Why Is Bureaucracy Wrong
“The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only object of good government,” Thomas Jefferson once said. The government is a precarious, but influential, part in the world today. Many believe that everything the government does should be implemented in order to keep structure in our daily lives. However, bureaucracy is not always right. The government can often prove it can not be credible, plausible, or dependable. For as long as democracy has been in place, people have disagreed with it. Yet, if it were not for these disputes, government would never be anything that it is today. It is appropriate to go against the government if there is a conscience-challenged problem that can be solved civilly.
…show more content…
Morals are what founded the beliefs we live on. It is appropriate to go against the government when a substantial amount of people believe that a ruling goes against their conscience. Henry David Thoreau states, “It is truly enough said that a corporation has no conscience; but a corporation of conscientious men is a corporation with a conscience.” (Thoreau) People that work together with strong integrities in mind often result in some of the best compromises that continuously fix this nation. In particular, the fight for women’s rights. Bureaucracy ruled that women should not be allowed to be leaders in this world because they are weak. That led to capable women not being able to vote, own property, and attend higher level education. None of which were abolished until the passing of the 19th Amendment in 1920. Women all over the world, such as Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton, worked together to eventually create rights allowing women to influence the world in ways they never have before. Leaders like this prove that it is correct to challenge government if numerous populations agree that the democracy is defying …show more content…
It is wrong for the government to interfere with personal matters. It is appropriate to go against the government when a law places unnecessary limits on a certain race. Such as the case for civil rights in America, specifically Mrs. Rosa Parks. After a long day of work in Montgomery, Alabama, Parks embarked on her bus route home when she was ordered to move from her seat so a white passenger could sit there. She refused to give up her rightfully claimed spot. Not many African Americans were willing to stand up for what they have faith in. Parks was thankfully not one of these people. Admittedly, she was arrested but she never gave in to the idea that the white man was better than her. Rita Dove states, “When she remained seated, that simple decision eventually led to the disintegration of institutionalized segregation in the South, ushering in a new era of the civil rights movement.” (Dove) That one choice to stay in her seat, created a landslide of events that propelled newfound respect for African Americans. She showed the government that no one person is better than the other due to the color of their skin. Her spark caught flame and started a contagious fire. With the help of others, such as Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., jurisdiction granted the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments. This provided equal protection under the law for any skin color that was willing to accept it. Societies are able to remember
Morals are what founded the beliefs we live on. It is appropriate to go against the government when a substantial amount of people believe that a ruling goes against their conscience. Henry David Thoreau states, “It is truly enough said that a corporation has no conscience; but a corporation of conscientious men is a corporation with a conscience.” (Thoreau) People that work together with strong integrities in mind often result in some of the best compromises that continuously fix this nation. In particular, the fight for women’s rights. Bureaucracy ruled that women should not be allowed to be leaders in this world because they are weak. That led to capable women not being able to vote, own property, and attend higher level education. None of which were abolished until the passing of the 19th Amendment in 1920. Women all over the world, such as Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton, worked together to eventually create rights allowing women to influence the world in ways they never have before. Leaders like this prove that it is correct to challenge government if numerous populations agree that the democracy is defying …show more content…
It is wrong for the government to interfere with personal matters. It is appropriate to go against the government when a law places unnecessary limits on a certain race. Such as the case for civil rights in America, specifically Mrs. Rosa Parks. After a long day of work in Montgomery, Alabama, Parks embarked on her bus route home when she was ordered to move from her seat so a white passenger could sit there. She refused to give up her rightfully claimed spot. Not many African Americans were willing to stand up for what they have faith in. Parks was thankfully not one of these people. Admittedly, she was arrested but she never gave in to the idea that the white man was better than her. Rita Dove states, “When she remained seated, that simple decision eventually led to the disintegration of institutionalized segregation in the South, ushering in a new era of the civil rights movement.” (Dove) That one choice to stay in her seat, created a landslide of events that propelled newfound respect for African Americans. She showed the government that no one person is better than the other due to the color of their skin. Her spark caught flame and started a contagious fire. With the help of others, such as Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., jurisdiction granted the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments. This provided equal protection under the law for any skin color that was willing to accept it. Societies are able to remember