Civil Disobedience Definition

695 Words3 Pages

Throughout decades, most of citizens cannot grasp the concept of the purpose and the importance of Civil Disobedience. According to John Rawls, an American moral and political philosopher, he (1971) states that “civil disobedience is a public, non-violent and conscientious breach of law undertaken with the aim of bringing about a change in laws or government policies. On this account, people who engage in civil disobedience are willing to accept the legal consequences of their actions, as this shows their fidelity to the rule of law. Civil disobedience, given its place at the boundary of fidelity to law, is said to fall between legal protest, on the one hand, and conscientious refusal, revolutionary action, militant protest and organized forcible resistance, on the other hand.” Therefore, …show more content…

Mode of Action and motivating in acting play the important roles. According to Rawls, non-violence and directness are the two factors of mode of action. The law breakers can choose and see one of which fits in due to the circumstances in different situation. This depicts that the law breakers study the strategies in order to be flexible and solve the problems quickly. In addition, motivating people in acting is about encourage a vast majority of people who share the same passion to change to have commitment and responsibility to success a goal. This cannot be succeeded by one person. It needs a team. For instance, Martin Luther King led the non-violence protest to bring the equality rights for Black American in 1963. He won a noble prize and gave such a powerful speech, “I have a dream” which was inspired by everyone. Furthermore, he quoted that “An individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for the