The "New York Times" explains the Occupy Movement, "Occupy Wall Street." It first began September 17, 2011 when a group of activists decided to organize a protect in one of New York's park that was privately owned. Reasons that they protested included corportate greed, social inequality, and unfair power with banks and corporate businesses under the democratic way. Camping out for weeks, maybe even for months peacefully was the common goal for these protestors. They were inspired by the protests in Egypt and wanted to make sure that it was a non-violent protest. Their slogan was " We are the 99 percent." Occupy Wall Street attracted people and fast, it spread like wild fire. A lot of media attention were drawn by this intreging non-violent protest. This movment spread to other states even to ours, "Occupy Lancaster." Occupy Wall Street had public services, such as their own website, charity towards the act, own library, personal messages, even food. But the non violence did not last forever, and the protestors began to harress police, they reacted with pepper spray.

This Deals with "Civil Disobedence" because people are standing up for what they think is right. This is interesting because they are first did not break any laws while doing so. They are using their right of freedomf speech and right to petition to protest about things they do not think is morally right. Such as: corporate greed, social ineqaulity, unfair power with banks and coporate business. They are doing what they feel is right, no what the goverment wants them to do. Thats is exactly what civil disobedence is all about. Instead of instances in our history of standing up for what they think is right and it's looked down upon from the majority, in this case I think the majority admires this stand because they can relate to a lot of what they are feeling and standing against. I think this partly has to do with that a lot of people are unemployed.

This relates to Chris because he is doing what he think is right. That includes going on his own personal journey to "live off the land." To him, that is his right to happiness. I think he is doing this to retaliate against the government. I think he is so sick of the government inferring in his life, that he wants to live without it. In his mind, he is not exactly proving a point to the government like Occupy Wall Street, but more towards himself. That he can survive and thrive without the government. This goes along with civil disobedence because it is what he thinks is right to him, not necessarily the goverments choice. I think he found a lot of negativeness in the goverment and corruption just as Civil Disobendence and Occupy Wall Street as well.