Accordingly, while admitting that it is reasonable and necessary to disobey unjust laws undermines the interests of the pubic, we should also recognize the value of laws, deeply respect it and behave strictly as the just laws. Justice was not completely exercised because most laws contradicted the principles America was built upon. To move forward as a society, injustice can be remedied through challenging the laws created upon the dominant ideologies that were limited to certain groups of people.
Law and justice are two completely separate things as Lyndon B. Civil disobedience differs from revolution in that you are being nonviolent, conscientious, and willing to accept legal consequences of their action. Civil disobedience is breaking of a law or laws, to bring attention to the public of its injustice and their motive is to force a change, to make the law just.
Civil disobedience is only an act against unjust laws, or laws that are thought to be unjust, and thus should be made just. Open Document. Essay Sample Check Writing Quality. The issue then stands, is justice fair for everyone? Justice is the administration of law, the act of determining rights and assigning rewards or punishments, "justice deferred is justice denied. Henry David Thoreau was described as many things.
Thoreau was an author and naturalist with very Republican views. Morals inspired him. He ties in morality with justice many times in his piece. He was as well a pacifist, who was more talk than action. Given this possibility, the right to political participation must include a right to continue to contest the result after the votes are counted or the decisions taken. And this right should include suitably constrained civil disobedience because the best conception of political participation rights is one that reduces as much as possible the impact that luck has on the popularity of a view Lefkowitz ; see also Smith , ch.
An alternative response to Raz questions whether the right to civil disobedience must be derived from rights to political participation. Brownlee , ch. Whether such a right would fall under participation rights depends on the expansiveness of the latter rights. When the right to participate is understood to accommodate only legal protest, then the right conscientiously to object, which commonsensically includes civil disobedience, must be viewed as distinct from political participation rights.
A further challenge to a regime-focused account is that real societies do not align with a dichotomy between liberal and illiberal regimes; rather they fall along a spectrum of liberality and illiberality, being both more or less liberal relative to each other and being more or less liberal in some domains than in others. Philosophers have typically focused on the question of how courts should treat civil disobedients, while neglecting to apply that question to law enforcement.
Yet the police have much discretion in how to deal with civil disobedients. In particular, they have no obligation to arrest protesters when they commit minor violations of the law such as traffic obstruction: accommodation of and communication with protesters is something they can but all too rarely decide to do. Instead, many governments practice militarized repression of protests. Local police departments in the U. Also, the British government sought to strengthen public order laws and secure new police powers to crack down on Extinction Rebellion XR , the global environmental movement whose street protests, die-ins, and roadblocks for climate justice have brought cities to a standstill.
Accommodation requires communication channels between police and activists and involves strategies such as pre-negotiated arrests. While the U. Neither approach respects anything like a right to civil disobedience. A constitutional government committed to recognizing the right to civil disobedience would also have to reform part of its criminal laws and make available certain defenses. Brownlee proposes two. Second, states should accept necessity as a justificatory defense for civil disobedience undertaken as a reasonable and parsimonious response to violations of and threats to non-contingent basic needs Brownlee , ch.
As these defenses suggest, constitutionally recognizing civil disobedience does not mean making civil disobedience legal. Disobedients would still be arrested and prosecuted, but they would get to explain and defend their actions in court. They would be heard.
Even so, civil disobedience remains an enduring, vibrant part of political activism and, increasingly, benefits from transnational alliances. Theorists have long assumed that civil disobedience only begs justification in liberal, democratic societies — the best real-world candidates for legitimate states. However, civil disobedience also raises questions in undemocratic and illegitimate contexts, regarding its overall role, strategic value, and tactical efficacy. Yet they still beg significant questions concerning the proper contours of extra-institutional dissident politics and the justification of uncivil and forceful tactics in repressive contexts, including violence against police and the destruction of pro-China shops and Chinese banks.
Finally, whereas theorists have tended to think of civil disobedience as generally undertaken to achieve worthy public goals, liberal democratic states have recently witnessed much disobedience in pursuit of anti-democratic and illiberal goals, including conscientious refusal to abide by antidiscrimination statutes and violations of, and protests against, laws requiring the provision of reproductive services and the public health measures enacted to slow the spread of the coronavirus.
We may need a different lens than liberal and democratic theorists have offered to evaluate the full range of conservative social movements, counter-movements, and reactionary movements which resort to civil and other forms of disobedience. Thanks to Kelsey Vicar for research assistance. Features of Civil Disobedience 1. Other Types of Protest 2.
Justification 3. Responding to Civil Disobedience 4. Features of Civil Disobedience Henry David Thoreau is widely credited with coining the term civil disobedience. Other Types of Protest Although civil disobedience often overlaps broadly with other types of dissent, nevertheless some distinctions may be drawn between the key features of civil disobedience and the key features of these other practices.
Justification The task of defending civil disobedience is commonly undertaken with the assumption that in reasonably just, liberal societies people have a general moral duty to follow the law often called political obligation. Responding to Civil Disobedience How should the state respond to civil disobedience? Bedau, Hugo A. Civil Disobedience in Focus , London: Routledge. Scheuerman ed. Burns and H. Hart eds. Brownlee, Kimberley, Owen ed.
Celikates, R. Kreite, and T. Wesche eds. Garner, and S. Ferzan and L. Alexander eds. Schwartzberg ed. Duff, Antony and Garland David eds. Dworkin, Ronald, , Taking Rights Seriously , 5th ed. Fanon, Frantz, [], The Wretched of the Earth , trans. Philcox, New York: Grove Press. Duff and D. Garland eds. Finlay, Christopher J. Duncan ed. Hanson, Russell L. Torpey, trans. Berkeley Journal of Sociology , 95— Rehg, Cambridge: Polity Press.
Hidalgo, Javier S. Himma ed. King Jr. Chaos or Community? Bedau ed. Sobel, P. Vallentyne, and S. Wall eds. Locke, John, []. Second Treatise of Government , C. Macpherson ed. Shelby and B. Terry eds. Lackey ed. Revised edition. Raz, Joseph, Russell, Bertrand, Autobiography , London: Routledge. Sabl, Andrew, Scheuerman, William E. Shelby, Tommie, and Terry, Brandon M. Simmons, A. Smart, Brian, Ng and J. In more human terms, this means that whenever you buy a book on Amazon from any link on here, I receive a small percentage of its price, which goes straight back into my own colossal biblioexpenses.
Privacy policy. TLDR: You're safe — there are no nefarious "third parties" lurking on my watch or shedding crumbs of the "cookies" the rest of the internet uses. To the intuitive outcry of what is to be done, which bellows from deep in the soul of any human being who has managed to stay woke , Thoreau answers: Cast your whole vote, not a strip of paper merely, but your whole influence. Share Article Tweet. View Full Site. Thoreau then returns to the metaphor of the government-as-machine.
He says that if an injustice is part of the "necessary friction" of the "machine of government," then it should be left alone. Perhaps the machine will wear smooth; in any case, it will eventually wear out. If the injustice has its own spring, rope or pulley, then one must consider whether the remedy is worse than the injustice.
However, if the government requires one to be an agent of injustice toward another, then Thoreau says one must break the law. He urges the reader to be a "counter-friction" to the machine and not to participate in the wrong. Thoreau then argues that working for change through government takes too much time and requires a person to waste his life. He is in the world simply to live in it and can't devote all of his time to making it a good place to live.
A person doesn't have time to do everything good yet, this doesn't mean he must do anything wrong. In the case of the United States, the government doesn't provide room for remedy anyway; the very Constitution is evil.
0コメント