Abstract
Adopting a genealogical methodology, this paper aims to unveil the historical intricacies of civil disobedience’s many conceptualizations, particularly the ones related to the Thoureaivian concept and the liberal model of civil disobedience. As suggested by Hanson, there has been a long process of selective appropriation of Thoreau’s Resistance to civil government - later republished as Civil disobedience - that goes from the editors until Gandhi. By the same token, there has been a second process, not of selective appropriation per se, but of colonization in which the authors of the liberal model of civil disobedience imposes a series of theoretical constraints in the form of constitutive elements that ought to be fulfilled in order for a political movement to be considered a legitimate case of civil disobedience. This has resulted in civil disobedients being required to recognize the legitimacy of legal and political systems and to demand changes only within the boundaries of the rule of law. Conversely, we suggest a different – and radical – approach to civil disobedience, one that acknowledges that civil disobedience’s conceptualization should be practical-base, i.e., determined from real political actions and not necessarily centered on legal foundations or normative status.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.