thesis statement civil disobedience essay

404 Not found

Home — Essay Samples — Social Issues — Civil Disobedience — A Critical Analysis of “Civil Disobedience” by Henry David Thoreau

A Critical Analysis of "Civil Disobedience" by Henry David Thoreau

• Categories: Book Report Civil Disobedience Literature Review

About this sample

Words: 611 |

Published: Jan 4, 2019

Words: 611 | Page: 1 | 4 min read

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Prof Ernest (PhD)

Verified writer

• Expert in: Literature Social Issues

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

3 pages / 1769 words

4 pages / 1646 words

4 pages / 1723 words

4 pages / 1713 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Civil Disobedience

Resistance to Civil Government is a seminal work that challenges individuals to question the legitimacy of unjust laws and government actions. Thoreau's arguments, while not without criticism, continue to inspire social and [...]

Sophocles' play Antigone is a timeless classic that explores the themes of civil disobedience and the clash between individual conscience and state law. The protagonist, Antigone, defies the law of King Creon by burying her [...]

Henry David Thoreau's essay "Civil Disobedience" has been a cornerstone of political and ethical philosophy since its publication in 1849. Thoreau's ideas on civil disobedience have influenced many important figures, such as [...]

Disobedience is often viewed as a negative behavior, associated with rebellion and defiance against authority. However, throughout history, acts of disobedience have played a significant role in promoting social progress. From [...]

Negritude was both a literary and ideological movement led by French speaking black writer’s intellectuals from France colonies in Africa and the Caribbean. The movement is marked by its rejection of European colonization and [...]

The United States of America is a country that is run by a democratic government, in order to protect the rights and liberties of the citizens in its discourse community. When social issues arise, citizens have the right to [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Civil Disobedience: Advantages and Disadvantages Research Paper

Introduction: obedience, definition of obedience and disobedience, arguments for obedience and disobedience, works cited.

The present day society has uncalculated into us that being obedient is good while being disobedient is very bad. Our social institutions have taught us that we have to obey people in every order or command that has been issued out to us without any question. Even without being told, people have to be obedient to the rules, laws and guidelines that have been set out by social institutions to ensure that there is peace and harmony in the society. This goes without saying that obedience is a human behavior that has been deeply ingrained within us. It has become an impulsive behavior that goes beyond being emphatic and sympathetic.

Social beings are prone to being obedient to a higher authority that makes them feel protected and secure. They therefore cannot make any mistakes or be disobedient to these authorities as they make the most vital decisions. These higher authorities include the government, law enforcement agencies and social institutions such as churches, schools and medical facilities. All these institutions are guided by moral, ethical and legal guidelines that ensure their practices have been followed and maintained within the society. Social beings are therefore expected to obey these guidelines to ensure their well beings have bee met adequately by these institutions.

The thesis statement for this research paper will be “The courage to be disobedient at times is what makes us fully human, with a strong and confident personality”. The thesis statement basically supports the notion that disobedience in social beings makes them stronger and more confident when faces life challenges. Most social proponents might argue against this statement by saying that being disobedient does not only make a person to be confident or stronger but it also fosters an attitude of negativity and disobedience.

They might also argue that disobedience creates an environment of hostility and rebellion within the society. Such proponents of social behavior argue for obedience when it comes to maintain a positive social equilibrium within the society. The research paper will therefore look at the aspect of obedience as well as of disobedience in social beings. The three arguments that will be raised in the research paper include; obedience is good and disobedience is bad, disobedience is good as it helps mould a human’s personality and obedience is bad to a human being’s development.

To better understand the concept of disobedience and obedience a definition of each is required. The term obedience refers to the act of performing commands or orders issued by other people. Obedience is part of human behavior and part of the norms and guidelines that make up the social fabric of the society.

Stanley Milgram conducted experiments and research into obedience with particular focus on how the Nazis were able to get ordinary German citizens to participate in the Holocaust that saw millions of Jews being murdered in concentration camps. He focused on how ordinary citizens were obedient in the presence of authoritative figures or social institutions. The results of his research work showed that obedience was normal and people who disobeyed were viewed to be abnormal within the society (Passini and Morselli 97).

The various forms of obedience that exist within the society include obedience to God and religious beliefs, obedience to social norms and cultural practices, obedience to governments and other social institutions such as churches, schools, and medical institutions, obedience to self imposed constraints and obedience to country laws (Milgram 64). Disobedience on the other hand is the refusal or failure to obey. It is basically the opposite act of obeying where an individual does not follow the set out guidelines or laws.

An individual might decide to disobey certain rules or certain orders given by a person in authority. Such an act has been described by social researchers to be an act of rebellion and non-compliance. People who disobey do so deliberately to break certain laws or to go against a certain authoritative figure. They also disobey to show that they do not cooperative with the authorities. Disobedience is therefore seen as a negative act that affects the institutions in the society (Passini and Morselli 100).

To explain the first argument where obedience is good and disobedience is bad, human beings follow rules so as not to against the law or against the rules. People are prone to obey because it offers them a sense of security and protection. People are not allowed to make any mistakes because the major social institutions and authoritative figures make the important decisions for us. Presidents make important decisions for their countries while the citizens get to exercise obedience to the decisions that have been made. Regardless of what kind of behavior is involved, obedience can be justifiable as long as the individuals follow orders and commands (Asch 31).

Obedience in the society provides a sense of order and continuity which is important. Social institutions around the world create laws and guidelines that are used in maintaining order and peace. Laws are made for various reasons and some of the most important reasons for following laws is to demonstrate obedience. Obeying laws ensures that there is no trouble in the society and it shows that people agree with the set out laws and are ready to defend them. Obeying laws also ensures that order is maintained in the society preventing cases where the rule of the jungle prevails (Asch 31).

The concept of obedience is at times difficult given the complex nature of human behavior which is difficult to control. This creates a situation where some people are prone to being disobedient or vulnerable to disobedience. While some people readily obey, others decide to disobey regardless of whether they have the opportunity to act independently.

To demonstrate this statement, most of the offenses that are committed within the society are usually done by ordinary people instead of social outcasts. These people decide to disobey under the impacts of surrounding circumstances and authoritative figures. They also disobey because the set out laws might at times contradict their belief and value systems. Ordinary people also disobey because of the pressure to conform to values that at times might not be right (Behrens and Rosen 304).

Disobedience also stems from the feeling of performing other people’s wishes rather than our own. This makes individuals to no longer feel responsible for their actions as their decisions are made by authoritative figures or people who have authority over social beings within the society. Such a situation forces people within the social context to feel responsible to the authoritative figures creating a need to constantly perform well out of duty or obligation to these authorities. Value systems and beliefs are at times compromised when this happens (Behrens and Rosen 304).

The human psychology prevents people from resisting orders or commands. Human beings are mostly wired to obey therefore making obedience to be a normal state. Obedience has become a historically accepted norm where a society requires each of its members to follow the established rules and guidelines.

Obedience is mostly focused on an authoritative figure that influences the norms and rules within social institutions. Authoritative figures create and regulate norms and rules that are used within the society and in return they require social members to follow these rules without any question. For example governments around the world create laws that require all citizens to obey. This is important as it ensures there is no disorder present in the society. Obedience has therefore been viewed to be a fundamental component in maintaining order within the society (Behrens and Rosen 304).

The next argument to be focused on will be disobedience is good as it build’s an individual’s personality and confidence. As explained before, society requires every social being to be obedient. But in some instances, obedience causes more harm than good as exemplified by the Holocaust where German citizens betrayed Jews to the Nazis.

Milgram explains the role of obedience during the Holocaust where ordinary people agreed to obey an authoritative figure which was the Nazi to the extent of severely hurting other ordinary human beings. Milgram’s explanation of the Holocaust points to the fact that disobedience is not always wrong. Some Germans during the Holocaust disobeyed the Nazis by harboring and protecting Jews an act that spared their lives (Milgram 64).

According to Fromm (2) the first act of disobedience in the world was committed by Adam and Eve. The two disobeyed God’s command by eating fruit from the Garden after God had forbidden them. Human history was therefore founded by an act of disobedience because of Adam and Eve. This act of disobedience affected the development of man in the world as obedience and disobedience co-existed together in the world.

This especially became true as more and more people continued to rebel against authoritative figures who were charged with developing their worlds. Fromm (2) also highlights the stealing of the fire by Prometheus as an act of disobedience. As much as it laid the foundation for human evolution, Prometheus’ act of disobedience set the stage for human history and it put him on the historic map for his crime.

The intellectual development of human beings has mostly been dependent on acts of disobedience. This disobedience arises from authoritative figures trying to stifle the thoughts and expressions of their subjects as well their long established opinions and thoughts that govern social institutions and members. Disobedience has also arisen from the pressure to conform or comply with these laws that might at times contradict the individual’s set of beliefs and values (Fromm 2).

Fromm further analyzes the act of disobedience by looking at various historic events that took place in the course of the century. Such occurrences such as the Garden of Eden and Prometheus formed the basis for the evolution of man. Acts of disobedience over the past would not have formed the foundation of the world today. Human history began with an act of disobedience when Adam and Eve defyed God by consumeing the prohibited fruit. This according to Fromm (2) was seen to be an act of freedom and independence from the authoritative figure of God.

Fromm relates disobedience with obedience by stating that an act of obedience to one principle might at times lead to an act of disobedience on the same principle. In the social context, human beings are faced with disobedience when performing their moral duties. When trying to obey some human principles, other laws have to be broken.

When the principles that had to be obeyed conflicted with those that had to be disobeyed, an irreconcilable situation arose. For example people using a zebra crossing might back up traffic which might be wrong, in some other cases people who water their gardens during the drought season might be doing so to keep the city green but they might be wasting valuable water resources that have become scarce during the dry season (Fromm 3).

Antigone was a perfect example of explaining the act of obeying one principle and disobeying another. She was faced with the dilemma of obeying a law that was deemed to be too inhumane which meant that she had to disobey the laws of humanity. Therefore an act of obeying one principle would be an act of disobeying another. Fromm advocates that people within the society should be free from any laws or rules established by authoritative figures or social institutions as they were born to be free and independent.

He states that people should be able to disobey as well as to obey without having to resort to rebellion. Fromm advocates for the proper balancing of the two concepts according to what individuals feel is right to obey or disobey. He uses an example of martyrs in either the religious or science circles who at one point had to disobey people that wanted to stop them following their own consciences (Fromm 3).

In coming up with the proper balance, Fromm analyzes the concept of obedience by looking at two types of obedience which include autonomous obedience and heteronomous obedience. Heteronomous obedience is the kind of obedience that is given to a person, an institution of power or an authoritative figure. Fromm describes this kind of obedience to be submissive in nature as it implies that an individual should abandon their own perceptions of what is right and accept the foreign perceptions of a higher authoritative figure in place of their own.

It is the kind of obedience that responds to outside thoughts and power. Autonomous obedience is the kind of obedience that is used by individuals who believe in their own religious, personal and political beliefs and convictions. Individuals who practice autonomous obedience exercise their own judgment and follow their own perceptions rather than those of other people. Fromm describes this kind of obedience to be the ability of an individual to judge for themselves (Fromm 4).

In describing how acts of disobedience develop people psychologically, Fromm states that acts of disobedience provide an individual with freedom and the ability to withstand oppression. Disobedience also enables an individual to voice their opinions and concerns against any societal or authoritative pressures. Fromm suggested that choice and the ability to be disobedient were two indivisible concepts that had to go hand in hand. For an individual to be free from societal norms and pressures, they had to be disobedient. This did not mean that defiance was a virtue and obedience was a vice, as a highlight like that would take no notice of the relationship that existed between the two concepts (Fromm 3).

In analyzing the third argument that states that obedience is bad, historical events such as the Holocaust come into mind. Innocent Jews were killed as a result of ordinary Germans obeying Nazi orders. This brought into contrast the fact that society’s committed human rights abuses in the name of being obedient. Ordinary German citizens were forced to commit inhuman acts against the Jews that they would ordinarily have not committed under normal circumstances. While some German citizens stood up and disobeyed Nazi orders to identify Jewish hideouts, others acted as Nazi spies by informing the officers where the Jews were hidden (Milgram 64).

Milgram’s analysis of German behavior during the mass murders of Jews during the Holocaust showed that people’s behavior changed drastically when they were faced with military conflicts. They tended to obey to avoid being involved in the conflicts that mostly led to the death of people who were disobedient. Such obedience created some forms of aggression amongst the social members who were under oppression. The results of Milgram’s research experiment revealed that people tended to obey authoritative figures and it was deemed to be abnormal for a person to disobey these authoritative figures. This created a dangerous situation where obedient people had to fulfill the commands of authority that were deemed to be illegal or criminal in nature (Passini and Morselli 100).

People who obey authoritative figures do so to fulfill the orders of these figures so that they can benefit from carrying out those orders and at the same time prevent the occurrence of conflicts within the society. Obedience at times becomes a very powerful tool that can make ordinary people commit acts that are deemed legal by authoritative figures. Cullingworth (262) discusses the aspect of blind obedience which is deemed to be more negative than positive.

Blind obedience dehumanizes people by making them act in an unimaginable way. Cullingworth further notes that blind obedience has a range of negative effects that might include death, fear, insecurity, and inconvenience. An example of blind obedience was the terrorist attack of September 11 th where suicide bombers attacked the World Trade Centre in the US based on their obedience to religious beliefs and values (Cullingworth 262). In summary obedience has been used for the purpose which at times has led to the devastation and loss of innocent lives.

The various arguments presented in the research paper have shown that obedience and disobedience can be both positive and negative concepts. On one hand obedience ensures that there is order in the society while disobedience demonstrates rebellion to the norms and guidelines that are used to govern the society. On the other hand disobedience ensures that a person has the freedom to do whatever they want based on their own perceptions and beliefs while obedience prevents people from being free and openly expressing their concerns, views and opinions without any fear of reprisals or condemnation.

In support of the thesis statement where the courage to be disobedient is what makes us fully human, strong and confident, disobedience has been noted by several authors in the research work to be positive in the intellectual development of human beings. Disobedience allows people to develop their freedom by voicing their concerns on aspects that are deemed to be detrimental to the society. It also allows for people to base their decisions on their own perceptions of what is good and what is bad. Disobedience is therefore seen to be important in developing a person’s intellectual capacity and perceptions.

Asch, Solomon. Opinions and social pressure. Scientific American , 193 (31-35), 1955. Print.

Behrens, Laurence and Rosen, Leonard. Writing and reading across the curriculum , 10 th Edition. New York: Longman Prentice Hall, 2008. Print.

Cullingworth, Nick . Btec national public service . Cheltenham. UK: Nelson Thomes Limited, 2004. Print.

Fromm, Erich. Disobedience as a psychological and moral problem . New York: Routledge Inc., 2005. Print.

Milgram, Stanley. The perils of obedience . Harper’s Magazine, 62-77, 1973.

Passini, Stefano and Morselli, Davide. Authority relationships between obedience and disobedience. New Ideas in Psychology , 27 (96 -106), 2009.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2020, June 25). Civil Disobedience: Advantages and Disadvantages. https://ivypanda.com/essays/civil-disobedience-advantages-and-disadvantages/

"Civil Disobedience: Advantages and Disadvantages." IvyPanda , 25 June 2020, ivypanda.com/essays/civil-disobedience-advantages-and-disadvantages/.

IvyPanda . (2020) 'Civil Disobedience: Advantages and Disadvantages'. 25 June.

IvyPanda . 2020. "Civil Disobedience: Advantages and Disadvantages." June 25, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/civil-disobedience-advantages-and-disadvantages/.

1. IvyPanda . "Civil Disobedience: Advantages and Disadvantages." June 25, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/civil-disobedience-advantages-and-disadvantages/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Civil Disobedience: Advantages and Disadvantages." June 25, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/civil-disobedience-advantages-and-disadvantages/.

• Fromm’s Humanistic Psychoanalysis
• Comparison and contrast of each of Fromm's Human Needs
• Erich Fromm's Contributions to Social Sciences
• The Reasons to Teach Children How to Disobey
• Disobedient Customers and Employee Turnover Intentions
• Obedience and Disobedience as Behaviour Forms
• Rights to Civil Disobedience
• Concept of Civil Disobedience
• Departing From Social Norms Can Lead to Progress
• Obeying the State in Plato’s Crito and Apology
• What Is the Point of Equality Theory?
• Socialism: H. White's and J. Keynes' Ideas
• The Nation-State Today: Arguments by Mann and Meadwell
• Habeas Corpus: History, Evolution and Significance
• War and Peace Effects on Foreign Aid in the Dominican Republic

• Environment
• Information Science
• Social Issues
• Argumentative
• Cause and Effect
• Classification
• Compare and Contrast
• Descriptive
• Exemplification
• Informative
• Controversial
• Exploratory
• What Is an Essay
• Length of an Essay
• Generate Ideas
• Types of Essays
• Structuring an Essay
• Outline For Essay
• Essay Introduction
• Thesis Statement
• Body of an Essay
• Writing a Conclusion
• Essay Writing Tips
• Drafting an Essay
• Revision Process
• Fix a Broken Essay
• Format of an Essay
• Essay Examples
• Essay Checklist
• Essay Writing Service
• Pay for Research Paper
• Write My Research Paper
• Write My Essay
• Custom Essay Writing Service
• Admission Essay Writing Service
• Pay for Essay
• Academic Ghostwriting
• Write My Book Report
• Case Study Writing Service
• Dissertation Writing Service
• Coursework Writing Service
• Lab Report Writing Service
• Do My Assignment
• Buy College Papers
• Capstone Project Writing Service
• Buy Research Paper
• Custom Essays for Sale

Can’t find a perfect paper?

• Free Essay Samples
• Human Rights

Civil Disobedience

Updated 18 October 2023

Subject Human Rights ,  Social Movements

Downloads 30

Category Crime ,  Government ,  Law ,  Social Issues

Topic Civil Rights ,  Civil Disobedience

According to Eric Fromm, a rebel is an individual who does not compromise with the prevailing circumstances for the obviously perceived desirable outcome during a contentious escalation; while a revolutionary is one who does not keep quiet in the face of corrupt leadership but chooses to raise a voice of concern (Fromm 1).  The Civil Disobedience shares great insight about transcendentalism ideologies. The Civil Disobedience is one of the most controversial topics ever done and discussed in philosophy. Fromm primarily argues that it is essential for a person to engage reason and critical thinking to arrive at conscientious decisions rather than blindly conforming to irrational laws put in place by unjust governments (Lefkowitz 222). The failing American policies coupled with the war against demonstrations of the celebrities, civilians, and athletes are a show of positive disobedience.

Based on the civil disobedience analogy, the government systems never prove themselves of worth in a civilized society. Therefore, Fromm does not support the idea that honesty, integrity, transparency, and justice are necessarily mainstreamed by huge masses of people (Fromm 4). Though the majorities form the governments on the concept of Democracy, most individuals who champion civil disobedience assert that even the minority has a right to express what their conscience outlines as the right to be done (Thoreau 10). On the other hand, Fromm contends that people should boycott the law if they feel it is both misguiding and misadvising. The proper approach to this is by refusing to cooperate with the government, not even accepting to hold political offices. By so doing, one distances themselves from unjust institutions of leadership. Indeed, the deduction of recent movements, athletes/celebrities, and civilians expressly categorizes the then government as of unjust precepts, founded on malice and irrationality, owing to limited concern for the rights of the people in different spheres of social life (Scheuerman 609).

On the other hand, a revolutionist does not believe in civil institutions, for instance, the process of voting. Rather, civil disobedience maintains that voting does not meet the necessary reforms in government; rather the political systems are manipulated to favor the irrational majority  (Lefkowitz 233). People who choose to do mass movements in solidarity against unjust treatment are justified in their acts to enhance their intellectual development. In fact, by so doing, those who appeal to civil disobedience become advocates who champion the fight against unjust governments from outside its corridors of power, for nobody employed by or working in government could properly mirror the reflection of its malpractices in the American society. Despite the justified constitutional rights of people to practice mass movements, in most cases, they are often met with extreme rebellion from those in government and those who emerged as clandestine espionage characters. The effort to counter the attack typically lacks the needed progress, but the situation could only get worse in a society whereby change is not embraced.

Indeed, civil disobedience is often characterized by campaigns for religious independence and social tolerance amidst prejudice against those who champion such freedoms (Fromm 3). There are clear-cut differences between the arguments of Fromm and the points of contention by other civil disobedience activists like Thoreau; Civil Disobedience. In America is embraced to counter the undermined basic human rights for those who feel oppressed hence the mass movements, a situation that greatly polarizes the security of the country, as sentimentalism, racism, and hates become common vices among the people. Naturally, revolutionists emerge, and factions of civil disobedience ensue to fight for freedom. Consequently, the recent movements in the US cannot be condemned in any way, because the people demonstrating were simply exercising their intellectual development.

Civil disobedience does not necessarily portray the difference between revolutionists and rebels. However, those who participate normally risk their lives, to fighting for the dispensation of the very rights of common citizens. Fromm makes it clear that all human beings can reason and make their rational decisions. In this manner, he contends that the conscience of people to embrace a given form of social life or cultural practices free from the direct influence of the state is vital (Fromm). Typically, civil disobedience as portrayed by rebels and revolutionists alike is that the government is unjust. It thus melts down into common virtues that both categories of people advocate and champion for the liberty of every single individual in socio-political and religious segments of human life.

The many confrontations disobedient civil advocates face to the most part is a reflection of the unjust government policies that compromise rights and freedoms of civilians, hence the recent mass demonstrations by celebrities, civilians, and athletes in the US (Scheuerman 611). The agitation for uprisings against the law is intentionally meant to sensitize the main stream society against unfair treatment on the part of powers that be. To the most part, therefore, it is apparent that both rebels and revolutionists under the umbrella of civil disobedience advocate for just governments which allow civilians to make conscious individual-based decisions, practice tolerance, and achieve the independence of the mind. All these aspects of controversy lead to better social lives, full of dignity and human rights for the present and future generations.

Works Cited

Fromm, Erich. “Erich Fromm On Disobedience.pdf.” 2016: 1–8. Web.

Lefkowitz, David. “On a Moral Right to Civil Disobedience.” Ethics 117.2 (2007): 202–233. Web.

Scheuerman, William E. “Whistleblowing as Civil Disobedience: The Case of Edward Snowden.” Philosophy and Social Criticism

40.7 (2014): 609–628. Web.

Deadline is approaching?

Wait no more. Let us write you an essay from scratch

Related Essays

Related topics.

Find Out the Cost of Your Paper

Type your email

By clicking “Submit”, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy policy. Sometimes you will receive account related emails.

Theorizing the Politics of Protest: Contemporary Debates on Civil Disobedience

• Critical Exchange
• Published: 21 April 2020
• Volume 19 , pages 513–546, ( 2020 )

Cite this article

• Çiğdem Çıdam 1 ,
• William E. Scheuerman 2 ,
• Candice Delmas 3 ,
• Erin R. Pineda 4 ,
• Robin Celikates 5 &
• Alexander Livingston 6  

2861 Accesses

10 Citations

7 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Aitchison, G. (2018) (Un)Civil Disobedience. Raisons politiques 69: 5–12.

Article   Google Scholar  

Bedau, H. (1961) On Civil Disobedience. The Journal of Philosophy 58(21): 653–661.

Boyte, H. (2005) Everyday Politics: Reconnecting Citizens and Public Life . Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Google Scholar  

Braunstein, R. (2018) Boundary-Work and the Demarcation of Civil from Uncivil Protest in the United States: Control, Legitimacy, and Political Inequality. Theory and Society 47(5): 603–633.

Brown, W. (2002) At the Edge. Political Theory 30(4): 556–576.

Brownlee, K. (2012) Conscience and Conviction: The Case for Civil Disobedience. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Book   Google Scholar  

Celikates, R. (2015) Learning form the Streets: Civil Disobedience in Theory and Practice. In P. Weibel (ed.) Global Activism: Art and Conflict in the 21st Century . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Celikates, R. (2016) Rethinking Civil Disobedience as a Practice of Contestation—Beyond the Liberal Paradigm. Constellations 23(1): 37–45.

Celikates, R. (2019) Constituent Power Beyond Exceptionalism: Irregular Migration, Disobedience, and (Re-)Constitution. Journal of International Political Theory 15(1): 67–81.

Celikates, R. (2020) Radical Civility: Social Struggles and the Domestication of Dissent. In J. Christ, K. Lepold, D. Loick, and T. Stahl (eds.), Debating Critical Theory: Engagements with Axel Honneth . Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.

Chambers, E. (2003) Roots for Radicals: Organizing for Power, Action, and Justice . New York: Bloomsbury.

Cooke, M. (2019) Disobedience in Civil Regeneration: Radical Transformations in the Civil Sphere. In J. C. Alexander, T. Stack, and F. Khosrokhavar (eds.), Breaching the Civil Order: Radicalism in the Civil Sphere . New York: Cambridge University Press.

Delmas, C. (2018) A Duty to Resist: When Disobedience Should Be Uncivil. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Frost, A. (2017) All Worked Up and Nowhere to Go: The Evermore Futile Politics of Left Protest. The Baffler 35(June). https://thebaffler.com/outbursts/all-worked-up-nowhere-to-go-frost . Accessed 9 March 2020.

Gallie, WB. (1956) Essentially Contested Concepts. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 56(1): 167–198.

Han, H. (2014) How Organizations Develop Activists: Civic Associations and Leadership in the 21st Century . New York: Oxford University Press.

Honig, B. and Stears, M. (2011) The New Realism: From Modus Vivendi to Justice. In J. Floyd and M. Stears (eds.), History versus Political Philosophy . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hooker, J. (2016) Black Lives Matter and the Paradoxes of U.S. Black Politics: From Democratic Sacrifice to Democratic Repair. Political Theory 44(4): 448–469.

King, M. (2010) Why We Can’t Wait . Boston: Beacon Press.

King Jr., M. L. (2015) Letter from Birmingham Jail. In C. West (ed.), The Radical King . Boston: Beacon.

Konya, N. (2020) The Inappropriable People of Gezi . Ph.D. Thesis. Cornell University.

Livingston, A. (2018) Fidelity to Truth: Gandhi and the Genealogy of Civil Disobedience. Political Theory 46(4): 511–536.

Livingston, A. (2019) Against Civil Disobedience: On Candice Delmas’ A Duty to Resist: When Disobedience Should Be Uncivil . Res Publica 25(4): 591–597.

Mancilla, A. (2013) Noncivil Disobedience and the Right of Necessity. Krisis 1.

Mantena, K. (2012) Another Realism: The Politics of Gandhian Nonviolence, American Political Science Review 106(2): 455–470.

Mantena, K. (2018) Showdown for Nonviolence: The Theory and Practice of Nonviolent Politics. In T. Shelby and B. Terry (eds.), To Shape a New World: The Political Philosophy of Martin Luther King, Jr . Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.

McAlevey, J. (2016) No Shortcuts: Organizing for Power in a New Gilded Age . New York: Oxford University Press.

Milligan, T. (2013) Civil Disobedience: Protest, Justification, and the Law . New York: Bloomsbury.

Nyong’o, T., and Tompkins, K. W. (2018) Eleven Theses on Civility. https://socialtextjournal.org/eleven-theses-on-civility/ .

Payne, C. (1995) I’ve Got the Light of Freedom: The Organizing Tradition and the Mississippi Freedom Struggle . London: University of California Press.

Pineda, E. (2015) Civil Disobedience and Punishment: (Mis)reading Justification and Strategy from SNCC to Snowden, History of the Present 5(1): 1–30.

Pineda, E. (2019) Civil Disobedience, and What Else? Making Space for Uncivil Forms of Resistance, European Journal of Political Theory. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474885119845063 .

Pineda, E. (2020 forthcoming) Seeing Like an Activist: Civil Disobedience and the Civil Rights Movement . New York: Oxford University Press.

Rawls, J. (1999 [1971]) A Theory of Justice , Revised Edition. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

Rudd, M. (2006) 1968: Organizing vs. Activism. In Paper presented at 1968: Global Resistance/Local Knowledge Conference, Drew University, 3–4 November. https://www.markrudd.com/index5cf2.html?organizing-and-activism-now/1968-organizing-vs-activism.html .

Sabl, A. (2002) Ruling Passions: Political Offices and Democratic Ethics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Schaffer, F. C. (2016) Elucidating Social Scientific Concepts: An Interpretivist Guide . New York: Routledge.

Scheuerman, W. (2014) Whistleblowing as Civil Disobedience: The Case of Edward Snowden. Philosophy and Social Criticism 40(7): 609–628.

Scheuerman, W. (2018a) Civil Disobedience: Key Concepts. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Scheuerman, W. (2018b) Review of a Duty to Resist: When Disobedience Should Be Uncivil. Contemporary Political Theory. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41296-018-00296-7 .

Sinsheimer, J. (1984) Interview with Robert Moses , 11 April. Series 1, Box 2, Joseph A. Sinsheimer Papers. Cambridge Massachusetts: David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Duke University. Available via Duke Digital Archives at: https://library.duke.edu/digitalcollections/media/jpg/sinsheimerjoseph/pdf/sinsi02007.pdf . Accessed 3 March 2020.

Skinner, Q. (2002) Visions of Politics . Volume 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Thaler, M. (2018) Naming Violence: A Critical Theory of Genocide, Torture, and Terrorism . New York: Columbia University Press.

Theoharis, J. (2018) A More Beautiful and Terrible History: The Uses and Misuses of Civil Rights History . Boston: Beacon Press.

Thoreau, H. D. (1991 [1866]) Civil Disobedience. In H. Bedau (ed.), Civil Disobedience in Focus . London: Routledge.

Tully, J. (2008) Public Philosophy in a New Key . Volume 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Tully, J. (2014) On Global Citizenship. In D. Owen (ed.), On Global Citizenship: James Tully in Dialogue. London: Bloomsbury.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Wolin, S. (2016) Fugitive Democracy. In N. Xenos (ed.), Fugitive Democracy and Other Essays . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Younge, G. (2019) Streets on Fire: How a Decade of Protest Shaped the World. The Guardian , November 23. https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2019/nov/23/decade-of-protest-occupy-wall-street-extinction-rebellion-gary-younge . Accessed 3 March 2020.

Zerilli, L. (2014) Against Civility: A Feminist Perspective. In A. Sarat (ed.), Civility, Legality, and Justice in America . New York: Cambridge University Press.

Zwiebach, B. (1975) Civility and Disobedience. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Union College, Schenectady, NY, 12308, USA

Çiğdem Çıdam

Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, 47405, USA

William E. Scheuerman

Northeastern University, Boston, MA, 02115, USA

Candice Delmas

Smith College, Northampton, MA, 01063, USA

Erin R. Pineda

Freie Universität Berlin, 14195, Berlin, Germany

Robin Celikates

Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 14853, USA

Alexander Livingston

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Çiğdem Çıdam .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Çıdam, Ç., Scheuerman, W.E., Delmas, C. et al. Theorizing the Politics of Protest: Contemporary Debates on Civil Disobedience. Contemp Polit Theory 19 , 513–546 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41296-020-00392-7

Download citation

Published : 21 April 2020

Issue Date : September 2020

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41296-020-00392-7

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research