America’s founding fathers developed a Constitution that many consider to be a combination of the best parts of a variety of governmental structures. In addition there are those who believe that in creating a government based upon the wants and needs of the represented people, the said people have a right to question and protest their representative’s decisions and motives, while there are also those who hold that although elected to their positions, the rulers of a nation, have the obligation to fully enforce the laws even if it results the death of a citizen, who broke one of those laws.

QUESTION

America’s founding fathers developed a Constitution that many consider to be a combination of the best parts of a variety of governmental structures. In addition there are those who believe that in creating a government based upon the wants and needs of the represented people, the said people have a right to question and protest their representative’s decisions and motives, while there are also those who hold that although elected to their positions, the rulers of a nation, have the obligation to fully enforce the laws even if it results the death of a citizen, who broke one of those laws.

Consider Machiavelli’s Prince excerpt, More’s Utopia excerpt, Thoreau’s “Civil Disobedience”, Plato’s “Crito”, King’s “I Have a Dream” speech and “Letter from Birmingham Jail”, and Jefferson’s “Declaration of Independence”, for their various definitions of a “just” government. In each instance the author believed in what he was espousing, and in many of the instances, went to jail for those beliefs and remained confident in his ability to exercise his constitutionally protected civil rights.

Briefly research America’s history in regard to Inalienable rights (see links below) and in a 4-6-page paper, justify, qualify or condemn the comments made by at least three of the above-mentioned writers in their respective works. Consider the logic and feasibility of their stance on government in your essay.

You may want to use Van Dusen’s “Civil Disobedience: Destroyer of Democracy” as a rebuttal or substantiation of your position.

ANSWER

Justifying, Qualifying, or Condemning the Perspectives of Influential Writers on Government and Civil Rights

The United States Constitution, developed by the founding fathers, is often regarded as a unique amalgamation of the best aspects of different governmental structures. It establishes a government based on the needs and wants of the represented people. Consequently, there are differing opinions on the rights of citizens to question and protest their representatives’ decisions and motives, as well as the obligation of rulers to enforce laws, even if it results in the death of a citizen. Examining the perspectives of various influential writers, such as Machiavelli, More, Thoreau, Plato, King, and Jefferson, offers insights into their definitions of a “just” government. This essay aims to justify, qualify, or condemn the views of three of these writers, taking into account the historical context of America’s struggle for inalienable rights.

Thomas Jefferson’s “Declaration of Independence”

Thomas Jefferson’s influential document declares that all individuals are endowed with certain inalienable rights, including life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Jefferson’s belief in the right of citizens to question and protest their government’s decisions is evident in his words, “That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it (The Stylistic Artistry of the Declaration of Independence, 2017).” Jefferson’s stance justifies the importance of citizens’ participation in shaping a just government. However, the feasibility of complete abolition might be questioned, as the stability and continuity of a nation are also crucial for its well-being.

 Henry David Thoreau’s “Civil Disobedience”

Thoreau’s essay advocates for civil disobedience as a means to challenge unjust laws and government actions. He argues that individuals have a moral obligation to resist laws that they deem unjust (Constitutional Rights Foundation, n.d.). Thoreau’s perspective, while inspiring, requires careful qualification. While the right to protest and question is fundamental, it must be exercised within the bounds of law and peaceful means. Unrestrained civil disobedience can lead to chaos and undermine the functioning of a just government.

Martin Luther King Jr.’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail” and “I Have a Dream” speech

King’s powerful writings and speeches advocate for justice, equality, and nonviolent civil disobedience in the face of racial discrimination. He calls for individuals to stand up against unjust laws and systems. King’s perspective is justified by the historical context of racial oppression and systemic injustice (Chakrabarty, 2013). His belief in peaceful protest and civil rights activism has played a pivotal role in advancing equality. However, it is crucial to acknowledge that the enforcement of laws, even in cases where they may result in tragedy, is an essential aspect of maintaining order and the rule of law in society.

Conclusion

The perspectives of influential writers on government and civil rights offer valuable insights into the complex nature of just governance. While Thomas Jefferson’s call to question and protest the government’s actions resonates with the principles of democratic participation, Henry David Thoreau’s concept of civil disobedience requires qualification to prevent anarchy. Martin Luther King Jr.’s emphasis on nonviolent resistance and the pursuit of equality highlights the transformative power of peaceful protest, but it must be balanced with the need for law enforcement. By understanding these perspectives and considering the historical context, society can strive towards a more just and balanced government that respects the inalienable rights of its citizens.

Reference

Chakrabarty, B. (2013). Challenging Jim Crow: King’s Approach to Racial Discrimination. In Oxford University Press eBooks (pp. 154–188). https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199951215.003.0005 

Constitutional Rights Foundation. (n.d.). https://www.crf-usa.org/black-history-month/thoreau-and-civil-disobedience 

The Stylistic Artistry of the Declaration of Independence. (2017, June 6). National Archives. https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/stylistic-artistry-of-the-declaration

Van Dusen, H. (1967). Civil disobedience: Destroyer of democracy.  International Journal of Ethics, 77(1), 11-25.