Talk:Civil disobedience
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is supported by the Sociology WikiProject, which gives a central approach to sociology and related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article Civil disobedience, or visit the project page for more details on the projects. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. |
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. |
Contents |
[edit] Change of image
I feel that the image is not suitable....could it be possibly changed to one of Gandhi's demonstrations as he is mentioned?
I concure the picture currently occupying that space does not make much sense. A picture of Gandhi would better suit that position.
- are you referring to the Potts picture? I think a picture demonstrating civil disobedience would be better. Perhaps Gandhi making salt, or some one in an earlier stage of arrest for civil disobedience. As it is it is just someone being arrested. Rds865 (talk) 03:08, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Gandhi's and Thoreau's ideas of civil disobedience
The distinction between Gandhi's and Thoreau's ideas of civil disobedience may be worth mentioning. Gandhi focused very much on that resistance should be active, whereas Thoreau, although he had great faith that C.D could change the world, primarily did it for reasons of conscience, it was the right thing to do, the changing the world part was just a bonus. Chaining yourself to something can not be supported by the book C.D. The difference is that Thoreau advocates resistance from a duty ethic, while Gandhi primarily advocates it from a consequence ethic - although his belief in karma complicates things a bit.
Thoreau refused to pay taxes that were going to pay for drilling of soldiers for the war. His aunt(?) paid the taxes against his will. There is a famous story of Ralph Waldo Emerson asking at the jail, "Henry, why are you here?" The response, "The more important Question is: why you aren't?"
I changed the link to Thoreau's "Civil Disobedience" to the text from WikiSource to help increase use of and interest in that project. biggins 06:27, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Thoreau
Civil Disobediance was an essay, not a book. I corrected this error.
[edit] Odd reference
- see the article by Christian Bay on this subject in the Encyclopaedia of social sciences
I'm unsure how to make this into a complete reference. -- Beland 11:57, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
[edit] ya
yes indeed my friend
[edit] Merge
- support merge of civil and social disobedience. No distinguishing features between the two.
--Pfafrich 23:53, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- Support for above reasons.
--Scaife 06:06, 03 February 2006 (UTC)
- Sound idea to me. Support. SchuminWeb (Talk) 16:19, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
- Do not support: Civil disobedience as propagated by Thoreau and (differently) by Gandhi is a chapter unto itself. "Civil and Social disobedience" is may derived from these ideas but presents itself as a modern movement which deserves a separate article. I am grateful for the cross-reference, though.
- Do not support: Civil and Social Disobedience, as the poster above me noted, practices ideas derived from the philosophy of civil disobedience. However, so did the US Civil Rights Movement, the 1960s Student Movement, etc. I would not want to merge articles like that into this one. They ALL deserve to be cross-referenced at the bottom of this article under "See Also" -- That is the extent of merging I find appropriate. takethemud 03:06, 10 April 2006 (UTC)takethemud
- Do not support because it lacks distinctive elements of non-violence. However, I do support either merging "Civil and Social disobedience" with "Disobbedienti" or renaming it under the Itialian terminology for the movement around the "Disobbedienti" to reduce confusion. Dennis 15:45, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
- Support I think that the articles are close enough so that they can be merged. I at least think that the civil and social article should be mentioned in the civil article. 205.155.146.74 01:26, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] I added a quote
I added in a quote from Gandhi
[edit] Delete Civil and social disobedience!
I think that the Civil and social disobedience should be deleated, and just mentioned in the Civil disobedience article, because there is not enough in the article to make it its' own article, and I think that it only deserves a quick mentin in the Civil disobedience article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Swat671 (talk • contribs)
[edit] Gandhi's campaigns
I have deleted "Gandhi believed in forceful disobedience until realizing civil disobedience was more sensible due to the fact his people didn't have the weapons or technology to win against the oppressive Indian army acting for the British Army"
Citations are needed for these assertions. Who has claimed that Gandhi ever considered "forceful disobedience"? Gandhi was trying to speed up a process of independence to which Britain had already agreed in principle before the second world war, not fight some war. The Indian army is highly respected within India, and is not considered a formerly repressive army. Gandhi served in the British armed forces in the Boer War, long before he started his independence campaogns, but even then was pacifist (he worked with the ambulance corps). Gandhi started politics in South Africa, where he was already pacifist, so why would he have ever supported "forceful disobedience" when he returned to India. It seems to me this is sentence which i have deleted is just incorrect weasel-worded anglophobe speculation.
129.12.200.49 21:04, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
it is totally wrong, not only was Gandhi pacifist, but the Indians had the total means to defeat the British by arms, that is if the Indians could unite against them. after all the British forces in Indian, was the Indian Army made up of Indians. That is why it is said, that the British ruled Indian, only because the Indians allowed it.Rds865 (talk) 03:03, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Clean Up
This doesn't read like an encyclopedia article. Even though the info is sound, I think the wording needs to be edited.Denis Diderot II 01:30, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Civil Disobedience
I know that Emerson pioneered the modern philosophy behind civil disobedience, and he wrote an essay entitled "Civil Disobedience", but did he actually coin the term "civil disobedience"? If so, I think that fact should be added...don't know if it's true or not though, or I would. 66.32.217.17 (talk) 22:03, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Other views of Civil Disobedience
Perhaps there should be added views of civil disobedience than the traditional ones expressed here. For example well Gandhi prohibits swearing and destroying flags, some consider civil disobedience to be everything short of physically harming a person. also, different strategies, such as violating laws that are unjust, or violating laws to protest an unrelated government act(ie. blocking traffic to protest a war) Rds865 (talk) 02:59, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] "Operation Rescue"
I'm not sure if I agree with the inclusion of this as part of the article. Generally, the religious examples seem ok, but protesting abortion by blocking access to clinics isn't necessarily civil disobedience. Rather than protesting a law, the protesters are forcibly hindering legal behavior of other citizens in order to argue for new laws. Further, the incident cited in the example seems a bit obscure. Why not include a more clear-cut example like a protest against the death penalty? In such a case, the citizens involved are clearly acting to change an 'unjust law' rather than trying to curb other individuals' behavior.
Opinions? ArchetypeRyan (talk) 06:23, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
