Suchergebnisse

Cover -- Series page -- Title page -- Copyright page -- Dedication -- Contents -- Acknowledgments -- Introduction -- Why civil disobedience? -- Which civil disobedience? -- Whither civil disobedience? -- 1: Divine Witness -- Civil disobedience and satyagraha -- Principled lawbreaking -- Gandhi goes to America -- Getting right with God – or your fellow citizens? -- 2: Liberalism and its Limits -- Civil disobedience vs. conscientious objection -- Recasting the die -- Disobedience and the rule of law -- Beyond liberalism? -- 3: Deepening Democracy -- Zinn's challenge -- Civil disobedience, law, and the revolutionary spirit -- Civil disobedience: between legality and democratic legitimacy -- Beyond the state? -- 4: Anarchist Uprising -- Political anarchism and direct action -- Philosophical anarchism: Back to Locke and Thoreau? -- Surviving anarchism -- 5: Postnationalization and Privatization -- Revisiting Rawls -- Postnationalization and privatization -- Novel threats to Rawlsian civil disobedience -- What remains? Rawlsian civil disobedience today -- 6: Digitalization -- Digital disobedience, surveillance, and the rule of law -- Digital lawbreaking as civil disobedience? -- Beyond civil disobedience? -- 7: Tilting at Windmills? -- The ghost of John Rawls -- Anti-legalism -- Practical ramifications -- Conclusion -- Civil disobedience now -- Civil disobedience for authoritarians and racists? -- Notes -- Introduction -- 1. Divine Witness -- 2. Liberalism and Its Limits -- 3. Deepening Democracy -- 4. Anarchist Uprising -- 5. Postnationalization and Privatization -- 6. Digitalization -- 7. Tilting at Windmills? -- Conclusion -- References -- Index -- EULA

Thoreau advocates for nonviolent protest in his classic manifesto Motivated by his disgust with the US government, Henry David Thoreau's seminal philosophical essay enjoins individuals to stand against the ruling forces that seek to erase their free will. It is the duty of a good citizen, he argues, not only to disobey a bad law, but also to protest an unjust government. His message of nonviolence and appeal to value one's own conscience over political legislation have resonated throughout American and world history. Peppered with the author's poetry and social commentary, Civil Disobedience h

In Civil Disobedience, Henry David Thoreau looks at old issues in new ways, asking: is there ever a time when individuals should actively oppose their government and its justice system? After a thorough review of the evidence, Thoreau comes to the conclusion that opposition is legitimate whenever government actions or institutions are unacceptable to an individual's conscience. What is particularly interesting is that Thoreau's creative mind took him deeper into the argument, as he concluded that this legitimate opposition really wasn't enough. In Thoreau's opinion, anyone who believed something to be wrong had a duty to resist it actively. These ideas were completely at odds with the prevailing opinions of the day – that it was the duty of every citizen to support the state. Thoreau connected ideas and notions in a novel manner and went against the tide, generating new hypotheses so that people could see matters in a new light. It is a mark of the success of his creative thinking that his views are now considered mainstream, and that his arguments are still deployed in defence of the principle of civil disobedience.

It has been widely feared - especially in Europe - that among the casualties in the "war against terror" it is now necessary to include a number of civil and political rights that used to form the nucleus of the liberal "Rechtstaat". In such times, it its useful to remember that on both sides of the Atlantic there has existed a powerful alternative political tradition - indeed a tradition that extends far beyond the West. This is the tradition of non-violence, one of the offshoots of which is the civil disobedience expounded and analyzed in this book. This exhaustive and carefully analytical study of civil disobedience, translated from Spanish, is a welcome reminder of the tradition that emphasised precisely the need to focus on the quality of the instruments of politics as much as its objectives. This volume seeks to disentangle the limits and possibilities of the tradition of civil disobedience: in what circumstances is it right, or perhaps necessary, to say "no"? The jurisprudential and philosophical literature discussed here is truly enormous and provides a complex and reliable overview of the main problems. This volume is thus a highly welcome contribution not only to discussions about civil and political rights, but also to the construction of the Europe of tomorrow as a political community worth making a commitment to

Civil disobedience is a public, non-violent and conscientious infringement of law carried out to express opposition to law and policy. The normative literature provides thorough treatments of several key issues related to the post-arrest treatment of civilly disobedient citizens, such as the propriety of imposing various types of legal sanction. An important issue that has received rather less consideration, though, is the matter of how police forces should react to civil disobedience prior to and during its commission. This article aims to encourage reflection on this issue by sketching a normative framework to orientate moral evaluation of the ways in which liberal democratic societies police civilly disobedient protest. The central argument is that the police should, wherever possible, adopt a strategy of 'negotiated accommodation' towards civil disobedience. The core requirement of this strategy is that police officers should attempt to engage in dialogue with protest groups before or during their civil disobedience actions. This dialogue must be underpinned by a conscientious and sincere commitment on the part of officers to balance the traditional goals of public order policing with the good of accommodating civil disobedience. The article contrasts the idea of negotiated accommodation with alternative strategies for policing civil disobedience, illustrates its practical implications through considering various examples, and defends it against important objections.

The distinctive American tradition of civil disobedience stretches back to pre-Revolutionary War days and has served the purposes of determined protesters ever since. This stimulating book examines the causes that have inspired civil disobedience, the justifications used to defend it, disagreements among its practitioners, and the controversies it has aroused at every turn. Tracing the origins of the notion of civil disobedience to eighteenth-century evangelicalism and republicanism, Lewis Perry discusses how the tradition took shape in the actions of black and white abolitionists and antiwar protesters in the decades leading to the Civil War, then found new expression in post-Civil War campaigns for women's equality, temperance, and labor reform. -- Publisher website

This article points out a struggle of today's societies with the traditional concepts of civil disobedience and stresses the need for reevaluation of the concept of civil disobedience for policy making and public discourse. Starting with a minimal definition of civil disobedience, the article introduces Hannah Arendt's approach for a legitimisation of civil disobedience and discusses her ideas for digital actions, which are increasingly framed as digital forms of civil disobedience. Addressing WikiLeaks as an example of digital civil disobedience, the author problematises the internal secrecy of WikiLeaks and the focus on Julian Assange as a single decision-maker. Both aspects challenge Arendt's understanding of legitimate civil disobedience. Even though traditional criteria of civil disobedience need to be revisited in the digital age, organisations or disobedience actors might themselves in their actions be well-advised to comply with the principles they fight for.