Could the civil right movement have succeeded without civil disobedience?

excon

Hello again, DC:

Ok, then. Why don't you tell us the steps we should take between writing nice letters and violent revolution?

I’ll tell you what the Constitution says, if you’re interested… "Congress shall make no law abridging the …. right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

What’s wrong with that?

excon

Dark_crow

Excon

Nothing wrong with that…so far as lawful assembly is used; there is a difference you know. The Constitution nowhere say’s unlawful assemble is protected under law.

excon

Hello again, DC:

You fell right into my trap. What if the government passed a law that made all assembly illegal? Do you go along with your government? According to you, not to go along would be immoral.

excon

George_1950

The constitution doesn't say that in the course of lawful assembly a group or subgroup can damage public or private property, which is against the law and violative of the owners' constitutional rights.

Dark_crow

Excon

What if the Queen had b…s? The point is, she doesn’t and we do. By the government do you mean what if both houses of Congress passed a law that made it a crime for people to assemble? Is your hypothetical realistic; I don’t think so, but to play along I certainly would not call for civil disobedience…would you? Civil disobedience would not carry us another further than it does today… I would suggest that people follow the direction of Thomas Jefferson, David Walker, Thomas Paine, Che Guevara, Kwame Nkrumah, or Nelson Mandela.

excon

Hello again, DC:

Hypothetical????

YouTube - Bridge to Freedom

I don’t think you understand how things work down where the rubber meets the road. I’m sure that both houses of the Alabama Congress didn’t pass a law that said people can’t assemble, but that didn’t stop these Alabama cops from making their own law. So, when I say “the government” I’m talking about the cops. Besides, do the marchers care whose law the cops are enforcing??? Nahhhh.

Are you going to tell me that these cops in this video are telling these marchers that they DO HAVE the right to peaceably assemble and petition their government?????

Dude!! You really do need to pay more attention.

excon

Dark_crow

Exon

Spare me the sob-stories that some people today love to linger over and wallow-in self pity over… …and also the jail-house mentality- “Cops are the government.”

You ax What if the government passed a law that made all assembly illegal? And then give me that nonsense after I reply.

ordinaryguy

Well, you did say that civil disobedience is immoral, and you did say that armed revolution was acceptable "as a means to an end", so I don't see how I twisted your words. Please explain how violent insurrection is morally superior to nonviolent civil disobedience.

Fr_Chuck

Actually in many cities, you have to get permits for assembly, they can deny them. You will have to provide money for clean up, security and more before you can be allowed to have many assemblies.

Dark_crow

Yes, violent insurrection is morally superior to nonviolent civil disobedience. Civil disobedience is carried out with-in the frame-work of a legal authority; that is, the legal authority granted by the people is not challenged but the ethic of following law is broken…a law is violated.

Where-as with revolution the right of the legal authority is challenged, as for instance in America it was the declaration of independence which declared that the Thirteen Colonies in North America were "Free and Independent States" and that "all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved."