I somewhat agree with that. The government needs to govern a little otherwise their would be unwanted actions happening. Some countries make great examples for that. The Venezuelan government did not govern enough and now they are neck deep in debt and inflation. The role of the government is to ensure that each of it’s citizens gets what is needed. That could be basic resources, justice, public education or even money if it is required. It should be able to keep the country and it’s citizens safe while also keeping corruption from taking place. The role of the government in relation to an individual citizen is that the government can indirectly affect the citizen and the citizen can affect the government.
The kind of government that would command my respect would be the kind that serves justice, takes care of not only its citizens, but of everyone regardless of race, religion or beliefs. The government should be able to have a certain amount of control over its citizens that allows for the citizens to do what they want but to an extent. They shouldn’t be able to illegal things or anything that can cause serious harm to ones reputation or self. If there is even an ounce of corruption in the government, it should be abolished. I would rather a bad politician that sometimes screws up than one that is corrupted.
If his essay can effect such great figures such as Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr..MLK got an entire country to change it’s perspective while Gandhi got an entire country to leave his country. If the essay brought this much change then it is certainly more than effective. Sometimes civil disobedience is the only way to bring change. I feel the only role of civil disobedience (in people that are in my age group) is to gain popularity or they do it out of peer pressure. I will admit that in some cases civil disobedience is OK but those are only serious cases in which the “victim” has no option left or if the law is simply unfair and the only way to change it is to take serious measures.