Wilde's Disobedience and Societal Change

Christofer Smith • December 4, 2025 • 827 Words

Introduction

Ethically, we humans are not perfect. We lie, we steal, we cheat, and we commit a plethora of transgressions against ourselves. One of these often-committed acts is that of disobedience — the subversion of authority over us. As author Oscar Wilde has stated, our use of disobedience has been able to promote lasting change through the formation of new governments and the amending of existing policies, despite the possibility of disobedience backfiring exposing its varying degrees of effectiveness.

Revolutions

Through the lens of history, the role that disobedience has played in fostering positive societal growth is exemplified. Take, for instance, the American Revolution in 1776, when colonists fought for and won independence from the British crown. Here, their rebellion against King George III allowed them to establish a new nation founded upon democracy in governmental matters — an arguably more representative society than during their subjugation under the monarchy suited to them while also setting a precedent for future rebellions and movements seeking equality. It is this same desire for freedom that inspired the similarly performed Haitian Revolution, the only successful servile revolt against slave masters in history. In gaining their independence, the people of Haiti were able to develop a society that was not founded upon the cruelty and inhumane practices of the slavery that they fought their way out of. While these violent forms of disobedience were responsible for mass losses of life, they eventually created net benefit in the newly-independent nations by allowing them to develop countries to meet their needs, not those of the oppressors formerly over them.

Protests

Although the age of rebellions has not come to a close, relatively recent non-violent examples of disobedience are able to demonstrate how a trait with such a negative association can facilitate positive change. Civil disobedience, for example, is often associated with Mahatma Ghandi, whose emphasis on peace as a core tenet in uniting India against colonial rule is recognized for its instrumental role in gaining Indian independence from the British crown without war in the late 1940s. This form of disobedience contrasts the latter instances in that it still successfully attained the benefit of political freedom without the violence that traditional revolutions impart. These practices would go on to help inspire Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s contributions to the American Civil Rights Movement that dominated the history of the mid-1950s and 1960s, helping to highlight how disobedience can also encourage change. Here, his speeches and marches were able to raise awareness of their cause and convey the importance of their goals whilst, similarly to Ghandi, stressing the prevention of bloodshed. Although these movements were by no means completely nonviolent, as there were always advocates willing to procure change by any means necessary, by seeking to protest with peace, these two figures of civil rights were able to help create the change that they sought — freedom and equality — that are still standing in their countries today.

Counterargument

Disobedience has brought forth detrimental effects to the transformation of societal values and norms, however, and this is where Wilde’s claim falters. He frames disobedience as an inherent proponent of societal change, where in fact, it may act not as a catalyst, but as a destabilizing force that complicates his generalization. Examples of such are especially prevalent in the opinionated and polarized climate of today. This was highlighted during the January 6th insurrection, in which Republic protesters stormed the United States Capitol Building. While rallying behind their presidential candidate following his electoral loss, the violent attack on Congress stirred groups among and across both sides of the aisle, resulting in greater tension and polarization that prohibited unity and progress. Additionally, disobedience in the form of protests has fostered the development of poor reputations among ideas, which is demonstrated by the organizations Just Stop Oil and the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA). Both groups have arranged protests and displays that employ shock value to raise awareness surrounding their stances against oil and animal cruelty, respectively. These acts, such as PETA’s Relate to Who’s On Your Plate campaign and Just Stop Oil’s Formula 1 racetrack demonstration, have been portrayed and circulated as outlandish and inappropriate, thus leading many to identify against these organizations, and by extension, their messages. In seeking awareness and the promotion of societal change, these events have cast themselves into a spotlight of poor connotation, and in doing so, repelled potential followers instead of attracting them to their movement. Without support, these movements seeking societal progress fizzle out, failing to impart the change that they sought.

Conclusion

While disobedience has, both violently and peacefully, served humanity well in allowing peoples to escape oppression, specific cases of its extreme forms have become platforms showcasing the failure it may bring. Regardless, all of these revolutions and protests have demonstrated that, as Oscar Wilde asserted, the potential to inspire and promote societal progress that disobedience possesses is real, and that through it, social progress may be, to varying degrees of truth, achieved.

Page updated

Google Sites

Report abuse