Violent Civil Disobedience
Grade Level at Time of Presentation
Senior
Major
Philosophy/Sociology
Minor
N/A
Institution
Morehead State University
KY House District #
95
KY Senate District #
29
Faculty Advisor/ Mentor
Dr. Christina Conroy
Department
History, Philosophy, Politics, International and Legal Studies
Abstract
We argued that violence committed as an act of self-defense against structural violence can be justified, and further; that we should properly define this type of violence as a form of civil disobedience. Debate over the justification of violent political activism regained prominence in the popular discourse in recent years. The question became pertinent in the wake of political violence committed by factions of both far left and far right in a series of public demonstrations. Commentators from across the political spectrum held that nonviolent political activism is both morally and tactically superior. However, not all violence is morally equal. We found that there was an important distinction to be made between the violence committed via the normal functioning of social, political, and economic institutions, or structural violence, and the violence committed as an act of self-defense against it. We concluded that in the process of defending against structural violence, the use of violence against both people and property is sometimes both necessary, and justified.
Violent Civil Disobedience
We argued that violence committed as an act of self-defense against structural violence can be justified, and further; that we should properly define this type of violence as a form of civil disobedience. Debate over the justification of violent political activism regained prominence in the popular discourse in recent years. The question became pertinent in the wake of political violence committed by factions of both far left and far right in a series of public demonstrations. Commentators from across the political spectrum held that nonviolent political activism is both morally and tactically superior. However, not all violence is morally equal. We found that there was an important distinction to be made between the violence committed via the normal functioning of social, political, and economic institutions, or structural violence, and the violence committed as an act of self-defense against it. We concluded that in the process of defending against structural violence, the use of violence against both people and property is sometimes both necessary, and justified.