having a righ. … To claim a right to civil disobedience is to claim that others have a duty to allow the agent to commit the act. Nonetheless it is
justifiable to violate an immoral law
(and even a moral law provided one is unable to violate the immoral law~ but would have been justified in doing so.)
Can violence be morally justified?
The most plausible justification of violence is
when it is perpetrated in return of other violence
. … In its mildest form, the argument in favor of violence as self-defense claims that to violence of some sort, an equally violent response may be justified.
Can violence be justified debate?
A State may be justified to respond violently to a violent attack
– be it physical, psychological, or verbal violence to be at stake. Equally, according to some, it may be justifiable to respond with physical violence to some legal or institutional violence.
Why is violence a good thing?
Violence
affects a significant proportion of the population
. It threatens the lives and physical and mental health of millions of people, overburdens health systems, undermines human capital formation, and slows economic and social development.
What are the three types of civil disobedience?
- Sabotage of trade and business activity. Actions include disrupting trade, boycotts of products and deliberate damaging of goods. …
- Labour resistance. …
- Breaking unfair laws.
Why civil disobedience is justified?
Greenwalt modifies his position that civil disobedience is justified if
it probably makes a contribution to the social good large enough to outweigh the moral duty to obey the law
. He also argues that “the law should be obeyed because individual judgement is unreliable” (Greenwalt, 1970, p. 345).
Can you justify violence?
If you justify an act of violence by saying that you are in a fight and are therefore fighting back, the justification is a bad one if you are not entitled to take yourself to be in a fight. Fighting back is justified relative to a practice of being in a fight, but is
only absolutely justified if that practice
is.
Does violence solve anything?
“Violence never solves anything
.” In this article, I aim to examine this contentious statement. On the surface it would seem true. People often resort to violence in order to settle a dispute, but victory does not always bring a real end to the problem. … Second, most violence does not destroy the enemy entirely.
Is disobedience a good thing?
Non-violent civil disobedience
is effective
because it emphasizes a group’s proposed injustice within an institution, while directly appealing to the different ethical systems of individual citizens.
What are the four features of civil disobedience?
(i) The most widespread non-violent mass movement led by Gandhiji. (ii) Large scale participation of women. (iii) Support given by commercial classes.
(iv) Workers’ participation in the movement, selectively adopting some of the ideas of Gandhian programme strikes of railways
and dock workers.
What are the two main claims of civil disobedience?
Thoreau argues that there are two laws:
the laws of men and the higher laws of God and humanity
. If the laws of men are unjust, then one has every right to disobey them.
Is civil disobedience good or bad?
Civil Disobedience is effective
because it creates a lose-lose situation for whatever Power the Disobedience is directed towards. If the Disobedience is ignored, then the Power is admitting defeat and allowing for further disobedience.
Is civil disobedience ever justified in society?
Most acts of
civil disobedience are justifiable
. … Civil disobedience is often frowned upon because these acts are illegal, although nonviolent. However, many positive changes have been achieved through civil disobedience.
Why is disobedience necessary?
Civil disobedience is an important part of a democratic country because it is one of the driving factors that
allow individuals to exercise their rights to free speech and speak up against an unfair and unjust government and its laws
.
Why violence is not always answer?
Overall, violence is
almost never the right answer
because it brings in more violence, affects younger generations in negative ways and because there are always alternative responses. Learning to act and respond in nonviolent ways can not only ease a conflict but even save lives.
