I believe that civil disobedience is perhaps essential for our society to develop. We can not be limited by past biases and "out of date" regulations. However, the key to my approval is "civil". Civil is defined 1) including ordinary citizens and their concerns 2) courteous and polite. So often showing disapproval turns to protest and escalates into riot or social condemnation. People should clearly know what they are against, and control their actions to project the outcome they are seeking. The current protest created by "Black Lives Matter" is a true example of my concerns. Why choose such a controversial slogan? It implies division rather than encourage unity. Martin Luther King Jr. was an amazing civil rights activist for his call to …show more content…
He reached across social lines and gave everyone something to drive for. Martin Luther King Jr. did not push to divide our nation. It seems that the news blast protest for individuals. Aren't there any civil liberties left that we all need? I do believe that civil disobedience can bring change and should be used to show the concerns of the people, but it should not be lead by mega-organizations that gain funds and host employees. The Washington Times claimed, "For all its talk of being a street uprising, Black Lives Matter is increasingly awash in cash, raking in pledges of more than $100 million from liberal foundations and others eager to contribute to what has become the grant-making cause du jour." With so much money at its disposal, shouldn't it be helping its cause at the people level? What about education, job purpose, skill training? Can't they do something more permanent than just protest? I agree that there are things that must be changed, but they should be changed within peoples minds. Dr. King also said, "Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do