is discussed particularly in the beginning of Part One where Jefferson states, “. . .it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another.” His powerful use of the word ‘necessary’ shows the gravity of the duty to break an unjust law. For a law or government to be unjust, it must greatly benefit some people more than others, must not be fair to all, and must not have a good reason for it. Jefferson lists multiple grievances in the document, including the unjust quartering of armed troops among the people, and taxation without representation. These are only two of many unjust, oppressive laws listed by Jefferson. He believes that mankind’s duty is to break oppressive laws like the ones he lists in the Declaration of Independence. Third, Jefferson asserts that a “petition for redress” must be done before breaking the law. He makes very clear that “in every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury.” The American people had peacefully asked for change many times, but the British government still refused to change the oppressive policies. Jefferson explains a citizen needs to ask peacefully for change multiple times before it is proper to break the law. In the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson defines the steps needed to take in order to perform the civil duty of properly breaking the law. Henry David Thoreau builds upon Jefferson’s foundation of why, when, and how to perform the civil duty of breaking the law in “Civil Disobedience.” First and foremost, Thoreau asserts that “the only obligation which I have a right to assume is to do at any time what I think is right.” This is justifying that when doing what is morally right, breaking the law is a civil obligation.
He follows this up by explaining that “If it is of such nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then I say, break the law.” This also clarifies that when the nature of the law is unjust, then following good conscience resulting in the breaking of the law is actually the duty of the people. According to Thoreau, for a law “to be strictly just, it must have the sanction and consent of the governed.” Strangely enough, Thoreau believes that a citizen’s duty is not to force others to eradicate the wrong by breaking the law, but only eradicate the wrong in one’s own life. Thoreau shows how remove injustice from one’s life in an influential line that reads as
follows:
It is not a man's duty, as a matter of course, to devote himself to the eradication of any, even to most enormous wrong; he may still properly have other concerns to engage him; but it is his duty, at least, to wash his hands of it, and, if he gives it no thought longer, not to give it practically his support.
Thoreau explains that a citizen can properly break the law on his or her own in order to not support unjust things by continuing to do them. Even if only one citizen starts to eliminate the injustice in his or her own life, “it matters not how small the beginning may seem to be:what is once well done is done forever,” according to Thoreau. This will start a chain of events which are needed to reveal the injustice of oppressive laws and government. Thoreau believes injustice is when one party gains more than another by “sitting upon another man’s shoulders.” The only way to combat this inequality is to “get off the other man’s shoulders” in order to stop following the path of injustice. Furthermore, Thoreau continues to explain the civil duty of properly breaking the law by proposing the concept of a “peaceable revolution.” Thoreau explains how to perform a peaceable revolution with an example. “If a thousand men were not to pay their tax-bills this year, that would not be a violent and bloody measure, as it would be to pay them, and enable the State to commit violence and shed innocent blood,” shows how Thoreau believed violence was not the correct way to break the law. The correct way is the peaceful way. In “Civil Disobedience,” Thoreau is able to connect ideas from Jefferson’s main writings and current events to explain the means of breaking the law as a civil duty.
Martin Luther King Jr. ties in Jefferson and Thoreau’s writings to explain the civil duty of breaking the law when necessary in his Letter from Birmingham Jail. Above all, King states that “freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed.” This shows how he believes it is a civil duty to demand change, rather than wait for the government to change itself. The people in power always think they are right and will not let others challenge their power. The oppressed needs to properly demand change from the people in power and prepare for it. Furthermore, King builds upon exactly how a civilian should go about breaking the law. He believes there are four basic steps to a nonviolent campaign: “collection of the facts to determine whether injustices are alive, negotiation, self-purification, and direct action.” King describes an unjust law as “a code that a majority inflicts on a minority that is not binding on itself.” This relates to Thoreau’s statements about the majority ruling over the minority. King explains in his letter that the minority tried negotiating with the political leaders who represent the majority, “but the political leaders consistently refused to engage in good-faith negotiation.” This mirrors Jefferson’s description of petitioning for redress, asking politely for change. King also listed multiple grievances in his letter, just like Jefferson did in the Declaration of Independence. After trying to negotiate and explain the acts of injustice, King and others decided to go through a process of self-purification by having workshops on nonviolence and repeatedly asking the questions, “Are you able to accept blows without retaliating?” and “Are you able to endure the ordeals of jail?” King was willing to wash his hands clean of the injustice, as Thoreau described, and was willing to face up to the consequences of breaking the law. Breaking the law would be the direct action part of the four-step plan. Before breaking the law, King states that “one who breaks an unjust law must do so openly, lovingly, and with a willingness to accept the penalty.” King fully describes the duty of breaking the law in detail in his Letter from Birmingham Jail by providing a four-step process for all of mankind to follow.
Indigenous peoples of have had land taken from them for over 400 years. This year, the Sioux tribe are protesting the pipeline because they believe it is unjust. According to Jefferson, Thoreau, and King, it is a civilian’s duty to break these unjust laws to show that they are unjust, but must be broken properly. The Sioux tribe followed some of the guidelines from these influential men in order to perform their duty correctly. All three definitions of injustice match with what the Sioux say they are experiencing with the planned construction. The tribe has decided that this is the last straw after a long history of land taken from them, and have listed their grievances to all, including a court of law. The Sioux tribe has also protested in all peaceful means, which is within their rights. The Sioux have clearly learned their civil duty from “The Declaration of Independence,” “Civil Disobedience,” and “Letter from Birmingham Jail” over the course of over 400 years that they have been fighting similar battles.
civil act of disobedience in order to protest what they think is unjust. It is civil duty to properly break the law when necessary. Thomas Jefferson’s The Declaration of Independence, Henry David Thoreau’s “Civil Disobedience,” and Martin Luther King Jr.’s Letter from Birmingham Jail are extremely significant historical writings that explain the civil duty to break the law by disclosing how, when, and why to break the law. Protesters, like the people of the Sioux tribe and other activists, should look to these writings in order to properly perform their civil duty. Jefferson clarifies the civil duty to properly break the law in The Declaration of Independence. First, Jefferson states that “a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.” This means that a citizen needs to have a good, just reason why he or she is going to break the law, and explain these reasons to mankind before breaking the law. This is an act of humility needed in order to gain mankind’s respect and support before properly breaking the law. Second, Jefferson expresses that “It is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.” Jefferson explains it is a mankind’s duty to rebel against an unjust government. This notion is discussed particularly in the beginning of Part One where Jefferson states, “. . .it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another.” His powerful use of the word ‘necessary’ shows the gravity of the duty to break an unjust law. For a law or government to be unjust, it must greatly benefit some people more than others, must not be fair to all, and must not have a good reason for it. Jefferson lists multiple grievances in the document, including the unjust quartering of armed troops among the people, and taxation without representation. These are only two of many unjust, oppressive laws listed by Jefferson. He believes that mankind’s duty is to break oppressive laws like the ones he lists in the Declaration of Independence. Third, Jefferson asserts that a “petition for redress” must be done before breaking the law. He makes very clear that “in every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury.” The American people had peacefully asked for change many times, but the British government still refused to change the oppressive policies. Jefferson explains a citizen needs to ask peacefully for change multiple times before it is proper to break the law. In the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson defines the steps needed to take in order to perform the civil duty of properly breaking the law. Henry David Thoreau builds upon Jefferson’s foundation of why, when, and how to perform the civil duty of breaking the law in “Civil Disobedience.” First and foremost, Thoreau asserts that “the only obligation which I have a right to assume is to do at any time what I think is right.” This is justifying that when doing what is morally right, breaking the law is a civil obligation.
He follows this up by explaining that “If it is of such nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then I say, break the law.” This also clarifies that when the nature of the law is unjust, then following good conscience resulting in the breaking of the law is actually the duty of the people. According to Thoreau, for a law “to be strictly just, it must have the sanction and consent of the governed.” Strangely enough, Thoreau believes that a citizen’s duty is not to force others to eradicate the wrong by breaking the law, but only eradicate the wrong in one’s own life. Thoreau shows how remove injustice from one’s life in an influential line that reads as
follows:
It is not a man's duty, as a matter of course, to devote himself to the eradication of any, even to most enormous wrong; he may still properly have other concerns to engage him; but it is his duty, at least, to wash his hands of it, and, if he gives it no thought longer, not to give it practically his support.
Thoreau explains that a citizen can properly break the law on his or her own in order to not support unjust things by continuing to do them. Even if only one citizen starts to eliminate the injustice in his or her own life, “it matters not how small the beginning may seem to be:what is once well done is done forever,” according to Thoreau. This will start a chain of events which are needed to reveal the injustice of oppressive laws and government. Thoreau believes injustice is when one party gains more than another by “sitting upon another man’s shoulders.” The only way to combat this inequality is to “get off the other man’s shoulders” in order to stop following the path of injustice. Furthermore, Thoreau continues to explain the civil duty of properly breaking the law by proposing the concept of a “peaceable revolution.” Thoreau explains how to perform a peaceable revolution with an example. “If a thousand men were not to pay their tax-bills this year, that would not be a violent and bloody measure, as it would be to pay them, and enable the State to commit violence and shed innocent blood,” shows how Thoreau believed violence was not the correct way to break the law. The correct way is the peaceful way. In “Civil Disobedience,” Thoreau is able to connect ideas from Jefferson’s main writings and current events to explain the means of breaking the law as a civil duty.
Martin Luther King Jr. ties in Jefferson and Thoreau’s writings to explain the civil duty of breaking the law when necessary in his Letter from Birmingham Jail. Above all, King states that “freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed.” This shows how he believes it is a civil duty to demand change, rather than wait for the government to change itself. The people in power always think they are right and will not let others challenge their power. The oppressed needs to properly demand change from the people in power and prepare for it. Furthermore, King builds upon exactly how a civilian should go about breaking the law. He believes there are four basic steps to a nonviolent campaign: “collection of the facts to determine whether injustices are alive, negotiation, self-purification, and direct action.” King describes an unjust law as “a code that a majority inflicts on a minority that is not binding on itself.” This relates to Thoreau’s statements about the majority ruling over the minority. King explains in his letter that the minority tried negotiating with the political leaders who represent the majority, “but the political leaders consistently refused to engage in good-faith negotiation.” This mirrors Jefferson’s description of petitioning for redress, asking politely for change. King also listed multiple grievances in his letter, just like Jefferson did in the Declaration of Independence. After trying to negotiate and explain the acts of injustice, King and others decided to go through a process of self-purification by having workshops on nonviolence and repeatedly asking the questions, “Are you able to accept blows without retaliating?” and “Are you able to endure the ordeals of jail?” King was willing to wash his hands clean of the injustice, as Thoreau described, and was willing to face up to the consequences of breaking the law. Breaking the law would be the direct action part of the four-step plan. Before breaking the law, King states that “one who breaks an unjust law must do so openly, lovingly, and with a willingness to accept the penalty.” King fully describes the duty of breaking the law in detail in his Letter from Birmingham Jail by providing a four-step process for all of mankind to follow.
Indigenous peoples of have had land taken from them for over 400 years. This year, the Sioux tribe are protesting the pipeline because they believe it is unjust. According to Jefferson, Thoreau, and King, it is a civilian’s duty to break these unjust laws to show that they are unjust, but must be broken properly. The Sioux tribe followed some of the guidelines from these influential men in order to perform their duty correctly. All three definitions of injustice match with what the Sioux say they are experiencing with the planned construction. The tribe has decided that this is the last straw after a long history of land taken from them, and have listed their grievances to all, including a court of law. The Sioux tribe has also protested in all peaceful means, which is within their rights. The Sioux have clearly learned their civil duty from “The Declaration of Independence,” “Civil Disobedience,” and “Letter from Birmingham Jail” over the course of over 400 years that they have been fighting similar battles.