Suchergebnisse

Civil disobedience is facing to the question of its democratic legitimacy: are citizens allowed to break the law voted by the majority and the elected Parliament? As demonstrated in the first part of the thesis, the answer to this question depends on weather we adopt the perspective of liberal philosophers such as John Rawls and Jürgen Habermas, or the perspective of activists like Gandhi and Martin Luther King.Furthermore, civil disobedients aim to fight against various forms of injustice, but without violence. They are standing for a nonviolent society, in a way that remains nonviolent, in a society that is not nonviolent. In the second part of the thesis, a participant observation in a group of civil disobedience reports how activists address this paradox. The gender-based dynamics among the activists and the domination of the leader over the rest of the group demonstrate that, despite its feminist values and egalitarian ideals, unequal logics and structural violence shape the organisation.The third part exposes a philosophy of civil disobedience. The relationship between a society and its laws tells us that the democratic experience is caught in a tension between its instituting and established dimensions, between the power to create and the one to institutionalize. Political action is not conceivable on the pattern of peace nor on the pattern of war. It manifests itself as a nonviolent conflict. ; La désobéissance civile est d'emblée confrontée à la question de sa légitimité démocratique : au nom de quoi des citoyens seraient-ils autorisés à enfreindre la loi issue de la volonté majoritaire et du Parlement régulièrement élu ? La première partie de la thèse montre que la réponse à cette question diffère selon que l'on adopte le point de vue de théoriciens libéraux comme John Rawls et Jürgen Habermas ou celui d'acteurs historiques comme Gandhi et Martin Luther King.En outre, la désobéissance civile entend lutter sans violence contre les différentes formes d'injustice. Les désobéissants civils se battent pour ...

Civil disobedience is facing to the question of its democratic legitimacy: are citizens allowed to break the law voted by the majority and the elected Parliament? As demonstrated in the first part of the thesis, the answer to this question depends on weather we adopt the perspective of liberal philosophers such as John Rawls and Jürgen Habermas, or the perspective of activists like Gandhi and Martin Luther King.Furthermore, civil disobedients aim to fight against various forms of injustice, but without violence. They are standing for a nonviolent society, in a way that remains nonviolent, in a society that is not nonviolent. In the second part of the thesis, a participant observation in a group of civil disobedience reports how activists address this paradox. The gender-based dynamics among the activists and the domination of the leader over the rest of the group demonstrate that, despite its feminist values and egalitarian ideals, unequal logics and structural violence shape the organisation.The third part exposes a philosophy of civil disobedience. The relationship between a society and its laws tells us that the democratic experience is caught in a tension between its instituting and established dimensions, between the power to create and the one to institutionalize. Political action is not conceivable on the pattern of peace nor on the pattern of war. It manifests itself as a nonviolent conflict. ; La désobéissance civile est d'emblée confrontée à la question de sa légitimité démocratique : au nom de quoi des citoyens seraient-ils autorisés à enfreindre la loi issue de la volonté majoritaire et du Parlement régulièrement élu ? La première partie de la thèse montre que la réponse à cette question diffère selon que l'on adopte le point de vue de théoriciens libéraux comme John Rawls et Jürgen Habermas ou celui d'acteurs historiques comme Gandhi et Martin Luther King.En outre, la désobéissance civile entend lutter sans violence contre les différentes formes d'injustice. Les désobéissants civils se battent pour l'avènement d'une société non-violente, d'une manière qui reste non-violente, alors même qu'ils agissent dans une société qui ne l'est pas. Dans la seconde partie de la thèse, une observation participante au sein d'un collectif de désobéissance civile rend compte de la façon dont les militants affrontent ce paradoxe. La division genrée du travail militant et la domination du leader sur le reste du groupe révèlent que, malgré ses valeurs féministes et son idéal égalitaire, l'organisation est traversée par des logiques asymétriques et des violences structurelles.Enfin, la troisième partie permet l'élaboration d'une philosophie de la désobéissance civile. L'examen des rapports entre une société et ses lois nous apprend que l'expérience démocratique est prise dans une tension entre sa dimension instituante et sa dimension instituée, entre le pouvoir de créer et celui d'institutionnaliser. L'action politique n'est pas concevable sur le modèle de la paix ni davantage sur celui de la guerre. Elle se manifeste en tant que conflictualité non-violente.

Can citizens disobey the law, which comes from the will of the majority and the decision of the legitimately elected Parliament, merely because it seems to them unjust? Opposing conservative thought, which defends the established order and condemns any transgression, contemporary liberal thought has provided a defense of the democratic legitimacy of civil disobedience. However, the Rawlsian and Habermasian justifications of civil disobedience seem rather weak when compared to the political thought of disobedient activists themselves, namely Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr. and Howard Zinn. This overlooked 'disobedient thought' reveals the shortcomings and assumptions of the liberal concept of civil disobedience. Adapted from the source document.

Can citizen disobey the law, coming from the will of the majority and the decision of the legitimately elected parliament, merely because it seems to them unjust ? Opposing the conservative thought, which defends the establish order et condemns any transgression, contemporary liberal thought provided a defense of the democratic legitimacy of civil disobedience. However, the rawlsian and habermasian justifications of civil disobedience seems very moderated when compared to the political thought of disobedient activists themselves, namely Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr. and Howard Zinn. This unknown « disobedient thought » reveals the shortcomings and assumptions of the liberal concept of civil disobedience. ; Peer reviewed

Noting that the first decade of the XXIst century was that of a renewal of utopia (marked by the success of the anti-globalization slogan "another world is possible") and, simultaneously, that of an increasingly use of civil disobedience, this article aims to examine the relationship between civil disobedience and utopia. We assume that this socio-historical congruence stems from an elective affinity between civil disobedience and utopia. Moreover, we will show – by extending the analysis of the "new utopian spirit" by Miguel Abensour – that civil disobedience is both a method of utopian conversion and an effectuation of the emancipatory potential of utopia. ; Peer reviewed

« Ce livre est une tentative d'approcher le concept de "désobéissance civile" dans une perspective juridique "scientifique". De ce fait, son originalité est double. D'une part, il se veut principalement explicatif : son objectif n'est pas de justifier (ou non) la désobéissance civile en fonction de son essence et de son rôle en société, mais plutôt de l'analyser--en tant que concept--à partir d'une conception « postmoderne » de l'obéissance au droit dans la pensée juridique contemporaine. D'autre part, il se veut novateur en théorie du droit : il invite les juristes à recourir à une méthode littéraire afin de formuler un discours réflexif sur le droit. Ainsi mobilisée, la connaissance juridique offre une perspective différente sur des problématiques centrales à toute société démocratique, comme le devoir d'obéissance au droit, mais surtout, la possibilité d'y désobéir. »--

What is eco-terrorism ? This research gives a multidisciplinary approach to this question and tries to answer it by covering the history of eco-terrorism and both its political and legal consequences. This concept is also observed through the lens of two other concepts : terrorism and then civil disobedience. ; Qu'est-ce que l'éco-terrorisme ? Cette étude pluridisciplinaire tâche de répondre à cette question en parcourant l'histoire du terme et ses implications juridiques et politiques. Elle le confronte également au concept de terrorisme, d'une part ; et à celui de désobéissance civile, d'autre part, dans le but de saisir les réalités qu'il désigne.

What is eco-terrorism ? This research gives a multidisciplinary approach to this question and tries to answer it by covering the history of eco-terrorism and both its political and legal consequences. This concept is also observed through the lens of two other concepts : terrorism and then civil disobedience. ; Qu'est-ce que l'éco-terrorisme ? Cette étude pluridisciplinaire tâche de répondre à cette question en parcourant l'histoire du terme et ses implications juridiques et politiques. Elle le confronte également au concept de terrorisme, d'une part ; et à celui de désobéissance civile, d'autre part, dans le but de saisir les réalités qu'il désigne.

The aim of this article is to analyse some contemporary practice of refusal in the field of 'politics', and to (re) embrace the long tradition of civil disobedience. ; The aim of this article is to analyse some of the most important contemporary practices of refusal that take place in the field of "politics", and to (re)inscribe them in the long tradition of civil disobedience. Firstly, we will consider civil disobedience in its "classical" form, defining it as the refusal to obey to one or some laws that govern citizens. We will sketch the five major characteristics of this "classical" form of civil disobedience on the basis of Henry David Thoreau's famous essay Resistance to Civil Government (1849). Secondly, we will study two specific but displaced figures that civil disobedience takes in our times - namely, the struggles of migrants in Italy and Greece during the year 2010 and the fights of the English ecologist group Climate Camp. In so doing, we will highlight the principal transformations of civil disobedience through the study of three innovative axes that we denominate "counter-uses", "active disobediences" and "movements of the intolerable". Our conclusion will be that, in order to understand these contemporary political practices of refusal, we must recognize in the disobedient subject an active "supplement" to the simple act of subtraction from power made in the name of a civil responsibility. ; The aim of this article is to analyse some contemporary practice of refusal in the field of 'politics', and to (re) embrace the long tradition of civil disobedience. ; Le but de cet article est d'analyser quelque pratique contemporaine de refus qui se joue dans le champ de la " politique ", et de la (ré)inscrire dans la longue tradition de la désobéissance civile.

The aim of this article is to analyse some of the most important contemporary practices of refusal that take place in the field of "politics", and to (re)inscribe them in the long tradition of civil disobedience. Firstly, we will consider civil disobedience in its "classical" form, defining it as the refusal to obey to one or some laws that govern citizens. We will sketch the five major characteristics of this "classical" form of civil disobedience on the basis of Henry David Thoreau's famous essay Resistance to Civil Government (1849). Secondly, we will study two specific but displaced figures that civil disobedience takes in our times - namely, the struggles of migrants in Italy and Greece during the year 2010 and the fights of the English ecologist group Climate Camp. In so doing, we will highlight the principal transformations of civil disobedience through the study of three innovative axes that we denominate "counter-uses", "active disobediences" and "movements of the intolerable". Our conclusion will be that, in order to understand these contemporary political practices of refusal, we must recognize in the disobedient subject an active "supplement" to the simple act of subtraction from power made in the name of a civil responsibility. ; Le but de cet article est d'analyser quelque pratique contemporaine de refus qui se joue dans le champ de la " politique ", et de la (ré)inscrire dans la longue tradition de la désobéissance civile.

The aim of this article is to analyse some of the most important contemporary practices of refusal that take place in the field of "politics", and to (re)inscribe them in the long tradition of civil disobedience. Firstly, we will consider civil disobedience in its "classical" form, defining it as the refusal to obey to one or some laws that govern citizens. We will sketch the five major characteristics of this "classical" form of civil disobedience on the basis of Henry David Thoreau's famous essay Resistance to Civil Government (1849). Secondly, we will study two specific but displaced figures that civil disobedience takes in our times - namely, the struggles of migrants in Italy and Greece during the year 2010 and the fights of the English ecologist group Climate Camp. In so doing, we will highlight the principal transformations of civil disobedience through the study of three innovative axes that we denominate "counter-uses", "active disobediences" and "movements of the intolerable". Our conclusion will be that, in order to understand these contemporary political practices of refusal, we must recognize in the disobedient subject an active "supplement" to the simple act of subtraction from power made in the name of a civil responsibility. ; Le but de cet article est d'analyser quelque pratique contemporaine de refus qui se joue dans le champ de la " politique ", et de la (ré)inscrire dans la longue tradition de la désobéissance civile.

Based on an ethnographic study in a French organization of civil disobedience and on interviews with journalists who covered its actions, this article examines the relationship between media and activism. It shows that media coverage of the protest organization under study strongly interacts with its internal structure. The omnipresence of journalists contributes to verticalize relations between activists, strengthening the leader's domination over the rest of the group and that of employees over volunteers. This process contributes to personalize the organization and to increase the material and symbolic rewards attached to the position of the leader. ; Peer reviewed