Posted: 7/2/2007 8:35:27 AM EDT
| When is civil disobedience appropriate? Law enforcement's power/control is based upon the willing submission of the majority of the the people subject to its control. Their effectiveness is always contingent on the fact that the disobedient will either willingly submit to their authority or be subjugated by their power, either implied or actually used, appropriate to the percieved threat or danger. When those to be subjugated refuse to accept the authority and greatly outnumber the authority the result is a game of "one uppism" in which a bluff is administered by both sides to see who will either resort to ultimate violence or submit. A classic example is the southern border. The "Illegals" are winning because they know the BP will not kill them nor will harsh penalities be enacted. That's why they are winning. Our system is based upon WE THE PEOPLE allowing others to impose authority. Maybe those illegals aren't so uneducated after all. They are winning. We aren't. |
Excellent post and thank you. T |
|
May work for the illegals but if gun owners tried it there would be a WHOLE LOT of prison sentences handed down. Civil Disobediance seems to work for people with nothing to loose. It doesnt apply to anyone on this site. Our options are Obedience or Armed, Violent, Kill 'em all and let God sort it out Disobedience. We don't have much grey area to play in. |
Sure you (we) do, just approach it from the right angle. Ghandi didn't refuse to eat because he thought the food sucked -- your disobedience doesn't have to mean directly breaking the laws you disagree with, though often times it does. |
Lose. Possibly the most common gramatical/spelling error ever on ARFCOM. 
|
| Thanks, my perhaps convoluted approach is that since the "authorities" only have their power by the will of the governed populace, and that the governed have submitted to this control, that it is entirely within their means to both refuse to accept the controls imposed on them and to remove those from power who impose it. The Jim Crow laws of the 50s were completely legal and the authority which enforced same were legitimate. Civil disobedience ensured their demise. The authorites of today are unwilling and unable to enforce laws which the governed willingly accepted. If the authorities are able to select which laws they choose to enforce then why can we not select the laws we wish to obey? I'm starting to view good ole America like a capped bottle of sweet cabonated pop sitting too long in the sun. It won't take much to shake it and blow the lid off. |