Did Indians have a (moral) right to disrupt peoples’ lives with their protests against the British? Did Martin Luther King have a (moral) right to disrupt peop

Did Indians have a (moral) right to disrupt peoples’ lives with their protests against the British? Did Martin Luther King have a (moral) right to disrupt peoples’ lives with his protests? Most people think it’s ok to have disruptive protests in favor of their strongly held beliefs and are opposed to such protests when they are not in favor of their own strongly held beliefs. One thing that is ironic in the article is the mention of Occupy Wall Street. Perhaps the author did not notice that they were disruptive since this since they aligned with his values. I don’t know but it is striking that he mentions Occupy as an example of non disruptive protests. There were definitely disruptive protests in that movement. The U.S. Declaration of Independence talks about when a government no longer has the consent of the governed that it is then the right of the people to alter it. Rebellion is the ultimate form of disruptive protesting. There are times when such actions are morally justified.