In a democracy civil disobedience is an appropriate weapon in the fight for justice.

[attacking first argument is unept] CD these days is a victim of the "roach-spray- effect" (the more you spray us, the more we develop immunity and the larger your doses need to be!). The Intelligent Singaporean, Dec. 1 2007 What they are trying to say is that as C.D. progresses in time, with the coming of the internet, these law breaking stunts need to be bigger, badder, and more drastic to capture public attention, thus rendering C.D. an ineffective tool in today's world. This is one of the many reasons why in a democracy, C.D. is not an appropriate weapon in the fight for justice. Our points of argument being C.D. Justifies Violence C.D. Hurts Democracy Social Contract theory disallows C.D. Con 1. C.D. Justifies Violence: Prof. Berel Lang at Colorado tells us that: Virtually all the discussions of those two forms of action have assumed that acts of civil disobedience are bound in principal by the restraints of nonviolence. The presumption of this connection has been drawn on the fact that advocates of the one form of action have often been advocates of the other. Now what this means is that civil disobedience is not completely kept away from violence. The connection has been falsely made because the majority of the most famous leaders of C.D. such as MLK Jr., Gandhi, and Henry Thoreau, have also been peace activists. Another form of violence, which is often over looked, is violence against oneself. Heiner Bielefeldt, with a PhD in Philosophy, says that Civil disobedience, too, may include an aspect of self-inflicted violence, if the resistors deliberately run the risk of violent action by the state and use it to dramatize their protest publicly. In Fact in protest of the Vietnamese Government prohibiting flags being flown on Buda's birthday Seven Buddhist monks lit themselves on fire and burned to death on city streets in a ritual suicide. 2. C.D. Hurts Democracy: An example of how C.D. hurts democracy is told to us by Prof. Harry Posch. . If C.D. fails, one has succeeded only in increasing the hostility of one's opponents toward one's views, and actually therefore created a greater obstacle to the moral re-evaluation one is ostensibly seeking. And then there is, in addition, the further considerable risk that "non-violence" may spill over into "violence" when it meets with the counter violence which it has provoked if it has not been successful. He tells us that if someone wants something, and their attempt at getting it fails, they will only try harder to get it, and go to more drastic measures. 3. Social Contract Theory Disallows C.D. The first full exposition of Social Contract theory was written by Thomas Hobbes. It explains that when a person turns to the age of adulthood, they have a choice whether they want to live in their country or not. And by accepting to live in that country, they have moral and/or political obligations between them to form society. This means that they should accept those laws, and abide by them. So, C.D. by definition, breaks that countries laws, and breaks this contract. And as Roger Geary stated: "The social contract benefits everyone for 'even the strongest must sleep' and when asleep the strongest must rely on the law to guarantee personal security." In Conclusion: I have explained to you why, in a democracy, C.D. in not an appropriate weapon in the fight for justice. C.D. Justifies Violence C.D. Hurts Democracy Social Contract Theory Disallows C.D. Civil Disobedience has descriptive and normative versions. In the descriptive version, one predicts that the example of disobediency will be imitated, causing disrespect for the government, increasing lawlessness, and tending toward anarchy. In the normative version, one notes that if disobedience is justified for one group whose moral beliefs condemn the law, then it is justified for any group similarly situated, which is also a recipe for anarchy. The first reply, offered in seriousness by Thoreau and Gandhi, is that anarchy is not so bad an outcome. I beg to differ.