Several significant events, not only in the US history, but also world history, have been led by revolutionaries.

This nation itself, was founded upon the vanguard minority with the determination to improve the living conditions present at that time, and has been transformed by the revolutionaries of each generation in order to fulfill the needs of its people. The idea that history supports the success of dissident activism is accurate, especially in the history of the US. I agree with the quote stated in the question, solely due to the fact that our history is filled with rich examples of civil disobedience that has changed the US into what it is today. Examples of significant civil disobedience are the Suffrage movement, which led to the !"th #mendment and gave women the right to vote$ the %ivil &ights movement resulting in the %ivil &ights #ct in !"'( and allotted equal rights to every citi)en, regardless of their race or ethnic bac*ground$ and finally, in recent history the immigration reform, which would ma*e access to citi)enship more attainable, as well as marriage equality which gives anyone the right to marry whomever they want, regardless of sex or sexual orientation. +ith success or notable consideration of these examples, confidence that although the triumph of a social revolution is difficult, it is an act whose achievement is recogni)ed after political upheaval, and inspires future generations to fight for what they believe in. ,efore we go into any further detail, I-d li*e to define civil disobedience, which could possibly be associated with a negative connotation, which isn-t necessarily true. %ivil disobedience is the nonviolent refusal to obey laws that citi)ens regard as un.ust or in protest of specific public policy. This could include refusal to pay a certain tax, li*e in the events leading up to the &evolutionary war, to the desegregation of a segregated society, li*e in the !"'/-s during the %ivil &ights protests. #lthough it is important to be a civil person, and follow the laws set in place, it is also important to practice freedom of speech and protest in order to reform laws or public policy that infringe on any particular group-s rights. I believe the reason dissident minority groups use civil disobedience as a means to accomplish their goals is simply because it is reasonable. It is nonviolent, yet it still attracts attention, which is important when trying to raise awareness of a situation in hopes to gain supporters. #lthough

%ivil disobedience isn-t a blatantly evil thing, it is still possible that those who do act with civil disobedience can become imprisoned. This not only attracts attention and expresses the conviction of those involved in the protest, but it also helps illustrate the impact a certain law or policy could have on many people-s lives to the point where one-s own freedom is less important than the oppression felt because of said law. 0or example, the civil rights protesting in the !"'/-s involved many cases of civil disobedience. This included refusal to sit in assigned segregated areas of restaurants, public transportation, public buildings, etc$ or creating large protest marches through public streets in order to grasp the attention of the population. 1owever, the exposure from civil disobedience was very useful because more citi)ens began to .oin this small group of protestors, and laws were past to protect anyone of an #frican #merican bac*ground. 2ow, what does it ta*e for an idea to turn into a small group of people with a passion to lead the world into new social developments and be considered the 3vanguard of democratic thought45 To help answer this question, I-d also li*e to define vanguard. The 6erriam +ebster definition states that vanguard is5 3the group of people who are the leaders of an action or movement in society, politics, art, etc.5 Essentially, to be vanguard, one must group with others who have a similar goal, and in the context of political reform, it means to be the leaders with a goal to bring equality to those without a voice. Specific goals that categori)e people in the 3vanguard of democratic thought5 are ones that could be considered a social 3taboo5 due to the pioneered ideas that, although may have been thought of before, were never really on the forefront of any significant amount of a population-s mind, or perhaps .ust previously deemed socially unacceptable. #n example of this would be the idea of same7 sex marriage. #s a relatively current debate, it is well *nown that when the thought of same7sex marriage was introduced, many were shoc*ed because it was such a modern concept that hadn-t been exclusively introduced to the world. There was some bac* lash as well as support, however, those who presented this fresh topic would be considered part of the vanguard of democratic thought because of their willingness to lead the world into this recent innovation of marriage.