- Also called:
- passive resistance
civil disobedience
-
What is civil disobedience?
Civil disobedience is the refusal to obey governmental demands or commands, typically as a nonviolent and collective means to force concessions from the government. It is a symbolic violation of the law rather than a rejection of the entire system.
This tactic has been central to various movements, including the American civil rights movement, nationalist movements in Africa and India, and social movements advocating for peace and equality. By submitting to punishment for breaking a specific law, individuals aim to set a moral example and provoke meaningful change. Philosophers like Henry David Thoreau and leaders such as Mahatma Gandhi have significantly shaped the philosophy of civil disobedience, emphasizing nonviolent resistance.
2 Britannica SourcesCreated from Britannica articles using AI. AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles. -
Why do people use civil disobedience?
People engage in civil disobedience as a tactic to compel a government to enact change, particularly when they perceive legitimate avenues for change as blocked or nonexistent. This involves the refusal to obey specific laws or governmental demands, often as a nonviolent and collective action. The goal is to force concessions by symbolically violating laws and then submitting to punishment, thereby setting a moral example to provoke the majority or the government into making political, social, or economic reforms. This method has been a significant strategy for various movements, including those advocating for civil rights, independence, and social justice.
2 Britannica SourcesCreated from Britannica articles using AI. AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles. -
How is civil disobedience different from violent protest?
Civil disobedience is the refusal to obey government demands or commands without resorting to violence. Its purpose is to force concessions from the government or occupying power. This tactic involves symbolic or ritualistic violations of the law, with the understanding that punishment will be accepted to set a moral example.
In contrast, violent protest, often manifesting as riots, involves active measures of opposition and can escalate from peaceful gatherings into destructive chaos. While civil disobedience aims for change through moral pressure and nonviolent means, violent protest relies on force and can lead to significant destruction and loss of life. The core difference lies in the commitment to nonviolence; civil disobedience explicitly rejects violence, whereas violent protest embraces it.
4 Britannica SourcesCreated from Britannica articles using AI. AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles. -
Who are some famous leaders who used civil disobedience?
Civil disobedience, the refusal to obey government demands without violence, has been a powerful tool for leaders seeking change. Mahatma Gandhi famously employed this tactic, leading the Indian Independence Movement through nonviolent resistance, including the Salt March. In the United States, Martin Luther King, Jr. was a key figure in the American civil rights movement, utilizing civil disobedience to protest racial segregation and discrimination. These leaders demonstrated that peaceful defiance could be a potent force for social and political transformation.
5 Britannica SourcesCreated from Britannica articles using AI. AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles. -
What risks do people face when practicing civil disobedience?
When practicing civil disobedience, individuals face the risk of legal consequences, as these actions are considered crimes. By submitting to punishment, those engaging in civil disobedience aim to set a moral example and provoke change. Critics, however, express concerns that civil disobedience could lead to anarchy or be seen as a mere tactic rather than a comprehensive philosophy for social change. The efficacy of this form of protest often relies on the opposition's adherence to a moral framework that can be appealed to.
2 Britannica SourcesCreated from Britannica articles using AI. AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles. -
How has civil disobedience influenced laws or societies in history?
Civil disobedience, the refusal to obey laws without violence, has significantly influenced societies and laws throughout history. It has been a key tactic in nationalist movements across Africa and India, and in the American civil rights movement. Figures like Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr. utilized civil disobedience to advocate for equal rights and end segregation. By symbolically breaking laws and accepting punishment, activists aim to provoke meaningful change. This philosophy, rooted in ideas of higher moral law, has also been employed by various social movements, demonstrating its enduring impact on demanding justice and reform.
2 Britannica SourcesCreated from Britannica articles using AI. AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles.
civil disobedience, the refusal to obey the demands or commands of a government or occupying power, without resorting to violence or active measures of opposition; its usual purpose is to force concessions from the government or occupying power. Civil disobedience has been a major tactic and philosophy of nationalist movements in Africa and India, in the American civil rights movement, and of labour, anti-war, and other social movements in many countries.
Civil disobedience is a symbolic or ritualistic violation of the law rather than a rejection of the system as a whole. The civil disobedient, finding legitimate avenues of change blocked or nonexistent, feels obligated by a higher, extralegal principle to break some specific law. It is because acts associated with civil disobedience are considered crimes, however, and known by actor and public alike to be punishable, that such acts serve as a protest. By submitting to punishment, the civil disobedient hopes to set a moral example that will provoke the majority or the government into effecting meaningful political, social, or economic change. Under the imperative of setting a moral example, leaders of civil disobedience insist that the illegal actions be nonviolent.
A variety of criticisms have been directed against the philosophy and practice of civil disobedience. The radical critique of the philosophy of civil disobedience condemns its acceptance of the existing political structure; conservative schools of thought, on the other hand, see the logical extension of civil disobedience as anarchy and the right of individuals to break any law they choose, at any time. Activists themselves are divided in interpreting civil disobedience either as a total philosophy of social change or as merely a tactic to be employed when the movement lacks other means. On a pragmatic level, the efficacy of civil disobedience hinges on the adherence of the opposition to a certain morality to which an appeal can ultimately be made.
" height="20" alt="HEW Logo">
The philosophical roots of civil disobedience lie deep in Western thought: Cicero, Thomas Aquinas, John Locke, Thomas Jefferson, and Henry David Thoreau all sought to justify conduct by virtue of its harmony with some antecedent superhuman moral law. The modern concept of civil disobedience was most clearly formulated by Mahatma Gandhi. Drawing from Eastern and Western thought, Gandhi developed the philosophy of satyagraha, which emphasizes nonviolent resistance to evil. First in the Transvaal of South Africa in 1906 and later in India, via such actions as the Salt March (1930), Gandhi sought to obtain equal rights and freedom through satyagraha campaigns.
Drawing in part on Gandhi’s example, the American civil rights movement, which came to prominence during the 1950s, sought to end racial segregation in the southern United States by adopting the tactics and philosophy of civil disobedience through such protests as the Greensboro (North Carolina) sit-in (1960) and the Freedom Rides (1961). Martin Luther King, Jr., a leader of the movement from the mid-1950s to his assassination in 1968, was an articulate defender of its strategy of nonviolent protest. Later the tactics of civil disobedience were employed by many protest groups within a variety of movements, including the women’s movement, the anti-nuclear and environmental movements, and the anti-globalization and economic equality movements.
The principle of civil disobedience has achieved some standing in international law through the war crime trials at Nürnberg, Germany, after World War II, which affirmed the principle that individuals may, under certain circumstances, be held accountable for failure to break the laws of their country.