3 ms·

That's not the definition of civil disobedience. Civil disobedience is not, in any way, exclusive to waging disobedience within a regionally localized or symmet

by aric 13y ago

That's not the definition of civil disobedience. Civil disobedience is not, in any way, exclusive to waging disobedience within a regionally localized or symmetric form. By definition, it's only exclusive to disobeying one's government, laws, or other civil institutions. True enough on that last part. These chilling effects compound rapidly.

noblethrasher 13y ago
I am using the definition of civil disobedience as first proffered by Thoreau, and effected by Gandhi, MLK, et. al. [1] It entails neither locality nor symmetry. Indeed, it exploits the fact that there exists a dimension where the faceless establishment cannot hope to enjoy a beneficial asymmetry: sympathy. When you kill or imprison a man for merely using a certain restroom, or sitting in a certain place on the bus, or casting a ballot, etc, you are making a gross injustice apparent to all, and you put yourself in the position of prevailing against the sympathies and sensibilities of society (including some of the oppressors). Thus, it turns an asymmetry that the establishment normally enjoys into a liability. Upvoted because this discussion has caused me to think of some new and interesting thoughts. [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Disobedience_(Thoreau) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Disobedience_(Thoreau)
- aric 13y ago
  Upvoted as well. We ultimately agree. I'm sure you understand my contention. > "It also means submitting to the authorities when you break the law; MLK spent a lot of time in jail." I interpreted that phrase as exclusive although you probably implied it as inclusive. I simply don't want anyone to be mistaken. Civil disobedience doesn't require submission to authority. Enough people as it is make irrelevant equivocations about Snowden and others having to flee the [United States | {or insert regime}] out of fearing for their lives. Civil disobedience feeds on strategy. MLK had his legions and knew some fleeting jail time would actually work in his favor. I appreciate Thoreau. :) I wish more people would take his thoughts (and the thoughts of other like-minds) to heart. Peace!

by aric 13y ago

noblethrasher 13y ago

I am using the definition of civil disobedience as first proffered by Thoreau, and effected by Gandhi, MLK, et. al. [1] It entails neither locality nor symmetry. Indeed, it exploits the fact that there exists a dimension where the faceless establishment cannot hope to enjoy a beneficial asymmetry: sympathy. When you kill or imprison a man for merely using a certain restroom, or sitting in a certain place on the bus, or casting a ballot, etc, you are making a gross injustice apparent to all, and you put yourself in the position of prevailing against the sympathies and sensibilities of society (including some of the oppressors). Thus, it turns an asymmetry that the establishment normally enjoys into a liability. Upvoted because this discussion has caused me to think of some new and interesting thoughts. [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Disobedience_(Thoreau) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Disobedience_(Thoreau)

aric 13y ago
Upvoted as well. We ultimately agree. I'm sure you understand my contention. > "It also means submitting to the authorities when you break the law; MLK spent a lot of time in jail." I interpreted that phrase as exclusive although you probably implied it as inclusive. I simply don't want anyone to be mistaken. Civil disobedience doesn't require submission to authority. Enough people as it is make irrelevant equivocations about Snowden and others having to flee the [United States | {or insert regime}] out of fearing for their lives. Civil disobedience feeds on strategy. MLK had his legions and knew some fleeting jail time would actually work in his favor. I appreciate Thoreau. :) I wish more people would take his thoughts (and the thoughts of other like-minds) to heart. Peace!