An overview of Civil disobedience

An overview of Civil disobedience At the beginning of â€Å"Civil Disobedience,† Thoreau expresses agreement with the idea â€Å"that government is best which governs least†. When carried to its logical conclusion, this concept leads to the realization â€Å"that government is best which governs not at all†. Thoreau believes government is the mode people have chosen to affect their will and is apt to be exploited before the people can act through it. Whatever the government assumes or promises, Thoreau argues, it does not keep a country free and it does not educate. He claims that all good that has been accomplished in America has been done not by the government, but by the people. He also argues that further accomplishments may have been reached if the government had not interfered. Thoreau states that as a reasonable citizen, he does not ask for no government at all, but an improved government. The first step in improving a government is for the people to identify what kind of government would earn their respect and loyalty. The problem is that not every individual has a say in how the government should perform, and many do not have the respect or even acknowledgement from the government. The majority can rule simply because it is more physically powerful, and the minority has essentially no say in shaping law. To Thoreau, a government based on majority rule is not based on justice. He asks, â€Å"Should an individual citizen have to resign his conscience to the legislator?† If this is so, why would a person even have a conscience? Thoreau states that we should be men first and subjects later. It is not desirable to develop a high opinion of the law, so much as for justice and right. For an individual to do what he thinks is right is the only duty which one has the right to assume. Thoreau makes a good argument; a group on its own has no conscience. However, a group of conscientious people is a conscientious group. Thoreau claims that when the people have respect for an undeserving government, the only natural result is that the people will be following the law against their wills, against their common sense, and against their conscience. So, Thoreau asks, are these people men at all? He states, â€Å"A wise man will only be useful as a man, and will not submit to be clay†. Thoreau states that most men do recognize the right of revolution when a government’s tyranny or inefficiency are sufficiently great and unendurable. When most of a country is unjustly overrun, then this is the time for honest individuals to rebel and revolt. Thoreau refers to voting as â€Å"a game†. He states that a person votes as he thinks is right, but that he is not necessarily bothered by whether or not his belief – his vote – is successful. The people, he believes, seem to be willing to leave this to the majority. Thoreau argues that a real wise man would not take the risk of what is right not prevailing and would also realize that there is not much virtue in the action of the mass. But as far as real men go, Thoreau believes that they are few and rare. He makes this clear in this essay; â€Å"How many men are there to a square thousand miles in the country? Hardly one.† Thoreau believes that there are few real people, it seems, because we are hypocritical, inconsistent, and weak in our beliefs. He claims that many disapprove of the nature of the government but continue to support it. Such people, he argues, should be resisting the government. An individual cannot genuinely be content when he knows he is consciously being cheated or deceived. Thoreau believes that instead of obeying rules one knows to be unjust, the individual should attempt to alter those laws. He suggests that the power of governmental control is what causes people to perceive resistance as worse than obedience. The government and the mass do not seem to be aware of or appreciate the wise minority who would push for reform, and those who choose to resist are punished and humiliated. Most people would rather wait until the majority agrees that laws should be revised via traditional process than to resist. Thoreau argues that if a government expects an individual to follow and carry out injustice, then that government is not one that should be followed. He makes a very good claim by saying that when one is under a government which unjustly imprisons people, then prison would be the appropriate place for a true, just individual. Thoreau evidently believes that an individual should not follow laws which he or she believes to be unjust. He states, â€Å"Know all men by these presents, that I, Henry Thoreau, do not wish to be regarded as a member of any society which I have not joined.† He declares that a real man would find it less confining to be locked up in a prison cell knowing that he was doing what is right, rather than living â€Å"free† in a society while obeying laws he believes to be wrong. Thoreau tries to make it clear at the end of the essay that he does not hate the idea of government, but that it is in dire need of major improvement, and that it should only be followed if it is just and if it has the consent of those who it governs. He states that the state will never be progressive and free until it recognizes the individuals, rather than the mass, and respects them accordingly.

Middle East in world affairs Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Middle East in world affairs - Essay Example e who have sacrificially dedicated their lives into trying to bring resolutions between the Israelis and the Palestinians through the use of non violent measures. The film is a close look at the constant growing foundations of the peace movements among the Israelis and the Palestinians (Kuriansky 66). It is in general a replication of the various conflicts surrounding the equal parties. The exploration of the lives of both the Israelis and the Palestinians into the numerous citizens’ lives in both areas has created this symmetry. This is the occurrence of the various lives that have constantly been hurt by the loss of the citizens and have considered the side of peace in order to resolve conflict. The fact that the Israelis and the Palestinians have chosen peace over revenge creates a pact of proper symmetry between the two parties thus inculcating a value of the grass roots of the two communities. The film in itself creates a factor that does not involve the politicians since what the politicians have, is easily blown away but what they have in place as a community is of value and is thus held close to their lives to avoid slipping aw ay from them. This film thus stands as a documentary that reverberates to show and interview ordinary people who achieve peace on both sectors. For instance in the movie, Robi Damelin, a mother who has got an Israeli origin has lost her son and reckons together with Ali Abu Awwad, a Palestinian (Kuriansky 230). This Palestinian has also lost a brother and several other members of the family and thus they connect. The social aspect of both parties is seen to come out strong in the lives of the two parties and is an inspiring story. The film is void of subjectivity and incorporates both communities equally without discrimination of one party. These are citizens who are working together for the everyday living towards peace away from destruction. The other factor of the constant dialogues between the communities creates symmetry.

Revise Persuasive Speech Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Revise Persuasive Speech - Essay Example In this regard, I seek to demystify an understanding of the BOTOX procedure; the serious side effects posed by the procedure, and create awareness reiterating that BOTOX injections are harmful to one’s health. III. Today I would like to enlighten you in understanding the BOTOX procedure; the serious side effects posed by the procedure, and create awareness reiterating that BOTOX injections are harmful to one’s health. 1. The term BOTOX refers to a purified type of botulinum that is a neurotoxin. Evidently, the neurotoxin when injected results to a medical situation called botulism. In this regard, it is normally injected in small amounts so as to relax the facial muscles and minimize wrinkles. 3. In this regard, scientific information indicates that a single gram of BOTOX could result to the death of as much as one million people. On the other hand, a couple of kilos could result to the total wipeout of all humanity as we know it. B. According to the medication guide of the Food and Drug Administration, it states that BOTOX may cause serious side effects that can be life threatening. These include difficulty in breathing or swallowing and spread of toxin effects. Moreover, the effect of botulinum toxin may affect areas of the body away from the injection site and cause symptoms of a serious condition called botulism. These evidently include loss of strength and muscle weakness all over the body, double vision, blurred vision, drooping eyelids, hoarseness or loss of voice, loss of bladder control among others. 2. Moreover, according to the New York Post in December 16th 2013, Gwyneth Paltrow was quoted in an interview that, â€Å" I won’t do BOTOX again, because I looked crazy. I looked like Joan Rivers!† Also in another confession, the queen of BOTOX, Nicole Kidman admitted that, â€Å"I did try BOTOX, unfortunately, but I got out of it and now I can finally move my face again.† Such shocking confessions and lamentation just further