Suchergebnisse

Civil disobedience is understood as an appeal to the public to alter certain laws or policies that the minority takes to be incompatible with the fundamental principles of morality, principles that it believes the majority to accept. The traditional requirements of accepting punishment & of acting non-violently are, with some modification, defended against critics & their rationale explained. The problem of defining civil disobedience in a constitutional system is discussed & it is argued that M.L. King & his admirers need not be considered civil disobedients. The view that the law is what the courts say it is is rejected & the implications of this, & of the refusal of the courts to adjudicate (under the "pol'al" question & other doctrines) is examined. Direct & indirect disobedience are distinguished & indirect disobedience is defended against Lockean critics who see it as essentially revolutionary. Lockean liberalism is criticized for its inability to accommodate civil disobedience as a distinctive form of pol'al activity. AA.