4 ms·

There the concept of civil disobedience. You don't simply leave a country because you disagree with it, you change it. Refer to the King and the civil rights mo

There the concept of civil disobedience. You don't simply leave a country because you disagree with it, you change it. Refer to the King and the civil rights movement for more. Go further back to the other Martin Luther for even more.

4ntonius8lock 7y ago
Isn't the concept of political refugees contrary to what you are saying? The way I see it, we acknowledge that sometimes a government can act outside of it's own boundaries in a repressive manner. That is why we help those who are fleeing persecution based on political activity. Saying you can't push for change and run away when repression comes would mean that a lot of people I admire, including the Dalai Lama, are bad people. I disagree.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- tempestn 7y ago
  There's a difference between saying it's OK to flee repression, which I don't think anyone is disputing, and saying that given the option to flee, it's immoral to instead stay and practice civil disobedience, which was the claim made up thread.
  - 4ntonius8lock 7y ago
    Thanks for clarifying. It seems I was wrong in my understanding.
michaelmrose 7y ago
For many changing it might be more practical than leaving it. For some like many refugees the choice was leave or die.
SkyBelow 7y ago
There is also the option of ignoring it (piracy vs IP laws) and subverting it (many communities refuse to work with cops and handle justice themselves). These are as illegal as civil disobedience (refusing to work with cops might be more legal in some countries). As to if they are more or less moral... what moral framework are we using to judge?
- mcny 7y ago
  We all have our own moral compass. I'm pretty sure the Declaration of Independence (1776) was also unlawful as well...
  - SkyBelow 7y ago
    This leaves us at a problem. Legality seems far too poor a standard to judge actions upon outside of court (and sometimes even in court), yet any moral standard is quite subjective to each person. So how do we determine right or wrong? There is a reason this has been an open problem for all of recorded history.
indigochill 7y ago
>You don't simply leave a country because you disagree with it Some do. See: secessionists or separatists. For historical examples, the English religious separatists who moved to Holland. Or the Confederates in the American Civil War. To be clear, I'm not defending their position or arguing whether or not this is better than civil disobedience, but clearly there is a separatist/secessionist school of moral thought.

4ntonius8lock 7y ago

Isn't the concept of political refugees contrary to what you are saying? The way I see it, we acknowledge that sometimes a government can act outside of it's own boundaries in a repressive manner. That is why we help those who are fleeing persecution based on political activity. Saying you can't push for change and run away when repression comes would mean that a lot of people I admire, including the Dalai Lama, are bad people. I disagree.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
tempestn 7y ago
There's a difference between saying it's OK to flee repression, which I don't think anyone is disputing, and saying that given the option to flee, it's immoral to instead stay and practice civil disobedience, which was the claim made up thread.
- 4ntonius8lock 7y ago
  Thanks for clarifying. It seems I was wrong in my understanding.

michaelmrose 7y ago

For many changing it might be more practical than leaving it. For some like many refugees the choice was leave or die.

SkyBelow 7y ago

There is also the option of ignoring it (piracy vs IP laws) and subverting it (many communities refuse to work with cops and handle justice themselves). These are as illegal as civil disobedience (refusing to work with cops might be more legal in some countries). As to if they are more or less moral... what moral framework are we using to judge?

mcny 7y ago
We all have our own moral compass. I'm pretty sure the Declaration of Independence (1776) was also unlawful as well...
- SkyBelow 7y ago
  This leaves us at a problem. Legality seems far too poor a standard to judge actions upon outside of court (and sometimes even in court), yet any moral standard is quite subjective to each person. So how do we determine right or wrong? There is a reason this has been an open problem for all of recorded history.

indigochill 7y ago

>You don't simply leave a country because you disagree with it Some do. See: secessionists or separatists. For historical examples, the English religious separatists who moved to Holland. Or the Confederates in the American Civil War. To be clear, I'm not defending their position or arguing whether or not this is better than civil disobedience, but clearly there is a separatist/secessionist school of moral thought.