The Case Against Civil Disobedience Herbert J. Storing
Storing criticizes civil disobedience in two different perspectives; a more radical view supported by people like Malcolm X and the perspective that civil disobedience does not show sufficient respect for the law. In this response, I agree with Storing’s argument that civil disobedience has numerous shortcomings that make it unacceptable to the society.
First, civil disobedience does not go far, and this is highlighted by the fact that it counsels people to be nonviolent. Through the latter, it plays into the agenda of the state and in the end, the unjust laws of the state are left unopposed. Second, civil disobedience is unacceptable because it does not help determine the just and unjust laws. It is vital to provide concrete guidance to unfair and just laws, and this is what the proponents of civil disobedience like King fail to provide. This has led to a contradiction because people show respect for the law while at the same time breaking it and accepting a punishment. Third, civil disobedience does not explain whether people should merely violate unjust laws or refuse to cooperate with systems that are considered unfair. By refusing to cooperate with systems, individuals cannot be disconnected from the society and this is where civil disobedience fails to give an elaboration. Moreover, civil disobedience should not be accepted because it places the suppressed in the position where they ask or request for justice instead of receiving justice.
However, there are those with the opinion that civil disobedience remains the most appropriate way of forcing a state to fulfill the demands of its citizens. Although this might be true, the state will take advantage of the citizens and instead of them receiving justice, they will be begging for it in the end. Besides, civil obedience has in the past resulted in more oppression than the expected justice.
Storing, Herbert J. “The Case Against Civil Disobedience.” Civil Disobedience in Focus. 1991.
 Storing, Herbert J. “The Case Against Civil Disobedience.” Civil Disobedience in Focus. 1991.
 Ibid, 96