Justified Violent Civil Disobedience for Dummies

Abstract

When and how violence is justifiable during civil disobedience remains controversial among legal professionals and civil disobedients. My paper rectifies this by creating a five-limb criteria that are understandable, usable, and flexible. The criteria analyse whether a violent civil disobedience incident was, is, or will be justifiable. Analysing justification at the incident-level allows proper consideration of the context and actors in a violent civil disobedience event. Realism and real-world examples ground this paper’s theory. Civil disobedience must develop society’s shared bonds to the political commitment of living together. Its purpose is to grow society’s bonds into a more inclusive system for all members. Violence is defined as whether the aggressor intentionally and detrimentally affects property or person.

Not every limb of the criteria must necessarily be fulfilled for violence to be justifiable, but unfulfilled limbs must be rare and well-founded. The starting limb is that authorities set the bar for justifiable civil disobedience violence. What democratic options citizens have available to create change and how authorities physically respond to civil disobedience dictates where the bar is set. The second limb examines the civil disobedient’s subjective communicative reason for the violence. The violence must communicate a message to an audience. Limb three is that violence must be objectively proportional and necessary, with its consequences considered. The penultimate limb is that violence against property is more straightforward to justify than violence against persons. Finally, violent civil disobedience must be led by civilians. Violence by militaries or paramilitaries cannot be justified under the criteria.