Ghandi Case
By: lauracastro • Coursework • 731 Words • September 7, 2014 • 820 Views
Ghandi Case
Castro 1
Laura Castro
Nosser
English
January 12, 2014
“Send us to prison and we will live there as in a paradise...”
Gandhi expresses that a state is only a state as long as its people remain its subjects. By failing to be a subject the government is no longer recognized as a sovereign leader. As long as its people are treated with injustice and ruled by outrageous laws the public will not abide intolerable acts. What Gandhi is portraying is that an individual will not follow a law that will ultimately subdue the individual. Therefore, if led to severe consequences they will be confronted with a strong stance.
Society is entitled to its own opinion. By neglecting to believe or follow an instruction made by law officials, the individual will suffer the consequences of their misstep. Government belongs to the governed therefore, moral laws outweigh government mandates.
As unfortunate as it may be, in most modern cases authorities and regulations seem to be corrupted by its officials causing the refusal of obedience. It is too often that, “the rich and powerful... bend the acts of government”, for their own benefit (Andrew Jackson, Veto Message). Bribery and Extortion take a big role in the every day “negotiation” between unions making it hard to follow and honor laws.
Although some may disagree, breaking the law is occasionally acceptable. It is called an affirmative defense, it takes place as the individual neglects denying the breaking of the law but
Castro 2
rather has a valid reason for doing so. Many argue that personal choice outweighs the law as it is our moral obligation to revoke any unjust order. Yes, breaking regulations is serious matter but no individual will put itself through such grave circumstances, which could ultimately lead to time behind bars, without effective reasoning. Gandhi teaches one must take a stand and connect with the attacker mentally in order to prevail.