Microsoft Word - Uncivil Disobedience 5.17.docx

Uncivil!Disobedience:!Political!Commitment!and!Violence!

N.!P.!Adams!

Standard! definitions! of! civil! disobedience! include! nonviolence! as! a! necessary! condition:!

any! violence! puts! protest! outside! the! conceptual! bounds,! and! so! justificatory! bounds,! of!

civil! disobedience.! As! John! Rawls! (1999,! p.! 321)! says! in! his! canonical! discussion,! “To!

engage!in!violent!acts!likely!to!injure!and!to!hurt!is!incompatible!with!civil!disobedience.”!

On! this! view,! as! Hugo! Bedau! (1961,! p.! 656)! puts! it,! “the! pun! on! ‘civil’! is! essential:”! civil!

disobedience!is!both!civil! in! the!sense!that!it! relates! to! the!public!sphere!and! civil! in! the!

sense!that!it!is!polite.!Violence!is!certainly!uncivil!in!the!latter!sense!and!it!is!often!argued!

that!it!is!uncivil!in!t he!former!sense!as!well.

!This!standard!understanding!is!bolstered!by!

two!of!the!paradigmatic!and!most!influential!examples!of!civil!disobedience,!namely!those!

of!Mohandas!Gandhi!and!Martin!Luther!King,!Jr.!These!deeply!religious!leaders!promoted!

nonviolence!both! as! a! means! and! as! an! end! in!itself,! thereby! entangling! nonviolence! and!

civil!disobedience!in!the!minds!of!many.!

! There! has! long! been! a! strain! of! thought,! however,! that! resists! defining! civil!

disobedience! as! necessarily! nonviolent! (Lang! 1970;! Morreall! 1976;! Zinn! 1990;! Moraro!

2007;!Raz! 2009;! Simmons! 2010;! Brownlee!2012;! Celikates!2016).! This! dissent! has! many!

roots,!including!disagreement!over!the!nature!of!violence!and!the!desire!to!better!describe!

a!wider!range!of!political!practice.!Here!I!follow!this!revisionary!strain!of!thought !and!argue!

that!violence!and!civil!disobedience!are!not!incompatible!in!principle.!In!particular,!I!argue!

that!civil!disobedience!can!be!violent!when!the!violence!is!not!directed!at!persons.!!

There! are! three! general! strategies! one! could! employ! to! argue! for! the! conceptual!

coherence!of!civil!disobedience!and!violence.!The!first!is!to!take!standard!understandings!

of! both! civil! disobedience! and! violence! and! to! reinterpret! their! relation.! As! noted! above,!

others!have!pursued!this!line! of!thought.!A!second!strategy!is!to!offer!novel!u nderstandings!

of!both!civil!disobedience!and!violence,!a!considerably!heavier!argumentative!burden,!and!

to! show! how! they! interrelate.! The! third! strategy! is! to! reinterpret! one! of! the! central!

concepts! but! leave! the! other! in! place.! I! pursue! this! third! strategy.! I! propose! a! novel!

understanding! of! civil! disobedience! that! centers! on! what! I! ca ll ! the! “commitment! to! the!

political.”! Focusing! on! the! commitment! to! the! political ! enables! a! clearer! and! ultimately!

more! plausible! discussion! of! various! kinds! of! violence! and! their! potential! role! in! civil!

disobedience.!As!I!explain!in!section!three,! I!do!not!offer!a!novel!understanding!of!violence.!

Of!course,!there!is!also!disagreement!about!the!concept!of!violence,!so!the!understanding!of!

violence!that!I!employ!is!necessarily!contested!(Bufacchi!2005).!I!offer!some!support!for!my!

stance!below,!but!I!do!not!have!the!space!to!undertake!a!complete!defense!here.!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!Even!this! minimal!characterization! of!violence!has! been!challenged:! Kimberley!Brownlee!notes! that!fencing!

is!in!some!se n se s!b o th !vio le n t!a n d!p o lite !(2 0 12 ,!p .!22 ).!

In!section!one!I!explain!what!I!take!to!be!the!distinctive!feature!of!civil!disobedience,!

namely! that! it! is! an! a ct! of! remedial! law-breaking! that! gets! is! special! character! from! its!

combination!of!condemnation!of!a!political!practice!with!a!commitment!to!the!political.!In!

section! two!I!explain!the!crucial!notion!of!a!commitment!t o!the!political!and! I!argue!against!

the! Rawlsian! notion! of! fidelity! to! law.! Finally,! in! section! three! I! apply! the! new!

understanding!of!the!commitment!to!the!political!to!the!issue!of!violence.!Although!here!I!

exclusively! pursue! the! implications! of! the! commitment! to! the! political! for! the! issue! of!

violence,! understanding! civil! disobedience! in! this! manner! also! has! implications! for! other!

aspects!of!the!practice.!I!leave!those!further!explorations!for!another!venue.!

! Before! proceeding,! an! important! caveat:! nothing! that! I! say! here! denies! that!

nonviolence!is!immensely!preferable!to!violence,!both!intrinsically!and!instrumentally.!As!

Joseph! Raz! (2009,! p.! 268)! notes,! even! if! we! admit! that! violence! can! play! a! role! in! some!

cases,! it! should! still! be! “used! only! very! rarely! and! with! great! caution.”! Further,! there! is!

good! reason! to! think! that! nonviolent! resistance! is! strategically! superior! to! violent!

resistance! in! general! (Chenoweth! and! Stephan! 2012).! My! concern! here! is! conceptual!

coherence,!not!important!further!issues!of!justification!and!strategy.!

1.!Civil!Disobedience!

We!can !dispense!with!one!point!immediately:!puns!are!not!arguments.!The!fact!that!‘civil’!

has!different! senses!does! not!constrain! our! theory.! While! I! would! prefer!to! use!a! clearer!

term! like! ‘political! disobedience’! (Markovits! 2005),! the! debate! has! settled! on! ‘civil’! even!

when! the! question! of! violent! disobedience! is! left! open.! Civil-qua-political! disobedience!

(rather!than!civil-qua-polite!disobedience)!captures!a!particular!kind!of!political!act!based!

on! its! two! terminological! elements.! By! “disobedience”! I! mean! the! intentional! breaking! of!

specific! laws.! This! distinguishes! civil ! disobedience! from,! on! one! hand,! p rotest! that! is!

perfectly! legal! under! a! particular! legal! regime,! and,! on! the! other! hand,! unintentional! or!

indiscriminate! law-breaking.! By! “civil”! (qua! political)! I! mean! with! the! intention! of!

remedying!some!public!practice!that!is!sincerely!held!to!be!unjust.!This!distinguishes!civil!

disobedience!from!private!law-breaking!of!two!sorts:!law-breaking!aimed!at!private!gain,!

as! in! the! case! of! theft,! and! law-breaking! for! reasons! of! personal! ethics,! as! in! the! case! of!

conscientious!refusal.

!What!I!am!arguing,!then,!is!that!violent(civil(disobedience,!or!uncivil(

disobedience,!is!a!coherent!concept.!

! Ultimately! the! concept! of! uncivil! disobedience! allows! us! to! more! accurately!

understand,! describe,! and! proscribe! our! political! world.! An! important! case! in! the!

development!of!my!thoughts!about!uncivil!disobedience!was!the!burning!of!a!police!cruiser!

in!Ferguson,!Missouri!(Tol er!2014).!Many!observers!and!commentators!contrasted!the!civil!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!I!d o!not!restrict!th e!intention!to! c ha ng ing !“political”!practice! b ec au se!civil! d isob edie nc e!can!aim! to !politicize!

something!currently!conceptualized!as!strictly!private.!

disobedience!of!marchers!an d!protestors!with!the!uncivil,!apparently!violent!destruction!of!

the! police! cruiser.! This! immediately! raised! a! question:! did! this! really! not! count! as! civil!

disobedience?!It!did!not!substantially! risk!harm!to!a ny!persons!and!it!seemed!to!convey!the!

same!message!as!p rotesting!but!with!more!vigor!and!more!impact .!Other!questions!arose!

as!well—for!example,!whether!it!could!be!distinguished!from!damage!to!private!property!

and!how!to!contextualize!it!in!relation! to!other!events!of!that!evening,! week,!and!year—but!

this! fundamental! conceptual! question! seemed! to! me! to! require! consideration! on! its! own!

terms.! Accurately! characterizing! this! act! matters! for! investigating! its! justification! and! its!

potential!repetition,!its!connection!to!social!movements!of!the!past!and! future,!as!well! a s!its!

character!and!effectiveness.!

! As!Ra wls!(1999,!p.!322)!notes,!civil!disobedience!lies!at!“the!outer!edge”!of!political!

practice.!Although!it!pushes!the!boundaries!of!the!political,!we!must!make!room!in!both!our!

concepts!and!our!justifications!for! such!disobedience.!As!Jürgen!Habermas,!Hannah!Arendt,!

and! others! have! persuasively! argued,! civil! disobedience! is! a! healthy! part! of! any! good!

society! because! it! represents! the! deep! convictions! of! citizens! committed! to! exposing!

injustice,! constantly! keeping! political! power! in! check! and! holding! decision-makers!

accountable!(Arendt!1972,!p.!96;!Habermas!1985,!pp.!103-5;!Rawls!1999,!pp.!336-37;!Sabl !

2001,!pp.! 307,! 327).! Even! under! legitimate! regimes,! ineliminable! features! of! government!

make!such!contestatory!practices!valuable,!including!benign!features!like!institutional!drift!

as! well! as! pernicious! features! like! the! corrupting! influence! of! concentrated! power!

(Markovits!2005;!Smith!2011).!!

! The!key! for!understanding!civil!disobedience!is!capturing!how!it! remains!within!but!

at! the! edge! of! the! political.! While! my! purpose! here! is! not! to! develop! or! defend! a! full!

definition! of! civil! disobedience,! I! give! a! novel! explanation! of! the! central! feature! of! the!

practice,! which! delimits! the! role! of! violence! in! my! arguments! below.! The! core! of! civil!

disobedience!is!that!it!necessarily!communicates!two!things,!simultaneously!but!strainedly:!

on! one! hand,! it! communicates! a! condemnation! of! a! political! practice,! while! on! the! other!

hand!it!communicates!a!commitment!to!the!political.

!Its!special!character—and,!often,!its!

special! persuasive! force! or! appeal—comes! from! the! interaction! between! these! two!

components! by! making! clear! that! this! particular! act! of! law-breaking! is! principled! and!

aimed!at!improving!our!shared!political!condition.!!

Civil! disobedience! communicates! a! disconnect! between! the! val ues! underlying! the!

political! project! and! how! that! project! is! being! carried! out! in! practice! by! contrasting! the!

disobedient’s!commitment!to!the!political !project!with!her!willingness!to!break!the!law!that!

is! supposed! to! embody! and! uphold! that! very! project.! Civil! disob edience! does! not! simply!

communicate! perceived! mistakes,! which! the! militant! may! also! communicate,! but!

inconsistencies.!The!appeal!ma de!by!disobedients,!then,!is!an!appeal!on!the!basis!of!shared!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!See! B rownlee! (2012)! for! the! most! fully! developed! and ! insightful! discussion! of! disobedience! as! an! act! of!

communication.!!

ground!that!the!audience!is!already!committed!to,!rather!than!the!more!removed!appeal!of!

mere!mistake.!Further,!the!disobedients’!simultaneous!condemnation!an d!commitment!do!

more! than! say! that! there! is! an! inconsistency,! they! demonstrate! the! inconsistency.! The!

particular! character! of! civil! disobedience! as! a! distinct! phenomenon,! worthy! of!

characterization! and! analysis! in! its! own! right,! is! that! it! performs! the! very! same! tension!

between! political! ideals! and! actions! that! it! aims! to! identify! and! remedy! in! the! broader!

community.!Its!condemnation!is!heightened!by!the!costs!of!law-breaking!and!the!contrast!

with!its!commitment!to!the!political!is!concomitantly!heightened!as!well.!

The! question,! then,! is! how! this! combination! of! condemnation! and! commitment!

constrains! an! act! of! civil! disobedience.! Law-breaking! demonstrates! condemnation! quite!

directly;!the!main!concern!is!making!clear!the!object!of!condemnation.!The!more!difficul t !

part!of!civil!disobedience!is!expressing!a!commitment!to!the!political,!for!law-breaking!per!

se!seems!to!imply!the!lack!of!such!a!commitment.!Thus!much!of!the!debate!over!the!concept!

of!and!justificatory!conditions!on!civil!disobedience!hinges!on!how!the!commitment!to!the!

political! can! be! expressed.! For! example,! Rawls! demands! that! disobedients! be! willing! to!

accept! punishment! specifically! on! the! grounds! that! such! a ! willingness! shows! the!

disobedient!to!be!“within!the!limits!of!fidelity!to!law”!(1999,!p.!322).!He!contrasts!this!w it h!

the!case!of!the!militant!who!is!not!willing!to!accept!punishment!because!“mil itant !action!is!

not!within!the!bounds!of!fidelity!to!law,!but!represents!a !more!profound!opposition!t o!the!

legal!order”!(1999,!p.!323).!Some!of!the!disagreement!over!whether!civil!disobedience!must!

be! public,! forewarned,! or! non-anonymous! also! rests! on! whether! such! elements! are!

necessary!to!remain!within!a!commitment!to!the!political.!!

2.!Political!Commitment!

The! central! question! is! whether! violence! necessarily! contradicts! the! commitment! to! the!

political! that! civil! disobedience! must! demonstrate.! In! order! to! answer! this! question,! we!

must!first!get!clear!on!the!commitment!to!the!political.!In!this!section!I!argue!for!a!rather!

minimalist,! thin! notion! of! commitment! to! the! political:! commitment! to! the! idea! of! the!

shared! project! of! living! together.! I! make! this! argument! along! three! avenues:! by! showing!

why! the! traditional! Rawlsian! notion! of! fidelity! to! law! is! too! strong,! by! showing! that! my!

notion!of!the!political!unifies!a!distinct!practice!across!a! desirable!range!of!contexts,!and!by!

showing!the!advantages!of!my!notion!in!relation!to!other!extant!accounts.!

What!I! call!the!commitment!to!the!political,!Rawls!understands!as!“fidelity!to!law”!

and!he!argues!(1999,!p.!322)!that!fidelity!to!law!is!inconsistent!with!violence:!!

The! law! is! broken,! b ut ! fidelity! to! law! is! expressed! by! the! public! and!

nonviolent! nature! of! the! act,! by! the! willingness! to! accept! the! legal!

consequences!of!one’s!conduct.!This!fidelity!to!law!helps!to!establish!to!the!

majority!that!the!act!is!indeed!polit icall y!conscientious!and!sincere,!and!that!

it!is!intended!to!address!the!public’s!sense!of!justice.!To!be!completely!open!

and!nonviolent!is!to!give!bond!of!one’s!sincerity,!for! it!is!not!easy!to!convince!

another! that! one’s! acts! are! conscientious,! or! even! to! be! sure! of! this! before!

oneself.!

The! first! question! is! what! fidelity! to! law! means.! As! William! E.! Scheuerman! (2015)! and!

others!argue,!it!is!a!mistake!to!incorporate!this!notion!of!fidelity!to!law!into!our!concept!of!

civil!disobedience!if!we!interpret!it!as!fidelity!to!the!actual!law.!

Fidelity! to! actual! law! rules! out! too! many! paradigmatic! historical! cases! of! civil!

disobedience,!including!both!Gandhi!and! King! (Lyons! 1998).! Gandhi! w a s! a!revolutionary,!

rightfully! viewing! Britain’s! colonial! rule! as! illegitimate! and! condemning! it! as! such;! his!

nonviolence!was!not!motivated!by!fidelity!to!the!actual!oppressive!law.!Rawls!constricts!his!

attention!to!disobedience!within!a!legitimate,!near-just!state!and!so!ends!up!characterizing!

disobedients! as! reformers,! critiquing! a! particular! aspect! of! a! system! t hat! they! are!

committed! to! on! the! whole.

!This! has! the! advantage! of! offering! a! clear! contrast! between!

disobedients!and!revolutionaries!but!excludes!too!much.

It! is! unfortunate! that! the! literature! treats! Rawls’! definition! as! canonical,!

understandable!as!t hat!may!be.!His!consideration!of!the!practice!comes!in!the!context!of!a!

discussion!of!political!obligation!and!he!explicitly!frames!the!problem!of!civil!disobedience!

as!a!challenge!to!political!obligation,!the!limits!of!democratic!rule,!and!obedience!to!unjust!

laws.! He! notes! that! his! theory! of! civil! disobedience! is! “framed! for! special! circumstances”!

(1999,! p.! 319)! and! its! purpose! is! “to! narrow! the! disparity! between! the! conscientious!

convictions!of!those!who!accept!the!basic!principles!of!a!democratic!society”!(1999,!p.!320).!

I!think!this!leads!Rawls!to!mistake!justificatory!conditions!for!conceptual!conditions.!

He!defines!civil!disobedience!in!an!extremely!narrow!way!not!because!he!is!interested!in!

characterizing! a! multifaceted! political! practice! but! because! he! is! interested! in! whether!

there! is! any! case! where! law-breaking! could! be! justified! under! conditions! where! political!

obligation!otherwise!holds.! To!do!so!he!restricts!his!attention!to!the!most!justifiable!case!he!

can! imagine! but! instead! of! framing! its! features! in! terms! of! justifiability,! he! incorporates!

them!directly!into!his!definition.!

Importantly,!though,!I!am!interested!in!civil!disobedience!for!reasons!that!go!beyond!

its!relation!to!political !obligation!(Raz!2009,!p.!265).!In!particular,!even!if!the!justificatory!

question! is! uninteresting! in! illegitimate! regimes! (because,! as! Rawls! notes,! if! militant!

revolution!is!justified!then!a(fortiori!mere!disobedience!is!justified),!it!is!not!the!case!that!

civil! disobedience! as! a! distinct! political! practice! is! uninteresting.! Even! in! an! illegitimate!

regime! we! often! have! good! reasons!to! choose! to! engage! only,!or! at! least! initially,! in! civil!

disobedience.!For!example,!militant!revolution!is!only!justified!as!a!last!resort!and!engaging!

in! civil! disobedience! is! likely! one! of! t he! steps! that! must! be! explored! before! a! last! resort!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!See!Sabl!(2001)!for!a!particularly!informative!discussion!of!Rawls’!notion!of!“near-just”!societie s.!

!For!more!along!this!line,!see!Scheuerman!(2016).!

constraint!is!fulfilled.!Similarly,!it!can!be!the!case!that!an!illegitimate!regime!lacks!the!right!

not! to! be! overthrown! but! that! other! factors,! such! as! likelihood! of! success! or!

proportionality,! make! militant! revolution! unjustified! for! citizens.! In! such! a! case! the! only!

justifiable! route! may! be! civil! disobedience! even! though! there! is! no! general! political!

obligation.! Further,! even! when! militant! revolution! is! justified,! tactically! speaking! it! may!

make! sense! to! remain! within! the! bounds! of! civil! disobedience,! so! we! need! to! be! able! to!

distinguish! the! practice! from! militancy! for! strategic! reasons! (Chenowet h! and! Stephan!

2011).! Finally,! for! those! opposed! to! militancy! on! political,! religious,! or! purely! moral!

grounds!also!need!to!be!able!to!identify!a!distinct!practice!of!civil!disobedience.!!

Another!way!of!highlighting!the!distinctiveness!of!civil!disob edience!apart!from!the!

question! of! its! justification! is! that! justification! focuses! on! part icul ar! acts! of! civil!

disobedience!but!the!practice!itself!is!best!understood,! both! historically! and! normatively,!

as! a! part! of! broader! social! movements.! For! example,! the! Civil! Rights! movement! in! the!

United! States! involved! a! huge! range! of! tactics! and! appeals,! some! legal! and! some! illegal,!

some!public!and!some!private.!When!put!into!the!context!of!the!broader!movement,!civil!

disobedience! is! only! one! part! of! the! whole! (even! if,! for! many,! the! most! notable! or!

controversial!feature!of! the! whole).!Even!when! the! question!of!justification! is! settled,!we!

still! want! to! be! able! to! distinguish! the! various! methods! and! tactics! that! constituted! the!

movement,!to!consider!their!relation!to!one!another,!their!effectiveness!in!combination!or!

in!isolation,!and!their!potential!applicability!to!future!situations.!

So!my!project!is!not!Rawls’!project.!The!fact!that!civil!disobedience!may!be!able!to!

override!political!obligation!is!interesting!but!that!is!not!its!only!interesting!feature.!Once!

we!see!this!we!should!reject!Rawls’!framing!of!the!concept!and! ask!what!features!define!the!

practice! as! distinct! and! useful! in! a! wider! va riet y! of! contexts.! Indeed,! this! seems! to! me!

precisely!what!Rawls!would!have!us!do:!“a!useful!theory!defines!a!perspective!within!which!

the! problem! of! civil! disobedience! can! be! approached;! it! identifies! the! relevant!

considerations!and!helps!us!to!assign!them!their!correct!weights”!(1999,!p.!320).!It!is!only!

after! this! caveat! that! Rawls! proposes! his! definition.! Since! Rawls! and! I! intend! to! put! our!

theories! of! civil! disobedience! to! use! for! different! purposes,! we! require! different!

perspectives!and!differently!weighted!considerations.!My!more!general!purpose!requires!a!

broader! notion! of! civil! disobedience! and,! in! particular,! a! broader! understanding! of! the!

commitment!to!the!political!than!fidelity!to!law.!

The!broader!notion!of!commitment!to!the!political!that!I!am!concerned!with!is!the!

idea! that! political! disobedients!are! committed! to! the! shared! cooperative! project! of! living!

together.!Unpacking!this!is!important.!A!commitment!to!the!political!presumes!the!goal—

living!together—is!both!communal!and!long-term.!It!assumes!that!we!are!going!to!have!to!

work!together!in!the!future!and! so!it!takes!care!to! preserve!relations!between!us!now!as!

well.!This!takes!certain!options!off!the!table,!namely!those!options!tha t!would!render!our!

future!cooperation!impossible!and!treats!our!agonists!as!outside!the!political!community.!

The! relevant! contrasting! case! is! a! commitment! to! achieving! your! preferred! outcomes! no!

matter! the! means! and! regardless! of! others’! position! as! members! in! the! on-going!

community.! The! most! illuminat ing! distinction! is! not! b et w een! the! disobedient! and! the!

revolutionary!but!between!the!disobedient!and!the!militant.!

Commitment!to! the!political! is! at! least! rela ted!to! Rawls’! notion! of! reasonableness,!

according!to!which!citizens!offer!terms!of!fair!cooperation!that!they!a re!willing!to!abide!by!

(2005,!p.!49).!Even!if!we!understand!the!commitment!to!the!political!in!this!wa y,!though,!

we!should!not!follow! Rawls! in!understanding!civil! disobedience! as!appealing!to! a! shared!

sense! of! justice,! including! his! two! principles! of! justice.! We! can! extract! the! notion! of!

appealing!to! others!as!co-members!in!a!cooperative! project!on!its!own!terms.!This!aligns!

with! a! more! purely! political! notion! of! civil! disobedience.! Justice! as! fairness! is! one!

substantive!and!detailed!way!of!working!out!what!reasonable!engagement!with!others!on!

terms!of!respect!and!equality!looks!like,!but!Rawls!admits!that!just!societies!could!come!to!

different!reasonable!interpretations!(2005,!pp.!xlvi-ii).!!

My! understanding! of! the! commitment! to! the! political! is! appropriate! for!

characterizing! a! practice! that! is! coherent! in! a! wider! variety! of! contexts.! Not! only! is! civil!

disobedience!a!coherent!practice!where!there!is!no!shared!sense!of!justice,!it!is!coherent! on!

behalf!of!markedly!illiberal!or!inegalitarian!causes.!For!example,!whatever!we!want!to!say!

about!their!justifiability,!the!March!2016!sit-ins!in!Pakistan!in!support!of!Mumtaz!Qadri!and!

sharia!law!seem!to!fit!squarely!within!the!concept!of!civil!disobedience.!

This! understanding! of! political! disobedients’! commitment! to! the! political! can! be!

usefully! contrasted! with! two! further! alternatives,! one! stronger! and! one! weaker.! First,!

Scheuerman! (2015,! pp.! 442ff.)! argues! for! fidel ity! to! the! ideal! of! rule( of( law( as! an!

interpretation!of!Rawls’!notion!of!fidelity!to!law.!The!focus!is!on!what!Rawls!calls!justice!as!

generality,! which! allows! political! disobedients! to! appeal! to! the! procedural! goods! of! law!

being! administered! fairly.! Scheuerman! thus! captures! a! commitment! to! the! political! in!

contexts!where!there!is!no!robust!shared!sense!of!justice!of!the!sort!Rawls!appeals!to!and!in!

unjust!circumstances,!where!the!actual!law!may!be!profoundly!unjust.!

Scheuerman’s!view!is!close!to!my!own!but!is!more!robust,!so!rules!out!one!case!that!

I! think! we! should! strive! to! maintain! within! the! conceptual! boundaries! of! civil!

disobedience.

!This! is! the! possibility! that! anarchists! could! be! political! disobedient s.!

Anarchists! are! ex( hypothesi( opposed! to! the! sort! of! institutionalization! that! rule! of! law!

requires.! But! they! are! opposed! on! specifically! political! grounds:! they! think!

institutionalization! is! unnecessary! to! successfully! engage! in! the! shared! project! of! living!

together! and! that! institutionalization! in! fact! impedes! human! flourishing! when! imposed.!

This! is! a! coherent,! principled! political! position.! We! should! not! rule! out! the! possibility! of!

civil!disobedience!by!anarchists!on!conceptual!grounds.!One!way!of!interpreting!Thoreau,!

in! many! ways! the! wellspring! of! our! modern! understanding! of! civil! disobedience,! is!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!Similar! points! can! be! made! about! a! variety! of! more! robust! understandings! of! the! commitment! to! th e!

political,! including! those! that! we! could! draw! from! the! republican! characterization! of! civil! disobedience! in!

Markovits!(2005)!or!the!deliberative!democrat!characterization!in!Smith!(2011).!

precisely! as! an! anarchist! engaging! in! civil! disobedience! (Simmons! 2010).

!Indeed,! Todd!

May! (2015,! p.! 158)! interprets! civil! disobedience! of! the! paradigmatic,! nonviolent! sort! as!

having!an!intrinsic!affinity!with!anarchism.!

On! the! other! hand,! appealing! to! anything! less! political! undermines! the! distinctive!

character! of! civil! disobedience.! Kimberley! Brownlee,! for! example,! argues! that! the!central!

feature!of! civil! disobedience!is! its! source!in! conscientious! moral!conviction.!Disobedients!

do!not!ap p eal!to!the! shared!political!project!of!living!together!but!to!the!more!starkly!moral!

“principle! of! humanism”! (Brownlee! 2012,! p.! 7).! This! principle! requires! us! to! respect! the!

deeply! held! and! conscientious! convict ions! of! others! and! is! based! on! a! robust! moral!

doctrine!about!the!nature!of!value!pluralism!and!basic!respect!for!the!humanity!of!others.!!

The!problem! with! this!is! not! the!substance! of! Brownlee’s!moral! claims! but!on! the!

move!away!from!the!political.

!This!move!characterizes!disobedients’!communication!very!

differently.! On! my! more! political! view,! disobedients! convey! condemnation! of! a! political!

practice! with! commitment! to! the! shared! project! and! practice! of! living! together.! The!

condemnation!is!stark!precisely!because!it!is!paired!with!political!commitment.!As!I!argued!

above,!it!embodies!the!very! political! tension!that!it!calls!out;!it!is!still,!as!Rawls!(1997,!p.!

321)!not es ,!“guided!and!justified!by!political!principles.”!On!Brownlee’s!view,!disobedients!

convey!condemnation!of!a!political !practice!with!signals!of!the!depth!and!sincerity!of!their!

moral!views.!They!make!their!appeal!not!to!an!audience!qua!co-participants!in!the!political!

but!qua!humans!worthy!of!respect.!This!is!simply!a!very!different!sort!of!appeal.!As!I!argue!

more! fully! below,! it! also! means! that! Brownlee’s! view! can! only! explain! the! limits! of! the!

practice!with!robust!moral!premises.!!

3.!Violence!

With!a!fuller!understanding!of!the!commitment!to!the!political!before!us,!we!can!consider!

whether! violence! is! inconsistent! with! such! a! commitment.! I! will! not! offer! a! precise!

definition! of! violence! (Bufacchi! 2005,! May! 2015).

!Below! I! distinguish! several! types! of!

violence! but! a! general! theory! of! violence! is! unnecessary! for! our! purposes.! To! be! clear,!

however,!I!do!take!violence!to!primarily!be!a!mode(of!action,!not!a!type!of!action.!Its!most!

important! usage! is! adverbial:! actions! that! are! done! violently! are! done! forcefully! and!

aggressively.!This!understanding!of!violence!allows!us!to!distinguish!violence!from!harm:!

harm! can! be! done! non-violently,! as! when! one! person! poisons! another! slowl y! and! subtly!

over! time.! It! also! distinguishes! violence! from! rights-violations,! injustice,! and! coercion.!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!Even!if!we!disagree!with!Simmons’!characterization!of!the!actua l!Thoreau,!a!slightly!modified!hypo thetical!

Thoreau!can!demonstrate!the!case.!

!Similar!worries!arise!for!views!that!appeal!simply!to!principled!objection!(Smart!1978;!Celikates!2016).!

!Some!proposed! definitions!strike!me! as! imp lausible! an d! sk ew!the!relevant! discussion ;! for! exa mp le,! M orreall!

(1976,!p.!38)!claims!that!viole nce!is!conceptually!only!directed!at!persons!and !is!necessarily!related!to!rights!

claims.! Similarly,! German! federal! courts! have! misguidedly! held! that! sitting! in! the! street! as! an! act! of! civil!

disobedience!can!be!violent!due!to!effects!on!drivers!(Celikates!2016,!pp.!41-2).!

Definitions!that!el ide!all!these!related! bu t!importantly!distinct!issues!seem!clearly!mistaken!

to!me!(Coady!1986).!!

! While!I!do!not!offer! a!definition!of!violence,!the!characterization!I!just!gave!falls!into!

the!minimalist!camp!(Buffachi!2005).!The!main!advantage!of!a!minimalist!understanding!of!

violence! is! that! it! allows! us! to! more! carefully! distinguish! various! phenomena,! especially!

because!it!does!not!normatively!weight!violence!as!other!more!maximalist!definitions!tend!

to.

To!my!mind,!the!minimalist!definition!also!fits!better!with!ordinary!usage!of!the!idea!of!

violence!whereas!more!maximalist!definitions!find!violence!in!counterintuitive!places.

!!!

The! main! complaint! against! minimalist! definitions,! raised! with! clarity! by! Vittorio!

Bufacchi,!is!that!t hey!miss!psychological!and!structural!violence.!My!own!preference!is!to!

claim! that! psychological! violence! is! in! fact! easily! captured! by! my! approach;! imagine! a!

parent!screaming!at!their!child.!Here!excessive!force!and!aggression!are!on!full!display!(as!

is!the!paradigmatic,!but! not! conceptual,!connection!to! harm).! As! for!structural!violence,!I!

am! more! sanguine! about! its! exclusion.! While! I! agree! that! social! structures! can! harm,!

violate,!engender!and!constitute!injustice,!and!employ!and!enable!violence!by!individuals,!I!

am!not!sure!that !it!makes!sense!to!say!such!structures!themselves!act!violently.!Finally,!as!

seems!correct!to!me,!the!adverbial!usage!locates!violence!in!the!actor!and!not!the!victim,!as!

most!maximalist!or!normatively!laden!definitions!do.!The!angry!man!who!punches!a!wall!

may!not!have!harmed!anything!or!violated!any!rights!but!he!clearly!acted!violently,!which!

matters!for!our!characterization!of!his!act!and!our!evaluation!of!his!character.!

With! this! restricted! notion! of! violence! in! mind,! we! can! turn! to! the! possibility! of!

violent! civil! disobedience.! To! narrow! the! aim! of! the! argument! even! further,! we! are!

concerned! only! with! constitutive( and( other-directed( violence.! First,! I! am! only! concerned!

with! violence! that! constitutes! the! act! of! civil! disobedience:! violence! in! the! very! act! of!

breaking!the! law.! On! one! hand,! constitutive! violence! contrasts! with! violence! from! others!

responding!to!the!act.!If!reprisal!violence!counts,!then!even!Gandhi!and!King!were!violent.!

This!move!makes!nonviolent!disobedience!nearly!impossible!to!achieve!and!too!dependent!

on!the!acts!of!others.!It!essentially!rules!out!some!paradigmatic!cases!where!the!brutality!of!

the!regime!was!precisely!one!of!objects!of!disobedience,!as! with!Gandhi;!one!of!the!primary!

strategic!elements!of!his!campaigns!was!to!contrast!the!nonviolence!of!the!protestors!with!

the!brutality!of!the!British!rulers.!While!it!may!seem!obvious!that!reprisal!violence!cannot!

render!the!disobedient’s!own!act!violent,!this!worry!did!arise!for!Gandhi!and!it!highlights!

the! problem! with! simply! labeling! the! practice! nonviolent! tout( court! without! further!

explanation.!

The! other! contrast! with! constitutive! violence! is! related! violence.! The! quest ion! is!

whether!violence!that!does!not!constitute!the!relevant!law-breaking!but!is!still!related!to!it!

(e.g.!responding!to!reprisals,!resisting! a rrest,!and!so!on)!counts!as!violence!for!the!purposes!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!Cf.!May!(2015,!p.!68)!arguing!that!any!undermining!of!dignity!is!violent,!so!toppling!a!dictator’s!statue!is!not!

violent!per!se,!but!stomping!on!it!and!denigrating!it!are!violent.!To!be!fair,!May!is!not!concerned!with!defining!

violence!per!se,!but!with!defining!a!particularly!robust!kind!of!nonviolent!political!practice.!

10!

of! our! concept. ! Is! violence! in! these! interactions,! related! to! but! not! constituting! the! civil!

disobedience,!ruled!out?!Put!aside,!for!the!moment,!the!idea!that!resisting!arrest!could!also!

constitute!civil!disobedience.!Consider!a!modified!case!from!the!civil!rights!movement.!Civil!

rights!workers!Andrew! Goodman,! James!Chaney,!and! Michael! Schwerner!were! murdered!

by!members!of!the!Ku!Klux!Klan!in!Alabama!in!1964.!Imagine!that!this!was!done!in!reprisal!

to! a! nonviolent! act! of! civil! disobedience,! minutes,! hours,! or! days! later.! Would! violent!

resistance! in! self-defense! render! the! prior! act! violent?! It! seems! not;! these! are! simply!

separate! issues,! even! though! the! violence! was! a! result! of! the! earlier! act! of! civil!

disobedience.! The! diachronic! nature! of! this! example! helps! make! clear! the! distinction!

between!constitutive!and!related!violence!that!can!otherwise!be!muddled!(for!it!is!surely!

true!both!that!in!close!succession!it!can!be!difficult!to!disentangl e!these!moments!and!tha t!

sometimes! one’s! commitment! to! the! political! can! be! displayed! even! more! clearly! when!

surrendering!to!a rrest !or!to!illegal!harsh!reprisals).!Focusing!only!on!constitutive!violence!

helps!make!sense!of!the!practice!on!its!own!terms.!This!puzzle!also!helps!us!see!w hy!civil!

disobedience! should! be! kept! distinct! from! a! commitment! to! nonviolence! more! generally,!

which!is!often!concerned!more!broadly!with!a!comprehensive!ethical!ideal!(May!2015).!A!

person! may! be! committed! to! civil! disobedience! in! the! political! sphere! yet! not! to!

nonviolence—or!satyagraha,!or!the!intrinsic!dignity!of!all—more!generally.!

Second,!other-directed!violence!stands!in!contrast! to! self-directed! violence!(Cohen!

1972,!p.!298).!Self-directed!violence!can!take!the!form!of!personal!or!property!violence.!A!

case!of!each!makes!it!clear!why!self-directed!violence!clearly!falls!within!the!bounds!of!civil!

disobedience.!Consider,!first,!the!case!of!Mohamed!Bouazizi,!the!Tunisian!fruit!vendor!who!

set! himself! on! fire! in! 2010,! sparking! the! Tunisian! Revolution! and! the! Arab! Spring.! If! we!

hold! that! civil! disobedience! is! necessarily! nonviolent! and! that! self-directed! personal!

violence!is!violent!in!the!appropriate!sense,!then!we!are!forced!to!conclude!that!Bouazizi’s!

self-immolation! was! something! other! than! civil! disobedience.! Yet! this! seems! absurd.!

Bouazizi’s! act! coheres! well! with! other! paradigmatic! cases! like! King! and! Gandhi,! who!

emphasized!the!role!of!self-sacrifice!and!even!suffering.!

Perhaps!suicide!is!too!far;!perhaps!it!conveys!despair!more!than!commitment!to!the!

shared! political! project! of! living! together,! for! it! takes! the! agent! out! of! the! community.! I!

think!this!assumes!an!overly!narrow!notion!of!the!political!(surely!political!martyrdom!is!a!

coherent!concept)!but!then!we!can!imagine!a!case!of!self-directed!violence!of!a!less!drastic!

sort;! carving! injustices! into! one’s! skin,! for! example.! This! may! be! unwise! from! a! strategic!

point! of! view! but! it! is! hard! to! understand! why! it! would! necessarily! conflict! with! a!

commitment! to! the! p olitical .! Self-sacrifice,! including! self-harm,! is! a! common! element! of!

such! a!commitment,!as!with!accepting!punishment!or!hunger!strikes.! A!hunger!strike!is!not!

violent!to!my! mind,! since!whatever!harm!it!inflicts!is!not!done!violently,! but!then!we!see!

that! the! question! comes! down! to! whether! self-directed! harm! done! violently! is! ruled! out!

even!though!hunger!strikes!are!not.!!

! In!the!case!of!self-directed!property!violence,!imagine!that!flag-burning!is!illegal.!In!

11!

order! to!protest!this!law,!you!buy!a!flag!and!then!burn!it!in!public.!Again,!whatever!reasons!

we!have!for!holding!that!civil!disobedience!is!necessarily!nonviolent,!extending!it!t o!mean!

that! burning!your!own!personal!flag!to!protest! an!anti-flag-burning!law!is!excessive.!This! is!

an! ideal! case! of! civil! disobedience! in! many! ways:! it! is! direct! (it! breaks! the! precise! law! it!

holds!to!be!unjust),!it!is!perfectly!symbolic!(it!destroys!the!most!prominent!symbol!of!the!

political!regime!that!imposes!the!contested!law!in!addition!to!breaking!that!very!law),!it!is!

self-contained!(not!risking!harm!or!costs!to!an yone!else),!and!it!is!public.!Ruling!out!such!

an!act!on!conceptual!grounds!is!badly!mistaken.! !

! Restricting!our!attention!to!other-directed!constitutive!violence!is!uncontroversial;!

such! restrictions! are! often! implicit! in! discussions! of! civil! disobedience.! In! addition! to!

simply! making! our! commitments! explicit,! though,! this! shows! how! violence! is! quite!

obviously!consistent!with!civil!disobedience!in!many!aspects.!This!observation!undermines!

at! least! one! potential ! justification! for! a! pure! nonviolence! constraint! noted! by! Simmons!

(2010,!p.!1808),!namely!that !law!regulat es!violence,!so!violence!of!any!kind!without!legal!

authorization!moves!one!outside!civil!disobedience.!This!is!another!reason!to!understand!

civil! disobedience! as! central ly! involving! a! commitment! to! the! political! thinly! construed!

rather! than! to! the! actual! la w .! The! question,! then,! is! not! whether! civil! disobedience! is!

inconsistent! with! violence! tout( court,! but! more! particularly! under! what! conditions! civil!

disobedience!is!inconsistent!with!violence!of!certain!sorts.!

! In! particular,! the! issue! is! whether! other-directed! constitutive! violence! can! be!

consistent!with!a!commitment!to!the!political.!On!my!construal!of!the!commitment!to!the!

political,! this! means! we! need! to! know! whether! other-directed! constitutive! violence! is!

consistent! with! treating! others! a s! members! of! the! on-going! communal! project! of! living!

together.! I! think! it! is! not:! violence! directed! at! ot her! people! is! inconsistent ! w ith! treating!

them!as!members,!and!so!is!inconsistent!with!a! commitment !to!the!political,!and!so!renders!

any!violence!directed!at!others!necessarily!not!an!act!of!civil!disobedience.!

! In! some! respects! this! might! seem! obvious—certainly! lethal! violence! literally!

removes! others! from! the! on-going! community.! But! there! is! an! important! puzzle! here!

because!civil!disobedience!often!treats!others!quite!harshly.!Civil!disobedience!can!clearly!

set!back!others’!interests,!as!when!a!strike!or!a!sit-in!prevents!people!from!obtaining!some!

service,!it!can!infringe!others’!rights,!such!as!their!right!to!free!movement,!and!it!can!coerce!

them,!as!in!t he! most! successful! campaigns!of!civil!disobedience!like!the!overthrow!of!the!

Marcos! dictatorship! in! the! Philippines.

!So! the! question! is! whether! we! have! a! notion! of!

membership! that! rules! out! treating! other! members! violently! but! not! setting! back! their!

interests,!infringing!their!rights,!or!even!coercing!them.!!

! Notice!that!this!question!is! onl y!pressing! for!a!minimalist!understanding!of!violence.!

If!we!think!any!harm,!rights!infringement,!or!coercion!is!violent,!then!civil!disobedience!is!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!This! conflicts! with! a! Rawlsian! strain! of! the! literature! that! rules! out! coercion,! claiming! that! civil!

disobedience!is!only!ever!an!attempt!to!persuade.!This!is,! I!think,!historically!inaccurate!as!well!as!a!result! of!

mistakenly!restricting!attention!to!the!near-just!cont ex t.!

12!

obviously! consistent ! with! other-directed! violence,! on! pain! of! reducing! the! pract ice! to!

irrelevance.!But!if!we!take!violence!in!a!more!restricted!manner,!as!I!think!we!should,!then!

the! question! is! more! difficult! because! the! question! becomes,! on! my! adverbial! construal,!

why!treating!others!simply!in!a!particular!mode—forcefully!and!aggressively—is!ruled!out!

even! while! rights! infringements! and! coercion! are! not.! And,! in! keeping! with! my! desire! to!

describe! a! distinctively! political! practice,! the! answer! must! be! given! only! in! terms! of!

membership! in! the! community! (not,! as! discussed! below,! in! terms! of! a! particular! ethical!

theory).!

! The! problem! with! other-directed! violence! is! that! it! treats! violence! as! a! legitimate!

decision-making!procedure!within!the!community,!both!now!and!into!the!future.!It!treats!

other! members! of! the! community! as! though! leveling! sudden,! aggressive,! overwhelming!

force!at!them!is!an!appropriate!way!to!solve!the!inevitable!disagreements!and!confusions!of!

living!together.!Yet!political!community,!conceived!of!as!a!communal!and!diachronic!project!

of! living! together,! cannot! rest! on! such! a! resolution! of! disagreement.! Violence! as! an!

adjudication! procedure! devolves! membership! in! a! community! into! subjection! to! the!

strongest,!and! so! not!a! communal! project!at! all.!Such! a! communal!project! undertaken! by!

persons! is! ult imatel y! a! practice! of! justification,! ruling! out! the! practice! of! foregoing!

justification!for!overwhelming!force.!Directing!violence!at!persons!removes!them!from!the!

class!of!people!that!we!are!committed!to!living!together!with!because!it!treats!them!as!an!

obstacle! to! be! overcome.

!Membership! in! a! political! community! in! my! sense! necessarily!

requires!putting!aside!acting!violently! a s!an!appropriate!way!to!settle!public!disput es.!

Due!to!this,!civil!disobedience!cannot!be!violent!in!the!sense!that!violence!is!directed!

at!other!persons,!for!example!ruling!out!assault.!It!also!renders!civil!disobedience!on!behalf!

of!a!regime!of!might-makes-right!incoherent—if!you!are!committed!to!might-makes-right,!

then!the!fact!that!you!are!forced!into!civil!disobedience!because!you!do!not!have!the!power!

to!institute!your!preferences!entails!that!your!preferred!regime!is!ill egitimate.!To!my!mind,!

this!is!the!limit!case!on!the!conceptual!coherence!of!the!practice.!

! Some! theorists! disagree! with! the! exclusion! of! other-directed! personal! violence!

(Lang!1970;!Smart!1978).!For!example,!A.!John!Simmons!(2010,!p.!1808)!offers!the!case!of!

“kidnapping!a!public!official!who!is!instrumental!in!administering!an!unjust!policy.”!While!

such!cases!can!certainly!be!morally!justifiable,!as!Simmons!claims,!the!question!is!whether!

they!count!as!civil !disobedience!rather!than!as,!for!example,!militancy.!My!claim!is!that!they!

cannot!be!civil!disobedience.!Simmons,!following!Rawls!and!others,!focuses!on!the!idea!that!

such! a! kidnapping! would! demonstrate! disrespect! for! or! a! lack! of! fidelity! to! the! law.! My!

focus!on!the!commitment!to!the!political,!on!the!other!hand,!asks!whether!we!are!treating!

others!a s!co-members!in!t he!shared!political!project!of!living!together.!Even!if!kidnapping!

the!unjust!official!does!not!disrespect!the!law!as!such,!it!treats!the!official!herself!as!outside!

the! bounds! of! the! shared! political! project.! In! so! doing! the! kidnappers! in! fact! precisely!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!Cf.!Brownlee!(2012,!p.!20);!Moraro!(2007,!p.!3);!Sabl!(2001).!

13!

communicate! that! they! lack! a! commitment! to! the! political.! That! is! why! such! personal!

violence!is!inconsistent!with!civil!disobedience.!

! Other!theorists!have!come!to!similar!conclusions!about!the!bounds!of!violence!and!

civil!disobedience,!including!Brownlee!(2012,!p.!20),!Moraro!(2007,!p.!7),!May!(2015)!and!

others.!Importantly,!though,!their!conclusions!are!made!on!the!basis!of!more!robust!moral!

and!ethical!commitments,!unlike!my!reliance!on!a!thin,!ecumenical!notion!of!the!political.!

Both!Brownlee!and! Moraro!appeal!to!Kantian!ethics!for!their!rejection!of!personal!violence!

by!arguing!that!violence!against!persons! is! unjustified! because!it!treats!people!as! a! mere!

means! to! disobedients’! political! goals.! May! goes! even! further,! arguing! that! nonviolence!

expresses! respect! for! the! dignity! and! equal! sta t us! of! all.! This! veer! into! ethical! theory! is!

unmotivated!and!unnecessary!to!make!sense!of!the!concept!of!civil!disobedience,!however.!

Neither! Brownlee! nor! Moraro! claims! to! be! making! an! explicitly! Kantian! case! for! civil!

disobedience,! so! it! is! unclear! why! Kantian! ethics! are! somehow! relevant! at! this! point.!

Further,!in!keeping!with!the!spirit!of!a!distinctively!polit ica l!practice,!it!would!be!better!if!

we! can! make! our! theory! rely! on! the! notion! of! the! political! apart! from! any! particular!

comprehensive!doctrine—in! this! respect!my! purpose!is! distinct! from!May’s,! who!aims! to!

characterize!a!comprehensive!ethic!of!nonviolence!rather!than!civil!disobedience.!

We! should! not! take! treating! others! as! members! of! the! political! project! of! living!

together!too!robustly.!Consistent!with!the!desire!to!make!coherent!a!wide!range!of!political!

practice,!people!can!engage!in!civil!disobedience!without!thinking!that!others!are!equal!co-

members—as!noted!above,!civil!disobedience!on!behalf!of!illib era l ,!even!oppressive,!causes!

is!conceptually!coherent.!Similarly,!civil!disobedience!need!not!be!undertaken!out!of!a!deep!

respect!for!others!as!moral!beings,!or!out!of!epistemic!humility,!or!anything!of!the!sort.! O ne!

can! simpl y! be! committed! to! the! idea! of! a! shared! political! project! that! rules! out! violence,!

even! among! unequal! members! who! are,! nonetheless,! all! members.

!This! is! the! thin!

understanding!of!the!political!that!civil!disobedience!requires!for!conceptual!coherence.!

! So!the!commitment! to! the!political!is!inconsistent!with!other-directed! constitutive!

personal! violence.! The! same! is! not! true! of! violence! directed! at! property;! protests! can!

include! other-directed! constitutive! property! violence! and! remain! within! the! conceptual!

bounds! of! civil! disobedience.

!Since! property! is! not! part! a! potential! member! of! the!

political! project! of! living! together,! destroying! property! does! not! set! anyone! outside! the!

political!project!and!so!does!not!contradict!a!commitment!to!that!project.!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!Interestingly,!this!gestures!towa rds!a!poten tial!explan atio n!of!one!of!Chenow eth !and!Stepha n ’s!interesting!

findings,! namely! that! non vio len t! r es ista nc e! was! uniquely ! ine ffec tive ! w it h! r es pe ct! t o! s ec ess ion .! S inc e!

secession! is! undertaken! precisely! on! the! premise! of! break ing! apart! a! p olitical! community,! it! is! difficul t! to!

express!a!commitment!to!the!political!in!such!cases.!

!More!precisely,!the!relevant!distinction!is!between!violence!directed!at!persons!and!violence!not!directed!at!

persons.!This!latter!category!in c lu d es !more!than!p ro p e rty ,!fo r! ex a m p le !in c lu d in g!u n o wned!elem en t s!o f!n a tu r e!

like! wild!an im a ls.! I! should! note! that! nothing ! in! my! argume nt ! exclud es! violen ce ! towa rds ! anima ls! from ! civil!

disobedience;! although!I!think!such!violence!is!tactically!unwise!and !most!often!unjustified,!it!does!n ot!seem!

to! e xclud e! any! perso ns! from ! the! realm ! of! the! political,! which! is! the! only! conceptu al! constrain t! that! I! rely!

upon.!

14!

! As! noted! above,! a! particularly! good! example! of! civil! disobedience! that! includes!

property! violence! occurred! in! Ferguson,! MO! in! the! aftermath! of! the! killing! of! Michael!

Brown! in! 2014.! In! addition! to! a! wide! range! of! disobedience,! including! nonviolent! direct!

action!as!well!as!conflicts!with!police,!prot estors!set!a!police!cruiser!ablaze.

!This!kind!of!

property!violence!is!highly!symbolic.! Protestors! were! objecting! to! Brown’s! death! and!the!

lack!of!legal!accountability!but,!as!they!made!clear,!also!more!broadly!to!the!local!police!and!

courts!and! routinized,! severe! abuse.! As!the! Department! of! Justice! l at er! confirmed! after!a!

detailed! investigation,! the! local! municipality! was! egregiously! violating! residents’!

Constitutional! rights! a cross! a! wide! range! of! practices,! often! with! a! marked! racial! bias!

(United! States! Department! of! Justice! 2015).! Burning! the! police! car,! the! very! symbol! of!

prowling!oppression,!is!a!precise,!clear!symbol!of!outrage!and!condemnation.!Accounts!of!

civil!disobedience!should!make!room!for!this!sort!of!violence.!

! Some! definitions! of! civil! disob edience! as! necessarily! nonviolent! may! be! implicitly!

relying! on! the! distinction! between! personal! and! property! violence! (Cohen! 1972,! p.! 298).!

Rawls!notes!the!distinction!but!rests!his!case!on!the!problems!with!personal!violence:!!

[Civil! disobedience]! tries! to! avoid! the! use! of! violence,! especially( against(

persons,!not!from!the!abhorrence!of!the!use!of!force!in!principle,!but!because!

it!is!a!final!expression!of!one’s!case.!To!engage!in!violent!a cts!likely(to(injure(

and( to( hurt( is! incompatible! with! civil! disobedience! as! a! mode! of! address!

(1999,!p.!321,!my!emphasis).!

If!Rawls!or!others!only!ever!meant!to!rule!out!violence!against!persons,!then!we!agree.!But!

if! so,! this! restriction! should! be! made! explicitly.! This! is! especially! important! because! the!

rhetoric!used!against!disobedients!often!fails!to!make!precisely!this!distinction.!If!property!

is!destroyed,!then!protests!are!often!dismissed!as!outside!the!bounds!of!political!practice,!

as!inviting!anarchy,!as!unprincipled!law-breaking,!and!so!on.!

! At!this!point!it!may!be!tempting!to!distinguish!between!public!and!private!property!

in!order!to!cla im!that!civil!disobedience!can! incl ude!violence!towards!public!but!not!private!

property.!The!Ferguson!case!is!plausible!b eca use!destroying!public!property!can!be!highly!

symbolic!but!private!property!is!different.!As!a!conceptual!matter,!though,!this!seems!to!me!

to!be!mistaken.!Directing!violence!at!private!property!does!not!show!that!the!owner!of!t ha t!

property!is! out side!the!political!community.!Imagine!a!country!of!radical!wealth!inequality.!

Protesting! against! such! inequality! by! seizing! and! destroying! the! gold-encrusted! jet! of! a!

plutocrat! is! an! eminently! symbolic! and! striking! form! of! protest.! Given! that! the! plutocrat!

himself!is!not!threatened,!I!do!not!see!why!such!an!act!would!be!conceptually!inconsistent!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!Individual!actions!must!b e!evaluated !within!the!broa de r!context!of!a!moveme nt!and!in!the!Fergu so n !case!

much!more!than!the!police!car!burning!occurred,!as!the!pictures!show,!so! for!our!purposes!here!I!am! making!

no! claims! about! whether! the! overall! evening! constituted! civil! disobedience.! Another! misleading! aspect! of!

considering! individual! instan c es ! of! law -breaking! is! that! it! obscures! the! group! nature! of! civil! disobedience!

(Arendt!1972).!!

15!

with!a!commitment!to!the!political.!It!does!not!push!the!person!outside!of!the! b ounds!of!the!

political!community.!There!are!important!differences!between!how!we!treat!someone!and!

how! we! treat ! their! property,! especially! given! that! the! shape! of! actual! property! holdings!

depends!upon!political!arrangements!and!is!not!exogenous!thereto.!

Recall!that!many!forms!of!protest!that!obviously!fall!within!the!concept ual !bounds!

of!civil!disobedience! set!back!the! interests!of!others,!such!as!blocking!traffic,!sit-ins,!strikes,!

and!so!on.!Some!of!the!costs!involved!in!such!actions!will!be!costs!to!the!property!of!others,!

if! indirectly,! as! when! businesses! lose! customers! and! so! lose! profit! or! when! police! divert!

resources!to!protests,!leaving!other!areas!unattended.!We!cannot!rely!on!the!general!claim!

that!setting!back!the!interests!of!other!citizens!without!their!consent!treats!them!as!outside!

the!political!project!without!eviscerating!the!practice!of!civil!disobedience!to!its!core.!Given!

that,!it!is!hard!to!see!why!violent!destruction!of!property!would!treat!them!as!apart!from!

the!political!project!even!though!setting!back!their!interests!in!a!variety!of!other!ways!does!

not! do! so.! And! as! Raz! (2009)! notes,! even! some! legal! and! nonviolent! modes! of! political!

protest!may!be!substantially!harmful,!as!with!a!strike!by!ambulance!drivers.!Ultimately!the!

distinction! between! violence! done! to! publ ic! property! versus! private! property! does! not!

seem!relevant!to!the!concept!of!civil!disobedience.!!

! This!does!suggest,!however,!that!in!some!contexts!property!violence!is!inconsistent!

with!a!commitment!to!the!political.!These!are!cases!where!violence!directed!at!property!is!a!

more!direct!strike!at!a!person.!Examples!would!include!destroying!their!only! shelter,!taking!

away!their!last!food!or!water,!and!so! on.!There!are!minimal!material!conditions!on!the!sort!

of! life! one! needs! to! live! in! order! to! be! a! member! in! the! political! project.! If! people! a re!

starving!or!otherwise!scrambling!just!to!stay!alive,!they!cannot!participate!in!the!right!way.!

Taking!away! those! preconditions! on! political! membership! thus! strikes! at! the! person! qua!

co-member! in! the! political! project,! so! civil! disobedience! cannot! be! violent! in! such! ways.!

The!relevant!issue!in!such!cases,!though,!is!the!harm!done!to!the!person!qua!co-member!of!

the!political!project,!not!the!mere!fact!that!it!was!their!property!or!that!it!was!violent.!

In!conclusion,!civil! disob edience!is!conceptually!consistent!with!reprisal!and!related!

violence,! self-directed! constitutive! violence,! and! ot her-directed! constitutive! property!

violence!but!is!not!consistent!with!other-directed!constit utive!personal!violence.!The!l a tter!

sort!of!violence!removes!ot hers!from!the!political!project!so!contradicts!the!commitment!to!

the!political!that!lies!at!the!conceptual!and!normative!core!of!civil!disobedience.!!

As!many!of!the!theorists!above!have!noted,!resorting!to!violence!immediately!calls!

into!question!one’s!commitment!to!the!political.!Even!in!those!cases!where!I!have!argued!

that! violence! is! not! necessarily! inconsistent! with! such! a! commitment,! the! qu estion! of!

effectiveness! matters.! Due! t o! this,! it! is! probably! true! that! any! instance! of! violent! civil!

disobedience! should! be! accompanied! by! other! elements! that! can! clearly! establish! a!

commitment! to! the! political,! perhaps! including! non-anonymity,! willingness! to! accept!

punishment,!and!so!on.!While!I!agree!with!revisionist!theorists!that!such!elements!are!not!

necessary!to!the!concept!of!civil!disobedience,!the!fact!that!violence!is!so!likely!to!obscure!

16!

the!principled!nature!of!civil!disobedience!means!that!uncivil!disobedience!often!requires!

support!from!these!additional!elements!in!order!to!be!effective.!Similar!thoughts!apply!to!

what! sorts! of! violence! should! be! chosen;! the! less! related! violence! is! to! the! disobedients’!

claims!of!injustice,!the!less!effective!the!civil!disobedience!is!likely!to!be.!

! There!are,!though,!limits!to!such!pragmatic!thoughts.!Too!much!concern!about!how!

the!message!will!be!received!stifles!political!protest!and!can!be!used!as!a!tool!of!oppression.!

Just! as! some! will! condemn! any! violence! against! property! as! crossing! the! line,! thus!

tarnishing!disobedients’!reception,!so!some!social!commentators!will!reliably!condemn!any!

law-breaking!whatsoever!as!anarchist,!unjustified,!and!vicious.!While!care!must!be!taken!to!

make! one’s! position! clear! and! convincing,! the! fact! that! some! recipients! will! obfuscate!

cannot! be! decisive,! for! otherwise! no! political! protest! would! ever! be! underta k en! and! we!

would!lose!the!many!goods!of!civil!disobedience!as!a!contestatory!political!practice.!

References(

Arendt,!Hannah.!1972.!Crises(of(the(Republic.(New!York:!Harcourt!Brace!&!Company.!

Bedau,!Hugo.!1961.!On!Civil!Disobedience.!Journal(of(Philosophy(58:!653-65.!

Brownlee,!Kimberley.!2012.!Conscience(and(Conviction.(Oxford:!Oxford!University!Press.!

Bufacchi,!Vittorio.!2005.!Two!Concepts!of!Violence.!Political(Studies(Review!3:!193-204.!

Celikates,! Robin.! 2016.! Rethinking! Civil! Disobedience! as! a! Practice! of! Contestation—

Beyond!the!Liberal!Paradigm.!Constellations(23:!37-45.!

Chenoweth,! Erica! and! Maria! J.! Stephan.! 2011.! Why(Civil( Resistance( Works:( The( Strategic(

Logic(of(Nonviolent(Conflict.!New!York:!Columbia!University!Press.!

Coady,!C.!A.!J.!1986.!The!Idea!of!Violence.!Journal(of(Applied(Philosophy(3:!3-19.!

Cohen,!Marshall.!1972.!Liberalism!and!Disobedience.!Philosophy(&(Public(Affairs(1:!283-314.!

Corlett,!J.!Angelo.!1997.!What!is!Civil!Disobedience?!Philosophical(Papers(26:!241-259.!

Habermas,!Jürgen.!1985.!Civil!Disobedience:!Litmus!Test!for!the!Democratic!Constitutional!

State.!Berkeley(Journal(of(Sociology(30:!95-116.!

Lang,! Berel.! 1970.! Civil! Disobedience! and! Nonviolence:! A! Distinction! with! a! Difference.!

Ethics(80:!156-159.!

Lyons,!David.!1998.!Moral!Judgment,!Historical!Reality,!and!Civil!Disobedience.!Philosophy(

&(Public(Affairs(27:!31-49.!

Markovits,!Daniel.!2005.!Democratic!Disobedience.!The(Yale(Law(Journal(114:!1897-1952.!

May,!Todd.!2015.!Nonviolent(Resistance:(A(Philosophical(Introduction.!Cambridge:!Polity.!

Moraro,! Piero.! 2007.! Violent! Civil! Disobedience! and! Willingness! to! Accept! Punishment.!

Essays(in(Philosophy(8:!1-14.!

Morreall,! John.! 1976.! The! Justifiability! of! Violent! Civil! Disobedience.! Canadian(Journal(of (

Philosophy(6:!35-47.!

Rawls,!John.!1999.!A(Theory(of(Justice.(Revised!edition.!Camb ridge,!MA:!Harvard!University!

17!

Press.!

Rawls,! John.! 2005.! Political(Liberalism.Expanded! edition.! New! York:! Columbia! University!

Press.!

Raz,!Joseph.!2009.!The(Authority(of(Law.(Second!edition.!Oxford:!Oxford!University!Press.!

Sabl,!Andrew.!2001.!Looking!Forward!to!Justice:!Rawlsian!Civil!Disobedience!and!its!Non-

Rawlsian!Lessons.!The(Journal(of(Political(Philosophy!9:!307-330.!

Scheuerman,!William!E.!2015.!Recent!Theories!of!Civil!Disobedience:!An!Anti-Legal!Turn?!

The(Journal(of(Political(Philosophy!23:!427-449.!

Scheuerman,!William!E.!2016.!Civil!disobedience! in!the!shadows!of!postnationalization!and!

privatization.!Journal(of(International(Political(Theory(12:!237-257.!

Smith,! William.! 2011.! Civil! Disobedience! and! the! Public! Sphere.! The( Journal( of( Political(

Philosophy(19:!145-166.!

Simmons,! A.! John.! 2010.! Disobedience! and! its! Objects.! Boston(University( Law( Review( 90:!

1805-1831.!

Smart,!Brian.!1978.!Defining!civil!disobedience.!Inquiry!21:!249-69.!

Toler,! Lindsay.! 2014.! 16! Photos! of! Ferguson! Burning.! Riverfront( Times.! http://www.!

riverfronttimes.com/newsblog/2014/11/25/16-photos-of-ferguson-burning?!

page=2.!Accessed!on!October!23,!2016.!

United! States! Department! of! Justice.! 2015.! Investigation! of! the! Ferguson! Police!

Department.! https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/opa/press-releases/!

attachments/2015/03/04/ferguson_police_department_report.pdf.! Accessed! on!

October!23,!2016.!

Zinn,! Howard.! 1990.! Law,! Justice! and! Disobedience.! Notre(Dame(Journal(of(Law,(Ethics(&(

Public(Policy(5:!899-920.!