Can We Disobey in Democracy? Three Points of View

Abstract

Can we disobey in a democracy? Does not such an attitude run the risk of leading to generalized disorder? Why use illegal means of protest when democracy offers disgruntled citizens legal means of expression? There are three ways to answer these questions: a legalistic approach, a moderate approach and a radical approach. The second, defended by John Rawls and Jürgen Habermas, was so successful that it erased the other two. This article therefore proposes to restore in all its complexity and plurality the debate on the democratic legitimacy of civil disobedience. To do this, it is necessary to confront the thought of philosophers with that of the actors of disobedience, whether they are activists or political and judicial authorities.