Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
×
Home

Domination and Disobedience: Protest, Coercion and the Limits of an Appeal to Justice

  • Guy Aitchison
Abstract

I offer a conceptual framework for assessing the normative legitimacy of coercive disobedience—involving threats, disruption, force, and deceit—by social movements. A standard liberal view is that while coercion may be required to resist authoritarian regimes, it is illegitimate in a democratic state since it conflicts with majority rule and mutual respect. In restricting disobedience to a form of moral persuasion, this perspective neglects how social power and material interests can distort the conditions for open, fair deliberation. I offer a principled defense of coercive disobedience, not only in repressive states but in plausibly democratic societies. I argue that coercion can be justified on democratic republican grounds as a means to collectively contest objectionable forms of political domination. The use of coercion can be justified as a surrogate tool of political action for those who lack effective participation rights; as a remedial tool to counteract the dominating influence of powerful actors over the process of democratic will formation, and as a mobilizational tool to maintain participation and discipline in collective action. I conclude by proposing democratic constraints on the use of coercive tactics designed to offset the potential movements themselves become a source of arbitrary power.

Copyright
Footnotes
Hide All

He thanks Associate Editor Daniel I. O’Neill and four anonymous reviewers for Perspectives on Politics for their excellent feedback and assistance in improving the paper. Earlier drafts were presented at conferences at Sciences Po, Paris; the European University Institute, Florence; and the LSE. He would like to thank audiences there for their valuable comments. Special thanks are also due to Rob Jubb, Laura Valentini, Candice Delmas, Richard Bellamy, Temi Ogunye, Simon Stevens, Adam Tebble, Martin Sticker, Steven Klein, John Wilesmith, Bruno Leipold, Christine Hobden, Rutger Birnie, Anthony Barnett, Rainer Bauböck, Avia Pasternak and Bilyana Petkova. He would also like to acknowledge the generous financial support of the Irish Research Council.

Footnotes
References
Hide All
Aitchison, Guy. 2017. “Three Models of Republican Rights: Juridical, Parliamentary and Populist.” Political Studies 65(2): 339–55.
Anderson, Elizabeth S. 1999. “What Is the Point of Equality?” Ethics 109(2): 287337.
Anderson, Scott A. 2010. “The Enforcement Approach to Coercion.” Journal of Ethics & Social Philosophy 5(1): 131.
Berlin, Isaiah. 2002 [1969]. “Two Concepts of Liberty.” In Four Essays on Liberty. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Brownlee, Kimberley. 2012. Conscience and Conviction: The Case for Civil Disobedience. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cabrera, Luis. 2010. The Practice of Global Citizenship. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Celikates, Robin. 2016a. “Rethinking Civil Disobedience as a Practice of Contestation—Beyond the Liberal Paradigm.” Constellations 23(1): 3745.
Celikates, Robin. 2016b. “Democratizing Civil Disobedience.” Philosophy & Social Criticism 42(10): 982–94.
Coffee, Alan M. S. J. 2015. “Two Spheres of Domination: Republican Theory, Social Norms and the Insufficiency of Negative Freedom.” Contemporary Political Theory 14(1): 4562.
Crouch, Colin. 2004. Post-Democracy. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Delmas, Candice. 2014. “Political Resistance: A Matter of Fairness.” Law and Philosophy 33(4): 465–88.
Gilbert, David. 2012. Love and Struggle: My Life in SDS, the Weather Underground, and Beyond. Oakland, CA: PM Press.
Gilens, Martin and Page, Benjamin I.. 2014. “Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens.” Perspectives on Politics 12(3): 564–81.
Goodwin, Jeff, Jasper, James M., and Polletta, Francesca, eds. 2009. Passionate Politics: Emotions and Social Movements. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Gourevitch, Alex. 2016. “Quitting Work but Not the Job: Liberty and the Right to Strike.” Perspectives on Politics 14(2): 307–23.
Habermas, Jürgen. 1985 “Civil Disobedience: Litmus Test for the Democratic Constitutional State.” Berkeley Journal of Sociology 30: 95116.
Humphrey, Mathew and Stears, Marc. 2006. “Animal Rights Protest and the Challenge to Deliberative Democracy.” Economy and Society 35(3): 400–22.
Lefkowitz, David. 2007. “On a Moral Right to Civil Disobedience.” Ethics 117(2): 202–33.
Livingston, Alexander. 2017. “Between Means and Ends: Reconstructing Coercion in Dewey’s Democratic Theory.” American Political Science Review 111(3): 522–34
Mansbridge, Jane, et al. 2010. “The Place of Self-Interest and the Role of Power in Deliberative Democracy.” Journal of Political Philosophy 18(1): 64100.
Mantena, Karuna. 2012. “Another Realism: The Politics of Gandhian Nonviolence.” American Political Science Review 106(2): 455470.
Markovits, Daniel. 2004. “Democratic Disobedience.” Yale Law Journal. Faculty Scholarship Series. Paper No.114.
Medearis, John. 2015. Why Democracy Is Oppositional. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Nozick, Robert. 1969. “Coercion.” In Philosophy, Science, and Method: Essays in Honor of Ernest Nagel, ed. Morgenbesser, Sidney, Suppes, Patrick, and White, Morton. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Olson, Mancur. 2009. The Logic of Collective Action. Harvard Economic Studies 124. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Pasternak, Avia and McTernan, Emily “Political Rioting: A Moral Assessment.” Challenging Injustice: the Ethics and Modalities of Political Engagement, E.U.I., Florence, 15 February 2016.
Pettit, Philip. 2012. On the People’s Terms: A Republican Theory and Model of Democracy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Rawls, John. 1999. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Raz, Joseph. 1979. “Civil Disobedience.” In The Authority of Law: Essays on Law and Morality. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Singer, Peter. 1973. Democracy and Disobedience. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Smith, William. 2013. Civil Disobedience and Deliberative Democracy. London: Routledge.
Waldron, Jeremy. 2004. “Terrorism and the Uses of Terror.” Journal of Ethics 8(1): 535.
Walzer, Michael. 1970. Obligations: Essays on Disobedience, War and Citizenship. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Warren, Mark E. 2006. “Democracy and Deceit: Regulating Appearances of Corruption.” American Journal of Political Science 50(1): 165–66.
Wasow, Omar. 2017. “Do Protest Tactics Matter? Evidence from the 1960’s Black Insurgency.” Working paper, Princeton University. Available at http://www.omarwasow.com/Protests_on_Voting.pdf, accessed March 1, 2018.
Watkins, David. 2015. “Institutionalizing Freedom as Non-domination: Democracy and the Role of the State.” Polity 47(4): 508–34.
Welchman, Jennifer. 2001. “Is Ecosabotage Civil Disobedience?” Philosophy & Geography 4(1): 97107.
Wilks, Stephen. 2013. The Political Power of the Business Corporation. Cheltlenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Winters, Jeffrey A. 2011. Oligarchy New York: Cambridge University Press.
Wong, Julia Carrie. 2016. “Dakota Access Pipeline: US Denies Key Permit, a Win for Standing Rock Protesters.” The Guardian; available at https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/dec/04/dakota-access-pipeline-permit-denied-standing-rock; accessed December 19, 2017.
Young, Iris Marion. 2001. “Activist Challenges to Deliberative Democracy.” Political Theory 29(5): 670–90.
Young, Iris Marion. 2002. Inclusion and Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Young, Kevin and Schwartz, Michael. 2014. “A Neglected Mechanism of Social Movement Political Influence: The Role of Anti-corporate and Anti-Institutional Protest in Changing Government Policy.” Mobilization: An International Quarterly 19(3): 239–60.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Perspectives on Politics
  • ISSN: 1537-5927
  • EISSN: 1541-0986
  • URL: /core/journals/perspectives-on-politics
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed