Q: Is civil disobedience ever justified?

Yes, Yes, Yes!!!!!!!

Civil disobedience is always justified by the people participating in the disobeying for the simple reason that they will always believe in what they are doing. However, from an outside perspective, the justifications are analyzed through the values of the individual, organization or government. The validity of the justifications will depend and vary on opinions, strength of the case etc. In this project, I will define civil disobedience, identify examples and justify my stance on the question above.

The refusal to comply with certain laws or to pay taxes and fines, as a peaceful form of protest. -Oxford Languages

Civil disobedience is a method to stand up for something or stand against something. It violates the law however in principal it is peaceful. Philosophically, it derives from Western philosophers for example: Thomas Aquinas, John Locke and Henry David Thoreau.

Thoreau, born in 1817, was an American linguist and philosopher most well known for his book 'Walden' (or 'Life in the Woods'). However he also wrote an important essay: On the duty of Civil Disobedience published in 1849 (and he coined the term). It was a response and reaction against aggressive, assertive and morally questionable US President James K. Polk, inaugurated in 1845. Examples of this was when he declared war on Mexico and believed in returning runaway slaves to their masters. The position of the essay (from the research I've done; I didn't read it) proposed the idea that even if the president in power fairly won the election and had the support of the majority it didn't mean that others were supposed to sit down and keep their opinions to themselves. Instead, Thoreau thought that 'true' patriots should follow their own conscience, sense of 'right' and 'wrong' and sense of reason. Basically, he thought that it was the duty of a citizen to question, think independently and to act (civil disobedience) if they believed it was right, even if the opinion wasn't popular or accepted. Thoreau did this by publicly criticizing Polk and his actions and not paying his taxes, for which he was jailed. And his response (and other quotes):

“Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also a prison.”-Thoreau, Civil Disobedience

“It is not desirable to cultivate a respect for the law, so much as for the right."-Thoreau, Civil Disobedience

“A minority is powerless while it conforms to the majority.” -Thoreau, Civil Disobedience

Mahatma Gandhi introduced/popularized modern civil disobedience by pulling from both Western and Eastern thought to create the philosophy of satyagraha (devotion to the truth). The foundation of this philosophy is 'nonviolent resistance to evil' as defined by The Encyclopedia Britannica. Interestingly, Gandhi read "Civil Disobedience" by Thoreau while he was in jail and it is what his movement was loosely based on.

Political Perspective and Gandhi: A well known activist, Gandhi advocated for peace and independence for India from British rule which inspired others across the world. Other examples of his work/beliefs include: activist for civil rights in South Africa and vegetarianism. I can use the concept of political perspective to identify the influence of beliefs/values on his actions and how and way he pushed for political change. Gandhi believed that many of India's problems were rooted in colonialism and because of this he contributed to the push for independence. He also valued peace which played an important role in his actions and work (peaceful protests etc.)

***One of the prompts for this concept of political thinking is: compare and contrast how different groups respond to the same political issue. It is also interesting to think about the opposite of this statement. Especially in the context of civil disobedience and how many different movements use this concepts.***

Throughout history there have been many other examples of civil disobedience for example the civil rights movement in the 1950s and 1960s. Below I will explore some other examples in Canada.

The Oka Crisis was a very famous standoff in Canadian history in between Mohawks, the Canadian army, Quebec police and the RCMP. Mohawk people from Kahnawake and Akwesasne and people from the Mohawk Warrior Society created barricades on a local road to block development of a golf course and houses. Quebec police were involved in resisting the group and created their own blockades. Many people in the area were annoyed with the situation and inconvenience. The Mercier Bridge was also barricaded in solidarity. The conflict lasted 11 weeks and ended on September 26, 1990. This is a very simple skeleton of the situation and the main purpose is to highlight the civil disobedience.

Justifications: it was a land dispute that originated all the way back to 1761 when the Mohawks wanted recognition for their land rights. They wrote to the British government and made many demands over the next 150 years, none which were accepted. The Oka Crisis was a reaction to the town of Oka wanting to expand a golf course on the land and build housing developments that the Mohawks claimed to be theirs.

Results:

• The Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples was founded in 1991
• the construction of the golf course was cancelled
• Federal government bought land to prevent development

The slogan of this movement was "Home of the global revolution in Ottawa" and it protested the economic inequities and inequalities, corporate influence and greed in politics and society (justifications). It was a solidarity movement for the Occupy Wall movement. From my research, I think they are still advocating and have a website:  http://occupy-ottawa.org . However to focus on 2011 and the civil disobedience, they set up an encampment at the intersection of Laurier Avenue and Elgin Street. There were about 60 tents and shelters and a kitchen. They protested and slept in Confederation park until they received a notice of eviction. Peaceful demonstrations were led in different parts of downtown Ottawa as well.

Up until now, I have only defined civil disobedience, given a short history and provided some examples. However to answer the main question, civil disobedience can be justified. Looking to the examples, people are standing for something and I think that this is very important in understanding civil disobedience. Although sometimes very chaotic, it is purposeful and effective. There are so many issues and causes to defend in our world. If people didn't take action for what they believe in then nothing would change. Injustices and imbalances of power would continue and divides would be even greater. It is also essential to remember that many of the rights and freedoms people have today (that are in the law) were fought for using civil disobedience. People stood up for something. They stood up for civil rights and women rights for example. And we still feel the positive effects of those movements today. That is why civil disobedience is justifiable.

In saying that it is justifiable, I understand that some causes use civil disobedience and that the reasons for action may be unjustified, unethical etc. However, there are always going to be people who misuse or misrepresent something and I don't think that this means civil disobedience should be undermined as an idea.

Both of these movies are based on real life acts of civil disobedience. They portray how these situations were set up and planned, the execution and the results and government reactions to a certain degree. The image gallery below shows some pictures from the movies as well as the real life events they portrayed. The movies not only give examples of civil disobedience but also how they were justified.

...summarizes the historical events of the trial of the Chicago 7 which included David Dellinger, Rennie Davis, Thomas Hayden, Abbie Hoffman, Jerry Rubin, Lee Weiner, John Froines and Bobby Seale. I actually watched this movie in theatres when it came out (and restrictions allowed it). The movie is set during the trial but shows scenes of what happened during the Democratic National Convention and the conflicts between anti-Vietnam war activists and police officers.

Historical context: The convention is held every year to nominate presidents. Before the convention in 1968, there had been protests against the war (organized by groups such as the Youth International Party). To control the tensions, the mayor of Chicago, only gave permit for one protest in the afternoon of August 28, 1968. However protesters camped out a couple nights before also defying the 11pm curfew. The 28th conflict broke out when protesters tried to march to the convention and it lasted for four days. There was lots of violence and people hurt.

Objectives and Results: The film highlights the defiance and strength of the eight (then seven). They were firm on what they believed in and their actions of civil disobedience. Returning to Thoreau and his essay on civil disobedience, acting against a government/political leader is the foundation of civil disobedience. These people were fighting for what they believed in. They justified their civil disobedience (disobeying curfews, protesting) because they disagreed with government actions and the Vietnam war. The violent development of the protests could of been caused by many factors including: too many people, unnecessarily violent police response, misunderstandings of the purpose, the fact that protesters went beyond their permit boundaries, already high tensions etc. Unintended effects were that over 600 protesters were arrested and about 1000 were injured and the 8 were charged and tried in court. It is interesting to evaluate whether effects are intended or not because there was two sides of the protests and the trial.

...is a dramatized movie following the story of the contractor turned whistleblower Edward Snowden. Realizing the mass surveillance (not only on foreign governments and terrorists groups but also American citizens) by the National Security Agency, Snowden steals confidential and classified documents. With the help of some independent journalists and some from The Guardian, Snowden reveals this information to the world. Seen as a traitor in the USA by some and a hero by others, Snowden is unable to stay in his own country. How was this justified? His act of civil disobedience (peaceful, going against the government, disobeying the law, standing up) highlighted the privacy breaches of individual's personal data. Snowden's justifications from what I understand, as well as others, are based in the simple belief that the data one generates is theirs to give away. And that when it is taken without consent, it violates basic human rights and freedoms. His actions are justified by having the general publics interest in mind and wanting to give them the opportunity to know how they are being tracked and analyzed. As I think about this and the case of Edward Snowden specifically, it is interesting to notice 'the law', what breaking the law entails, and who is doing it. This case was tried in court and the ruling found that the surveillance was illegal (one example of an article:  https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-54013527 ). In addition, Snowden's actions were also illegal through the espionage act and if he returns to the US he will be tried in court. Snowden's acts of civil disobedience exposed the governments own illegal actions. This forces me to question the idea of disobedience and for me it intensifies my own support of it.

The Political Significance of Edward Snowden: Snowden revealed the actions of the most powerful government in the world and how this was affecting Americans (and others). He contributed to political change in society by forcing people (citizens, courts, policy makers) to take notice. The data collection and privacy infringement were found to be illegal as well. Furthermore, the Russian government is involved in a detached way by allowing Snowden to reside in their country. This could (does?) increase tensions and international relationships. It is difficult to analyze the degree of which Snowden's actions represent turning points. Their were some laws changed and it took people by surprise however the internet and social media is for the vast majority unregulated. And their is no way to give that data back. Although it was a courageous and powerful move which received a lot of attention, it is by no means the final answer. It didn't create enough of a change because data collection and the control of big tech in politics, society and our lives still reign.

One of the other foundation questions for the Unit 3 evaluation was "How has technology affected political participation?" However for this section I will analyze civil disobedience specifically and technologies influence. Technology has evolved rapidly. From around 2000, the internet and social media (the digital world really) has started and grown into this huge, uncontrollable 'thing' for lack of a better word. Originally a means to positively connect the world and form an information society it has since become bigger and more dangerous then that. For English class this year, I read The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power written by Shoshana Zuboff, a Harvard professor, scholar and philosopher. Surveillance capitalism in definition uses our data as raw material. The material is collected (without consent) and analyzed to further predict and influence individuals and society as a whole. In comparison to how capitalism has worked traditionally it is no longer a physical entity. The raw material is easily created in our everyday lives and the more we make use of these tools, the better profits are. In addition, the actual process of analyzation (and the extent of it) is difficult to pinpoint. Basically, our capitalist system is thriving off of stolen information and big tech are rising in power and wealth.

The influence of technology on civil disobedience specifically is complicated. To begin, technology (which extends to social media, data collection, credit cards etc) and the internet is for the most part lawless. And although this is changing as people realize the various issues and repercussions with it, technology develops at an extraordinary speed. So unfortunately by the time we've caught up, big tech and its technology are speeding ahead. It is a vicious cycle and one that Zuboff thoroughly analyzes and explains in her book, other publications and speeches. Honestly, technology 'provides' another reason for civil disobedience as seen in the case of Edward Snowden. It is another issue, another cause to stand for. There are many activist working towards more ethical data collection (if that's possible) and pushing for internet privacy rights to be considered as basic human rights. The internet/technology also influences the actions of disobedience, how they are executed and possibly how they are viewed. It is interesting to reflect what civil disobedience will look like in the future.

***I want to be clear that these aren't definite answers but what I have pulled from living in this technology age and knowing about some more recent acts of civil disobedience.***

Throughout this project, I have presented a brief history and the development of civil disobedience so it makes sense to include the future as well. To continue from the paragraph above: Now, we can reach and communicate with people across the world. We can post and share and advocate through online platforms. We can sign online petitions. Although it depends on the content, the vast majority of time none of these actions are breaking the law. So, technology could actually have an impact on civil disobedience as a whole and what it means. With new ways to advocate and protest, traditional methods may change in popularity. That being said, 2020 was a year full of demonstrations so it is really difficult to predict or even validate this opinion. However, social media today does influence and has changed how we communicate and many activists do use these platforms to advocate. But then there are people who post without truly being invested to doing much more beyond that. Could it be that technology actually cripples individuals desire to act? I predict that social media and the internet will continue to develop and that people will continue to use it AND civil disobedience/physical action to advocate. I also predict (and see if already) that there will be an increase in people who do think that action can stop at posts, shares, blogs, tweets etc. In looking at how social media, internet and data collection works, it is realized that what an individual is seeing is tailored to them for example targeted ads or articles. As it intensifies I predict that polarization will increase and it will be more difficult for tradition forms of civil disobedience to convince and rally people not already participating in the cause. As they are bombarded with what they want to see and one perspective, it will become harder to keep an open mind. And it is important to keep in mind that this wouldn't only affect 'every day' citizens but also diplomats, government, policy makers etc.

Civil disobedience forces people and governments to notice. It creates change and disrupts inequalities. I think that what we need to ask ourselves is what rights and freedoms wouldn't we have if others before us hadn't fought for them. For me, I think about women's rights and the rights and freedoms I have now because of previous acts of civil disobedience. There is still work to be done (some places more then others) but the truth is, is that I am very fortunate and privileged to have one 'rights and freedoms' to list. There are still inequalities, injustices and human rights violations all over the world, in every single country. Civil disobedience is justifiable because it is one method of changing and improving this world for the actual benefit of the greater good.

My first demonstration was when I was very young and my father brought me downtown to the US embassy. It wasn't a demonstration organized by anyone else, just me and my dad. We were protesting the US invading and their presence in Iraq, not that I would have had any idea. From what my dad recalls our sign read: "Restorative justice heals, retribution just hurts." The police officers surrounded us within seconds and they didn't understand the sign. My dad tried to explain it and we were asked to leave. I don't remember this, but have had the story told to me. Reflecting on this, I think about the years in between then and now and I really haven't done much else. And this depresses me. I've marched for climate change and left school to protest Doug Ford and changes to the curriculum however beyond that not much else. In 2019, my New Years Eve goal was to go to a protest every month. And that really didn't end up happening. Civil disobedience and advocacy takes hard work, courage and determination and I find that I get too caught up in my everyday life. That being said, I continue to live the way I want to the world to work or what I think is the 'right' way (to a certain extent, I don't believe that I have all the answers!). For example, I'm vegetarian, try to consume as little as possible, don't buy new things and volunteer at a food bank. However researching civil disobedience has inspired me to act and take a public stance for what I believe in.

To connect to my Unit 2 evaluation, I wanted to take note of the US presence in this project (and in civil disobedience) as well. They are everywhere! America and Americans have significant influence on the rest of the world. The concept of civil disobedience was invented as a response to a political leader in the US. In addition, the two movies both highlight American history and events which is affected by the movies I chose, how many movies are produced in the United States, their grasp on the film industry and also how when people advocate against the US government it impacts everyone. What I'm realizing is that it is impossible to leave them out or choose not to mention it because their power is so vast. That being said, I don't think that trying to ignore them is the answer but instead just noticing it. Noticing it in our everyday lives when we complain about injustices, or when we eat or watch a movie. Noticing is the first step in taking action and noticing US power is crucial in ensuring that we move forward and better the world for everyone.

Andrews, E. (2015, March 12). When Gandhi's Salt March Rattled British Colonial Rule. History.com. https://www.history.com/news/gandhi-salt-march-india-british-colonial-rule.

Besser, S. M., Jackson, M., Platt, M., Thompson , T., & Sorkin , A. (2020). The Trial of the Chicago 7. United States; Netflix.

Borman, M., Kopeloff, E., Schulz-Deyle, P., Sulichin, F., Fitzgerald , K., & Stone, O. (2016). Snowden. France, Germany and United States ; Open Road Films (United States), Universum Film (Germany), and Pathé Distribution (France).

Cantrell Assistant to the Editor in Chief Liz Cantrell is the assistant to the Editor in Chief of Town & Country, L. (2021, April 19). The True Story Behind 'The Trial of the Chicago 7'. Town & Country. https://www.townandcountrymag.com/leisure/arts-and-culture/a34361792/the-trial-of-the-chicago-7-1968-democratic-convention-true-story/#:~:text=Portrait%20of%20the%20Chicago%207,Hayden%2C%20and%20lawyer%20William%20Kunstler.&text=On%20February%2018%2C%201970%2C%20each,defendants%20was%20acquitted%20of%20conspiracy.

The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica. (2020, March 10). Civil disobedience. Encyclopædia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/topic/civil-disobedience.

Huss, D. (Ed.). (n.d.). Gandhi and Civil Disobedience. Constitutional Rights Foundation. https://www.crf-usa.org/black-history-month/gandhi-and-civil-disobedience.

Marshall, T., McIntosh, A., & Doerr, A. D. (2020, July 9). Oka Crisis. The Canadian Encyclopedia. https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/oka-crisis.

The School of Life Channel, & Booth, M. (2017). Thoreau and Civil Disobedience. YouTube. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gugnXTN6-D4.

Staff. (2020, February 14). Here's a list of major civil disobedience events in recent Canadian history. Global News. https://globalnews.ca/news/6554023/canada-major-civil-disobedience-events/.

Vandinthe, J. (Ed.). (2012). CTV News: Canada News - Top National News Headlines. CTVNews. https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/rcmp-snooped-into-occupy-protesters-in-nation-s-capital-documents-show-1.1141217/comments-7.366491.

Wikimedia Foundation. (2020, December 28). Occupy Ottawa. Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_Ottawa.