What Civil Disobedience really is...
By ParaTed2k
@ParaTed2k (22940)
Sheboygan, Wisconsin
February 27, 2011 1:07am CST
Civil Disobedience is breaking laws as part of acts of protest or demonstration. It is used when people feel they can't get their voices heard if they make nice and obey the laws. The laws broken during civil disobedience are usually misdemeanors, but can be felonies also. They are also non violent, which is what the "civil" part means.
In U.S. History there are many examples of such disobedience. Some of them were instrumental in bringing about positive change, others did little more than make things worse all the way around.
In modern US history, one of the most retold and celebrated acts of civil disobedience was when Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat to a white man on the public bus. It wasn't a fluke, she knew what she was doing, and knew she'd probably be arrested. In fact, there were plans made in case that happened.
What makes her act such a textbook example of civil disobedience is her willingness to accept he consequences of her actions. She never used CD as a reason why she shouldn't be punished. In fact, she and her supporters were prepared to use her arrest to further their purpose.
Today, too many people forget that little detail. When people are arrested during acts of CD, they act like the law is persecuting them. They somehow have the idea that CD exempts the person from legal consequences of their actions.
CD is considered an honorable act, but part of the reason it's considered honorable is the person committing the act is brave enough to face prosecution. If the person isn't willing to face prosecution, then all they are is petty criminals who use political causes as an excuse to break the law.
So, before you go putting your support behind someone for their act of civil disobedience, watch how they react to being fined or arrested. If they use it as a badge of honor, then they are sincere in their protest. If they whine and complain that the law isn't honoring their Civil Disobedience rights.. then they are just whiners.
3 people like this
6 responses
@EvanHunter (4026)
• United States
27 Feb 11
You do know that Rosa Parks did not intend to start the bus boycott don't you? She also appealed her fine so according to your logic she should of just took it.
1 person likes this
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
27 Feb 11
I was waiting for someone to say something like this, thanks for not making me wait long. ;~)
Actually, Rosa Parks knew full well that she could be arrested for not giving up her seat. She knew the law. There is discussion on either side whether she was part of a bigger movement, or if she just became a hero for her rebellious act, I've seen compelling arguments both ways. Either way though, it wasn't a fluke, she knew that she was breaking the law.
As for her fighting her fine. Nothing about Civil Disobedience says the person gives up their right to trial. Her fighting the fine was simply her exercising her rights. Also, you are discounting the option in Civil Disobedience of using the courts as a forum to air grievances.
It's not in the fighting the charges in court that negates the sincerity of CD.. it's the idea that CD should mean you don't have to face a trial at all.
In other words, it's not an excuse to break the law.
1 person likes this
@EvanHunter (4026)
• United States
27 Feb 11
She herself confirmed her prior encounter with James Blake the bus driver. http://www.macombbar.org/displaycommon.cfm?an=1&subarticlenbr=155
Sometimes it is not about any organized plan sometimes people just get fed up with the way things are and that leads to something bigger.
"Also, you are discounting the option in Civil Disobedience of using the courts as a forum to air grievances."....LOL, come on we both know there is no way the court system in Alabama was going to help her out.
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
27 Feb 11
Not going to help her our, true, but just the fact she was arrested at the time she was lead to what it did.
But let's get back to the point instead of getting bogged down on the example, shall we?
@Rollo1 (16679)
• Boston, Massachusetts
27 Feb 11
This is interesting because I saw this tweet from someone called "SocialistBooks" just this morning:
"to deny workers their collective bargaining right IS violence and will be treated as such, see labor history"
To equate this legislation with violence against the union members gives them the excuse to be violent, or at least that is the irrational logic.
I fear that this will turn violent at some point. I have seen too much footage from these protests - footage of union thugs assaulting a woman with a camera, making racist comments to a gay, black tea partier and one instance where a union member shouted "your a bad jew" to a conservative. When the violence begins, it will be blamed on the right and that is how the media will portray it.
1 person likes this
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
27 Feb 11
Well, I wasn't talking about this issue in particular, but civil disobedience in general.
There have been too many lies from the left for them to claim any kind of high ground on this issue anymore.
1 person likes this
@laglen (19759)
• United States
27 Feb 11
consequences? we dont need no stinkin consequences. You have to understand, we are a pampered people now. If it will cost me, then I want nothing to do with it. I should have more rights than you. Peaceful protest yes, from your home.
I am going to assume you are referring to the Wisconsin unions. They are PUBLIC employees, cry me a river. There is no seat shop involved, they are paid well above the average citizen. they have no stance other than, I do not want to be held accountable but I want more money.
I think PUBLIC unions should be outlawed, they can elect their boss for crying out loud. This has gotten out of hand.
@spalladino (17891)
• United States
28 Feb 11
Good discussion, Ted...and I agree with you. The first time I participated in civil disobedience I was 17 years old and chose to join an anti-war demonstration being held in front of my high school. Many college and high school students across the country wanted their voices to be heard that day and I knew the consequences, both legal and personal, of my decision. We were arrested, charged, suspended from school, went to court and, oh man, was I grounded! But we didn't whine and complain...or cause a problem for the officers who showed up to haul us off...because we did break the law (and school rules) and we stood by our choice because we believed that what we did was important. That may be one reason why the judge let us off with a lecture and had our records sealed.
It's more difficult to be arrested for protesting in D.C. because it's allowed and is a normal activity in that city as long as you have the required permits and follow the rules. The first thing that came to mind while reading your discussion (other than my own brush with the law) were the videos that were submitted here a while ago when some members of Code Pink were arrested for protesting in an area they were not supposed to be in. The general consensus, among many on the scene as well as some folks here was that law enforcement was in the wrong for enforcing the law. The members of Code Pink whined and screamed that their Constitutional rights were being violated, even though they were very aware that they weren't supposed to be in that particular location and had been told to move more than once before action was taken against them. I believed then, as I do now, that their main goal was to get media attention and to paint "the government" as the bad guy who was trying to silence them.
@agrim94 (3805)
• India
27 Feb 11
According to Wikipedia Civil disobedience is the active, professed refusal to obey certain laws, demands, and commands of a government, or of an occupying international power. Civil disobedience is commonly, though not always,[1][2] defined as being nonviolent resistance. It is one form of civil resistance.
So if a person does not pay fine for the traffic violation it is not civil disobedience as you have to refuse to accept only certain laws and commands of government to be called Civil disobedience
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
27 Feb 11
Yes, refuse to pay the fine, knowing you are breaking the law. Not acting as though your civil disobedience should absolve you of having the fine imposed on you.
@jujubeez25 (13)
• United States
27 Feb 11
Interesting points all around. I would just like to point out that the term "civil" in civil disobedience actually refers to the government, as they are disobeying a civil statute. It is a minor point, but important in understanding the term. Civil disobedience simply means to disobey a law. Nonviolent protest is usually a part of it, but not always.
As for the whole "whining" issue, well, that is kinda the point. CD is a form of whining usually on a large scale. The fact that there are legal consequences to any form of protest is a clear violation of the first amendment's assembly clause.
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
28 Feb 11
There is no first amendment right to break the law.
