The Great Dangers of Civil Disobedience

van Dudes explicitly confounds the archetypes of Thoreau mentioning that they, as the denomination of his wrick suggests, destroy state. avant-garde Dudes olfactory goodtys that when service hu earthkind dis accompanys the justice and separates from the democratic federation he feels has fai take, he simply pushes state further towards failure. patch the curiositys laid out by Thoreau in Walden and politeized Disobedience, and Martin Luther exponent Jar. In Letter From Birmingham Jail, may be completely valid, the pissed by which they chose to try and attain them, civil noncompliance, is acted upon without true understanding of its insalubrious impact to democratic friendship according to Lewis H. question Dudes. While Henry David Thoreau seems to feel he is presenting the ideals for how one should live their life and how organization should function, In mankindkind he Is conveying an impractical message with detrimental effects. In his work Walden, Thoreau outlines the basic ideas of transcendentalism and keeps an account of his time spent living in the Walden woods. It is in the Walden woods that Thoreau concludes, If we do non Forge rails, and devote days and nights to the work, simply go to tinkering upon our lives o improve them, who will build railroads? Ho will want Thoreau Is conveying the message that within American club man has becomes so consumed with his own life that he has forgotten nearly striving towards progression. Thoreau feels that If e real man spends his time concerned with minor detail, and the somatic things society has defined as symbols of success. Man will not advance, he will simply live a cyclical life during which postcode of meaning occurs. While Thoreau presents his ideas with great confidence he soon finds that man inherently cant abandon all outing and ritual, thus making his concept of transcendence impractical.More Important than the Impracticality of transcendentalism Is Thoreau Interpretat ion of what he is presenting. Thoreau feels he is providing the manikin of a man who transcends societal constraints and living his life to the fullest. In verity Thoreau is very much avoiding society entirely by taking up this supposed transcendent lifestyle. Lewis H. Van Dudes presents the Idea that call disobedience Is very much a self- fulfilling prophecy. In going to the woods Thoreau doesnt build railroads but rather leaves them to be built by the world which he has wooly faith in.By leaving the building of railroads, essentially the directing of society, to a society he feels is very limited cod to deeply Ingrained process and ritual, Thoreau removes the settle he may have potentialityly had. This removal of Influence doesnt lead the railroads to taking the shape Thoreau wished for but instead lets a society he already doesnt 1 OFF nave Tall n In create teen In any way teen please. When man elects to transcend, en really avoids society and does not build railroads but instead runs from them. Henry David Thoreau presents his ideas for achieving better political sympathies in his work Civil Disobedience.As the title of his work suggests, Thoreau felt civil disobedience, a form of non-violent protest of laws, was the let on to ensuring a political relation doesnt over extend its control over its large number. In Civil Disobedience Thoreau states, The but obligation which I have a counterbalance to assume is to do at any time what I think is right(l). Thoreau seems to suggest that governmental laws constrain people. He feels as if man cant truly live within a society led by a government that restricts him by imposing laws and expecting adherence to them.While Thoreau feels that a government that didnt impose itself upon him would best allow man to flourish, it is Thoreau very picture that he should be able to do what he feels is right that could potentially create anarchy. Van Dudes argues that to break the law is to consider oneself above th e law, and if everyone feels they atomic number 18 above the law society cant function. If no one pays taxes or supports government society doesnt flourish instead it perishes. While an organized effort against government could potentially lead to unofficial solutions, when all people rebel against the laws presently in place the results are not necessarily ideal.Simply because many people disagree with the law doesnt mean they have the same opinions on what the proper laws are. Abandonment of laws would possibly, and likely result in the development of factions and these divided factions could result in the development of a state of anarchy. While Thoreau felt he was conveying the basis for great improvement in society, should his intellectual ideas be taken to fruition the possibility of anarchy could be ever present. Martin Luther King Jar. Arguably one of the most influential Americans of all time, relied upon civil disobedience as a method of attaining his ultimate goal, th e elimination of segregation. During one of his unbloody protests King was arrested and placed in a Birmingham Jail. After being condemned by the clergymen of Birmingham King wrote his Letter From Birmingham Jail. Within this letter King attempts to Justify the collect for his acts of civil disobedience. King claims there is a necessity for civil disobedience to bring about change.Kings goal was, without a doubt, Just and necessary so far his methods for attaining his goal were not. In his letter King stated, One has not scarce a legal but a moral responsibility to obey Just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey dirty laws. I would agree with SST. Augustine that an unjust law is no law at par 12). King takes a very similar stance to Thoreau in deciding that it is mans responsibility to disobey laws he finds unjust. King is suggesting that to think a law is unjust but do nothing is Just s bad as blindly following the law in the setoff place.King is convince d that only civil disobedience could bring the results he desired. While Kings goal to end the segregation of African Americans and whites in America was ostensibly one of great importance, his methods were not as ideal. Van Dudes would argue that by insisting on disobeying laws, Martin Luther King was demanding African Americans and others to pull away from the potential answer to their problem. King was essentially giving up on the res publica that he felt oppressed him. While democracy is inherently blemished it still allows for all who patiently adhere to it can have an influence.King doesnt patiently wait for the processes of democracy to get his point across. Instead , Klan puts enamels above democracy Ana requests toners ay ten same. Only in abandoning democracy does it truly fail, not due to its own inherent faults, but due to the assumption of failure by those who abandon it. Lewis H. Van Dudes, in his Civil Disobedience Destroyer of Democracy, attempts to refute the beli efs of all those who favor civil disobedience. Van Dudes directly interdicts Thoreau in saying, Thoreau position is not only morally irresponsible but politically reprehensible.When citizens in a democracy are called on to draw a craft of faith, the civil disobedient offer only a confession of failure. Van Dudes is conveying the idea that Thoreau beliefs are unacceptable because what he feels to be an shake up message for further progress, is simply a foreboding message of ineluctable failure. Thoreau sees civil disobedience as the expression of a higher man who is unwilling to stand for moral injustices. On the other hand, Van Dudes argues that Thoreau ideas suggest to man that he should give up on his effort to make change.By stepping away from American democracy and society the natural born right to try and direct democracy in the ways you wish is lost. Van Dudes also contradicts the idea that man should, at any time, disregard the law when he states, There is no man who is above the law, and there is no man who has a right to break the law. Civil disobedience is not above the law, but against the law. Van Dudes is making it nett that are only two types of citizens, those who obey the law ND those who disobey the law. Civil disobedience is not a loophole or gray area it is simply a glorified Justification for breaking the law.Simply because such a glorified news report is presented doesnt mean one should latch onto it. Man within a democracy should support it in hopes of making it better, not ignore it because he doesnt sanction of it in its current state. Lewis H. Van Disuses argument brings to light the potential dangers of the seemingly Justified argument for civil disobedience. Lewis H. Van Dudes refutes both Henry David Thoreau and Martin Luther Kings arguments in favor of civil disobedience. Thoreau believed in a policy of civil disobedience in trying to prevent democratic government from oppressing its people.King felt that civil disobedienc e was a necessary measure in bringing an end to segregation. Van Dudes makes evident the potential dangers of both mens ideas. Van Dudes brings to the forefront the potential for political turmoil should the message of either King or Thoreau be put into practice. While King and Thoreau both feel they are presenting the method by which society can better itself, Van Dudes sakes it clear that their ideas imply people should give up on a government that doesnt comply exactly with their beliefs.