Why Is Civil Disobedience Effective

Civil disobedience is a not a viable way of protesting or showing a disagreement towards the government. Examples of why civil disobedience is a bad strategy to get a point across are how it didn’t help in democracy, it doesn’t usually change what the people are against, and it is not any more effective than other tactics. Civil disobedience did not help in democracy during 1848 until 1920, women had to fight to gain freedom. When quiet protests weren’t enough, they had to find an alternative. Brave women would march in the streets, went on hunger strikes, and even went to jail to gain the right to vote. Whether citizens consider disobedience “civil” or not, the government and authorities will still make you suffer consequences. Resistance
When people choose to protest, they want to get the message across to as many people as possible. Being against civil disobedience in no way means to be for violence, it just means that acting more outrageous is more effective. Organized disobedience or protest will stir up a crowd and cause change to happen, it’s a plain fact. Throughout the years in history, police and/or authorities have found ways to deal with civil disobedience and it is time for a change. Lastly, civil or not, disobedience flouts the law. Everyone gets mad about the denial of a basic right, but civil disobedience just doesn’t work anymore. Anger is not the best way to go as a first option in trying to change laws. In order for things to change, citizens must be smart about the choices made. Too much money is spent on a method that isn’t effective and more legally risky. Before the laws were changed so drastically, civil disobedience was a viable option. On the other hand, People may think that civil disobedience has played significant roles throughout history and that it is best known to work. But with recent changes in society, it does not have the same outcome as