Political Obligation and Civil Disobedience Lecture Slides PDF

10/6/24 X THE P U LNAI V C EE RO THE S FI T U Y SOE FF USLT R UNIVERSITY...

10/6/24 X THE P U LNAI V C EE RO THE S FI T U Y SOE FF USLT R UNIVERSITY LEAT OF AHRC N LI N YG STRATHCLYDE DE www.strath.ac.uk 1 X T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E Political Obligation and Civil Disobedience Dr Johann Go Topic 3 – L2235 Political Philosophy 2 1  10/6/24 X Lectures 5 & 6 T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E Lecture 5: Political Obligation Political Obligation Anarchism Theories of Political Obligations (Consent, Fair Play, Natural Duty, Collective Action) Lecture 6: Civil Disobedience The Limits of Political Obligations Features of Civil Disobedience Justifications for Civil Disobedience 3 X Is there a duty to obey the law? T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E Is there a duty to pay our taxes? Is it permissible for me to run a red light when I am absolutely sure no one else is coming? Is there a duty to obey just laws? Is there a duty to obey unjust laws? When, if ever, is civil disobedience justified? When, if ever, is violent civil disobedience justified? 4 2  10/6/24 X What is political obligation? T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E Political obligation is the idea that we have content- independent reasons to obey the law as set down by the state. If a person has a duty to obey the law, she must do X simply because the law says so. The fact that the law says to X is reason enough to X, regardless of what she herself thinks about X. 5 X T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E Political obligation implies that we ought to follow the rules and laws of the state, even if we think that disobeying might lead to better consequences, or even if we personally think the law is wrong. E.g. running a red light in the middle of the night at a deserted road crossing. E.g. refusing to pay the 60% tax rate because you think the correct top rate should be 40%. 6 3  10/6/24 X T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E Political obligation is taken seriously, both historically and in contemporary circles. Consider Plato’s Crito and the trial of Socrates. Was Socrates right in refusing to disobey? 7 X The Anarchist Challenge T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E Anarchists deny the authority of the state, in theory or practice, or both. Anarchists deny that we have any content independent reasons to obey the law. The fact that the state says we must do X does not compel us to do X. 8 4  10/6/24 X Two Forms of Anarchism T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E Philosophical Anarchism denies the legitimacy and authority of the state, and rejects the view that we have any content-independent reasons to obey the law. Robert Paul Wolff is the foremost defender of this view. Political Anarchism not only accepts philosophical anarchism, but it further argues that anarchism (i.e. having no state) would, in fact, be better than the state. 9 X Law does not imply justice T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E It is clear that what is legal does not imply what is right or just. e.g. cheating Nor does something being illegal mean that it is morally wrong or unjust. e.g. slavery e.g. inter-racial marriage 10 5  10/6/24 X So, how do we decide which laws we T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E should follow? The problem is, political obligation relies upon content independent reasons for obedience – not on a case-by-case evaluation. Can it be the case that a generally just institution will produce laws that we ought morally to follow? 11 X Substantive and Procedural Justice T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E John Rawls famously distinguishes between substantive justice and procedural justice. Some kinds of justice are about substantive issues. However, there is also justice in fair procedures. It matters that things are done the right way, and certain things can gain legitimacy through a fair procedure. A fairly determined law, even if it is not ‘correct’ according to substantive justice, may nevertheless be procedurally just and therefore warranting of our obedience. 12 6  10/6/24 X Theories of Political Obligation T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E In response to the anarchist challenge, theorists have proposed several ways to justify political obligation: Consent (Social Contract) Fair Play Natural Duty Public Goods 13 X 1. Consent-based Theories T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E Consent-based theories have their basis in the social contract tradition of Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Consent-based theories argue that citizens can be assumed to have consented to the state’s authority. This is generally based on the idea of hypothetical consent. 14 7  10/6/24 X The Social Contract Tradition T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E Locke Rousseau Hobbes 15 X Problems with Consent Theory T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E The Achilles heel of consent theories is that hypothetical consent does not seem like real consent at all. Consent-based theories of political obligation put a lot of weight on hypothetical consent. Active dissenters – Those who refuse to recognise the legitimacy of the state and actively dissent. Are they exempt from political obligation? 16 8  10/6/24 X 2. Fair Play Duties T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E H. L. A. Hart argues that “when a number of persons conduct any joint enterprise according to rules and thus restrict their liberty, those who have submitted to these restrictions when required have a right to a similar submission from those who have benefited by their submission”. John Rawls developed this into the duty of fair play. 17 X T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E On the Fair Play View, we should obey the state and follow laws that restrict our own liberty because we benefit from everyone else doing so. We benefit from the cooperative enterprise that is the state, and the duty of fair play demands that we restrict our liberty by following its rules. 18 9  10/6/24 X T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E e.g. driving Everyone driving on the left-hand side of the road, following the speed limit etc. benefits us all. We should reciprocate by doing the same and restricting our urge to drive in a careless or wanton way. 19 X 3. Natural Duty Accounts T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E On this account of political obligation, we ought to obey the law because it corresponds to existing duties we possess anyway. The law tells us to do X, but we have a natural (moral) duty to do X anyway, so we should do X in any case. This account has been defended by theorists such as Anna Stilz, Christopher Heath Wellman, and Thomas Christiano. 20 10  10/6/24 X Car Crash Example T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E Suppose you and your two friends come across a car accident: An off-duty doctor arrives and gives you orders. She instructs you to telephone the ambulance; she asks your first friend to assist her with treatment; and she asks the second friend to help divert traffic. Do you need to obey her? 21 X T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E In this case, you have a duty to obey the doctor’s instructions. This is because you have existing duties of assistance anyway. She is just helping coordinate and discharge these existing duties. Obeying her is merely about discharging your natural duty of justice (in this case, the natural duty of rescue). 22 11  10/6/24 X T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E By analogy, the natural duty account of political obligation argues that the state simply helps you discharge duties you have to your fellow citizens. Political obligation follows from this. It follows, however, that where the state asks you to do things that are contrary to your natural duty, you are under no obligation to obey. 23 X 4. Collective Action Theories T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E A collective action problem is a situation where individuals are disincentivised from joint action in pursuit of a common goal, despite that goal being in everyone’s interests. Consider: The Prisoner’s Dilemma The Tragedy of the Commons 24 12  10/6/24 X T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E 25 X Collective Action Problem – Example T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E It is in everyone’s interest to have a functioning healthcare system. This requires everyone to pay their bit. However, some people will attempt to avoid paying taxes to prop up the NHS and free-ride on others’ contribution instead. This is an individually rational but collectively irrational choice. People would prefer to get something and not pay for it, BUT if everyone reasoned this way, no one would get healthcare. This collective result is something no one wants. 26 13  10/6/24 X Free-Riding and Political Obligation T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E Political obligation solves the collective action problem. It compels everyone to contribute (using sanctions if necessary) in order to achieve the thing that individuals rationally desire and collectively want anyway. 27 X Public Goods Approach T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E There is a related approach called the public goods account of political obligation. This is more limited and focuses on solving collective action problems in the provision of public goods (what economists call goods which are non-excludable and non-rivalrous). This is common among libertarian theorists of political obligation, who believe in the state having a minimal scope. 28 14  10/6/24 X Hypothecated Taxation T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E The dominant model of general taxation means that citizens collectively pay towards everything a state does. This means that all (taxpaying) citizens are implicated in the state’s activities. Some people have proposed hypothecated taxation – being able to tick a box to say where you are happy for your taxes to go towards. Does this sound plausible? 29 X T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E Break 30 15  10/6/24 X Civil Disobedience T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E Civil disobedience has a long history. Gandhi Suffragettes Sit-ins at White-only spaces Civil disobedience is distinct from other forms of political action such as protests (which are generally legal) and revolution (which is a much more drastic move). 31 X Features of Civil Disobedience T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E Principled Law-breaking Civility (Non-Violent) Publicity Fidelity to the Law We shall analyse each of these features. 32 16  10/6/24 X 1. Principled Law-breaking T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E Civil disobedience must involve law-breaking. After all, it is disobedience. The law-breaking must be deliberate and principled. If I refuse to pay my taxes to make a point about the government funding a war (as in the case of Henry David Thoreau), I must be doing it for principled reasons – not merely because I do not want to pay my taxes. 33 X 2. Civility and Non-Violence T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E Must civil disobedience necessarily be non-violent? On a straightforward reading, it seems that violence would make it uncivil disobedience, contrary to its meaning. Many people object to violent civil disobedience on the grounds that it causes undue harm to others. (Recall Mill’s Harm Principle) Civil disobedience is supposedly acceptable because it is non-harmful, while violent (uncivil) disobedience is harmful and therefore unacceptable. 34 17  10/6/24 X T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E Non-violent action is not necessarily less harmful to others. Non-violent strike action by paramedics and doctors, for example, is likely to be much more catastrophic and harmful to people than violent protestors throwing bottles and bricks through commercial premise windows. Violence may be incompatible with civil disobedience, but this has nothing to do with the fact that violence is more harmful. (It is not clear that it always is). 35 X T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E Kimberlee Brownlee and others have recently argued that violence can be compatible with civil disobedience. Vandalising a Confederate monument or burning a police car – as in the recent Black Lives Matter protests – can, it is argued, send a message about police violence. John Morreall also defends violent civil disobedience, using the case of a runaway slave and his ‘master’ being beaten as an example. 36 18  10/6/24 X Morreall’s Escaped Slave Scenario T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E “If [the slaveowner] has almost caught up with the [escaped] slave, and my engaging him in a fistfight would give the slave the few precious minutes he needs to get away again, then I would be perfectly justified in grabbing the man and knocking him to the ground to give the slave the time he needs.” (Moreall, p. 42) 37 X T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E The law at the time that says I must help a slaveowner recapture his slave is an immoral one and not binding upon me. For Morreall, we are permitted to use violence to oppose that law and stop it being enforced: “My prima facie obligation to obey the law has been superceded by a higher moral obligation.” (Morreall, 42) 38 19  10/6/24 X 3. Publicity T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E Civil disobedience is a public action. It must be done in a transparent and public way, communicating the reasons publicly (Hugo Bedau). It is about sending a message to other citizens to convince them about their position. (John Rawls, Peter Singer, Jurgen Habermas) Hugo Bedau argues that covert action is not civil disobedience. It must be public, open, and communicative. 39 X 4. Fidelity to the Law T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E Civil disobedience is distinct from more drastic action such as revolution because it still promotes fidelity to the law. Civil disobedience is about reforming the regime and political system, not overthrowing it totally. This means that civil disobedients must still generally respect the law. This is the meaning of fidelity to the law. 40 20  10/6/24 X T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E Some theorists argue that civil disobedients must be prepared to accept legal punishment, as this is part of their message: they are so passionate about their views that they are willing to be punished for it. (e.g. JSO Van Gogh case) Other theorists disagree about what it means to have fidelity to the law. Candice Delmas agrees that civil disobedients need to submit themselves for arrest and prosecution, but need not plead guilty nor accept any punishment. 41 X Justifications for Civil Disobedience T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E According to John Rawls, there is a very high bar to meet for civil disobedience to be justified. Civil disobedience must: 1. Target serious and long-standing injustice, 2. Be used as a last resort, and 3. Be coordinated with other minority groups who are experiencing similar injustices. Many theorists think that Rawls is unduly restrictive about the legitimate conditions for civil disobedience. 42 21  10/6/24 X T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E Ronald Dworkin sees civil disobedience as justified because it allows people to test the validity of particular principles of justice. We test how strong the principles are by disobeying. Over time, policies and laws are tested and amended. They become fairer and more just. Dworkin also puts emphasis on the importance of conscience. There is a right to conscience, such that an individual may refuse to obey a law that conflicts with her conscience. 43 X T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E Civil disobedience raises many important moral and political issues. However, it is undeniable that civil disobedience has secured (or at least helped to secure) many of the civil liberties and rights we now take for granted. At the same time, sometimes it is counter-productive. How, if at all, should these conflicting realities change our views about civil disobedience? 44 22  10/6/24 Please download and install the Slido app on all computers you use Do you have an obligation to obey all laws, even ones which you consider unjust? ⓘ Start presenting to display the poll results on this slide. 45 X Sample Exam Questions T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E When, if ever, is violent civil disobedience justified? Are we justified in breaking the law if doing so will lead to better consequences? 46 23  10/6/24 X Summary T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E Political obligation is the idea that we have content independent reasons to obey the law. Anarchists challenge this view, with two variants of the view: philosophical anarchism and political anarchism. Political obligation theorists have advanced several accounts for why we might have political obligations: consent, fair play duties, public goods, and natural duty. 47 X T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F S T R AT H C LY D E Civil disobedience and political obligation are closely related topics. Civil disobedience is principled law-breaking that is public, civil, and performed with fidelity to the law. It is distinct from protest and revolution, though there is debate around whether it must be non-violent. Various justifications are given for civil disobedience, including on the basis of promoting justice and defending one’s conscience. 48 24 10/6/24 25 X THE P U LNAI V C EE RO S FI T U Y SOE FF USLT R LEAT AHRC N LI N YGDE 49