Civil Disobedience

There are definitely cases where there can be a moral justification for breaking the law. I think that this is such a grey area though because often at the time when the act of civil disobedience is committed it can be hard to understand just how unjust or immoral the case is which is being protested or which is the vehicle for the civil disobedience. It's often easier to grasp the point in retrospect.

A great example of civil disobedience that was warranted would be the Rosa Parks case. Civil disobedience is warranted when it is a means of social progress, when the government has exceeded its authority, when there is a duty to combat immorality, when one must seek to preserve moral integrity and when there is no practical alternative. Racial segregation was the law and what the majority wanted and it was what Rosa Parks was seeking to shed light on and change. Her law-breaking act did shed light on the situation in the South and it served as a great inspiration for those who came after her who also sought to protest unjust, immoral laws. I think that in cases like this, it is absolutely warranted and while it may have looked completely crazy at the time, many people can agree that in retrospect she did a justified thing.

I found the reasons listed in the text for not committing civil disobedience compelling but also a bit flawed. While, in a free society, it is true that we are in a social contract with the government (ideally) and that there can be a multitude of bad results that accompany the good from acts of civil disobedience, a society which doesn't seek to address things that can be wrong or unjust will not evolve properly. There can be a lag when it comes to social issues keeping up with the current law and that can be addressed by protests or other acts. The notion that one can just move out if they don't like things made me openly laugh when I read it. It reminded me very much of the politicians claiming that the people who stuck around in New Orleans during the Katrina disaster were obviously stupid and 'asking for it'. It's a sort of romantic notion to believe that anyone can pick themselves up and move if they are in a bad or unjust situation. Economically speaking, many people are born into class structures that stack many things against them from birth (even in this free society). So, if they experience unfit, unjust laws there is no option to pick up and leave. Often, the best option is to make their voice heard and shed light on the bad situation they have encountered. This is not to say that I think that everyone at any given time should run around and openly break the law just to prove a point or expose huge injustices but that it can be warranted even in this society. The Rosa Parks case really is the great example, once again, of this fact.