Duty to disobey? A perspective on the new civil disobedience, between international actors and digital media

Abstract

The aim of this thesis is to analyse the concept of civil disobedience and to give a justification for it, to finally assess whether or not it is possible to claim that there is a duty to disobey. The initial focus will be on the definition of the concept of civil disobedience itself, to move then to the actors involved, from social movements, to non-governmental organisations, and power holders, and show how the nation-state is not the only entity that counts in the political sphere, nowadays. I will then question the idea of a non-violent civil disobedience, to include violence in the definition of it, maintaining however the difference between civil disobedience and revolution. Afterwards, I will consider the concept of responsibility and the reasons of the dissenters, before turning to Internet as the new space where new actors, such as Anonymous and the whistle-blowers, make a more pluralistic politics. So, I will justify civil disobedience on the basis of democracy as an inclusive system, and on the respect that the institutions should have for our moral agency. I will consequently derive from this the idea that dissenters should be punished in a more clement way than common criminals. Finally, I will conclude by arguing that, under certain circumstances, we might have a duty to disrespect the law. I will base this claim on the fact that, to be full individuals, we have to be political individuals, ready to act.