Civil Disobedience: An Examination

It may well be that our means are fairly limited and our possibilities restricted when it comes to applying pressure on our government. But is this a reason to do nothing? Despair is nor an answer. Neither is resignation. Resignation only leads to indifference, which is not merely a sin but a punishment

-Elie Wiesel

Authority is a necessary part of an orderly society. Without it anarchy would consume us and plunge us into a darkness not seen since the fall of the Roman Empire; yet, what happens when authority oversteps its boundary, abusing the power ceded by its constituents? What recourse is available to citizens when the law itself is advocating oppression? The answer is civil disobedience. It is a rarely addressed and sometimes misunderstood tradition; but, from Samuel Adams to Martin Luther King Jr. it has served as an effective tool for visibly challenging and subsequently changing oppressive laws and mores. Civil disobedience can be a tangible check on a government's perceived abuse of power by its constituents.

The act of civil disobedience has been interpreted in two different ways. The source of the confusion arises over the word civil. Henry David Thoreau, a 19th century philosopher and proponent of civil disobedience, meant for the word to be interpreted as, "of or relating to the state or its citizenry" (Merriam-Webster Online). Under this definition it is disobedience to the state, ruling out no possibilities, including armed revolt. The theory behind this definition compares the government to a machine, with pulleys, ropes, and cranks. If that machine is perpetuating an injustice then the conscientious citizen must do what is necessary to break that machine, or become its counter resistance, lest they become a part of that which they are condemning (Thoreau). The second definition would interpret civil to mean, "adequate in courtesy and politeness" (Merriam-Webster Online). This definition was made famous by Mahatma Ghandi, who advocated pacifism and nonviolent resistance. Neither interpretation is wrong and both are an effective means for accomplishing their goals. In context of the United States of America, however, the latter definition is the one interpreted most often, and when exercised with consistency and dedication shown to be a more effective tool to defeat government sponsored oppression or excessive interference with civil liberties.

The majority in any situation holds a considerable amount of power over those with different views. In a study observing people who opposed a majority view, people, acting alone, would rather choose an incorrect answer and stay in compliance with the majority than the correct answer. When that same person knew that another person was also picking the correct, the knowledge instilled more confidence to resist the majority (Asch et al. 176-182). In the Milgram study, it was shown that people were more willing to be obedient to those in an authoritative role (Milgram et al. 183-194 ). When the Federal Government, with the support of a clear majority oppresses a minority group or view in a manner that does violence to the government's expressed moral tenants, then action is needed. Martin Buber, in his essay Man's Duty as Man says it like this:

The question here is not just about one of the numerous individual cases in the struggle between a truth powerless to act and a power that has become the enemy of truth. It is really a question of the absolutely concrete demonstration of the point at which this struggle at any moment becomes man's duty as man....

The simple act of a citizens doing what they know is right, as was the case in the Civil Rights Movement, and opposing a, "power that has become the enemy of truth", can form the seeds of a revolution that will, over time, erase oppression.

Perhaps the greatest successful instance of sustained civil disobedience is America's Civil Rights Movement. In Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) state mandated segregation was upheld. This was extended with Guinn v United States (1915) as well as Berea College v. Kentucky (1908). These Supreme Court rulings, in conjunction with the Jim Crow laws effectively denied African Americans the fundamental rights of citizenship guaranteed by the Constitution. In the monumental case of Brown v. Board of Education (1954) schools segregated by race were banned by the Court's reversal of its "Separate but Equal" precedent. The backlash to that decision resulted in the closing of schools rather than desegregate. In 1955, Rosa Parks sat down in a seat that was reserved solely for white passengers. Her arrest resulted in the Montgomery Bus Boycott led by a young Martin Luther King who instilled a sense of purpose and solidarity in Montgomery's African American community and after a long period of hardship resulted in the lifting of the segregation on the public buses. In 1960 four African-American students performed a sit-in at a local restaurant, which sparked a series of sit-ins all across the southern states. When arrested, they refused to pay bail so that the government had to carry the burden of paying for their imprisonment. This then led to the Freedom Riders, and so on. Fifty years later, the concept of "separate but equal" does violence to most American's sense of justice. Each one of the hard fought non violent events that are now referred to as the Civil Rights Movement demonstrate that non violent disobedience of oppressive laws and mores held by a majority can be changed by sustained and visible resistance, no matter the cost to oneself.

Authority will always exist in society in one way or the other. In the United States of America, that authority's duty is to look after the constituents. However, when it fails to do so, as it sometimes does, Civil Disobedience as preached by Thoreau and utilized by the Civil Rights Movement can change the way that that power is being used. By standing up for what is right, one person, through civil disobedience, can inspire more to stand up and resist a majority view that is morally wrong. In a democratic society civil disobedience is a necessary counterweight to the government's or a President's exercise of oppressive or intrusive powers to achieve a desired goal or maintain the status quo.

WORKS CITED

Ashe, Solomon et al. Reading and Writing Across the Curriculum. New York: Pearson Longman, 2007.

Buber, Martin et al. Thoreau in Our Season. "Man's Duty as Man." Boston. University of Massachusetts Press. 1962.

"Civil." Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. 2008. Merriam Webster Online. 31 October 2008. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/civil>

Milgram, Stanley et al. Reading and Writing Across the Curriculum. New York: Pearson Longman 2007.

Thoreau, David Henry. Civil Disobedience. 1866. 31 October 2008.

http://www.thoreau-online.org/civil-disobedience.html>