The Art Of Civil Disobedience
Over the years, hundreds of protests were held in America over injustices against victims and their families.From the March on Washington, to the Flowers vs.Guns protest, their resistance was something that positively affected and encouraged free societies. The practice of civil disobedience started with Henry David Thoreau, who went on to rationalize his thoughts about the term. In his lecture,he discloses into two principles that the government relies on the sufferance of the administered, and also how the citizen has the full right to determine if a law emulates or repudiates justice. This displays the right for citizens to withstand the law and accept the consequences of civil disobedience. In Thoreau's context, he criticized
…show more content…
Morris Leibman, a former lawyer, wrote an article on how non violent resistance is a severance in the general public. Leibman goes to state that "No society whether free or tyrannical can give its citizens the "right" to break the law. There can be no law to which obedience is optional, no command to which the state attaches an "if you please." Further in the article, Leibman goes to ask why the practice of civil disobedience may be necessary, when citizens should just portray the "majestic title bestowed on those of us who create and share in the values of the law society". Why do these people contend to rebel against a country that is providing freedom and peace for you? Opposing the prospect of discrimination is something that is to be reckon with, and the sentiment of human rights are certianly important, but to not have a general idea on how to go about things, results to a corollary from Justice Frankfurter saying that "Only those lacking responsible humility will have a confident solution to problems as intractable as the frictions attributable to differences of color, race, or religion." This statement brings Leibman to include how the introspection of civil disobedience can disintegrate into violence and work up destruction and inherently clinch the gist of the
Morris Leibman, a former lawyer, wrote an article on how non violent resistance is a severance in the general public. Leibman goes to state that "No society whether free or tyrannical can give its citizens the "right" to break the law. There can be no law to which obedience is optional, no command to which the state attaches an "if you please." Further in the article, Leibman goes to ask why the practice of civil disobedience may be necessary, when citizens should just portray the "majestic title bestowed on those of us who create and share in the values of the law society". Why do these people contend to rebel against a country that is providing freedom and peace for you? Opposing the prospect of discrimination is something that is to be reckon with, and the sentiment of human rights are certianly important, but to not have a general idea on how to go about things, results to a corollary from Justice Frankfurter saying that "Only those lacking responsible humility will have a confident solution to problems as intractable as the frictions attributable to differences of color, race, or religion." This statement brings Leibman to include how the introspection of civil disobedience can disintegrate into violence and work up destruction and inherently clinch the gist of the