Traditional forms of political protest have failed us so a new process of resistance against oppressive systems is needed and this project presents that this is literature.
Tag: protest
On the back of Britain’s anti-racism movement, arguably civil disobedience is becoming an ever more prominent feature in the protester’s arsenal for raising awareness regarding their social and political agendas. Naturally the project concerns itself with understanding and assessing whether civil disobedience is a necessary attribute in bringing about governance and increasing the potential for change. The project will focus upon the subsequent acts of civil disobedience associated with the Black Lives Matter movement (‘BLM’); the vandalism and the tearing down of the Edward Colston statue (Bristol) and the vandalism of the Sir Winston Churchill statue (Westminster). However, the significance of the project’s enquiry lies within questioning the treatment of these statues and thus the nuances of the discussion are embedded within the statues themselves. These will be analysed through conceptual exploration of property, representation, and jurisprudence.
Whilst recognising that there are some points of comparison between the statues and their treatment, much of the project will target their differences and aim to reach an understanding through wider analysis of civil disobedience itself. Arguably, culminating in an analysis of Colston’s role within the Bristol community versus the role of Churchill within the national community. Consequently, the project will recognise that it is not a simple task of addressing whether the man set in stone was ‘bad’ or ‘good,’ but much rather a more complex exploration of memorialisation and representation.
The riots of 2011 were particularly significant due to the rate they spread nationwide, and the prevalence of looting and the perceived greed of those involved, leading many to believe they were caused by nothing more than opportunism.
Objectives:
Come to an understanding of how we define violence, using R.P. Wolff’s On Violence and Žižek’s Violence
To compare and contrast the theories of the various key thinkers and how they understand violence
To then apply these theories to the events of 2011 and understand why the riots took place, and what we can learn from them as a result
Background:
In August 2011, England experienced its ‘most serious bout of civil unrest in a generation’, for most the riots were a clear indication of the deepening problem of broken Britain. The majority of people could not understand and were left deeply bewildered at the shocking behaviour exhibited and total disregard shown for the law, 59% were unemployed and 50% were under 18.
Aims:
– In this project one of my fundamental aims is to assess whether the motives behind the riots were legitimate or as David Cameron described acts of ‘mindless criminality’
– Did the participants wish to change the political system? Were they just fed up of being ignored? Or did people just follow the masses and joined in because everybody else was like a ‘domino effect’
– I will also research the validity of rioting itself and distinguish between violent and non-violent protest and research whether non-violent protest can significantly change a system or is just witnessed and ignored.
Thinkers:
Thomas Hobbes- Concentrates on the individual’s pleasure. However emphasised the importance of a state, as there would be anarchy without one.
John Stuart Mill- Uses Utilitarianism as a foundation (pleasing the majority) Also focused on the individual, pleasure alone motivates us
Thomas Aquinas- Just War theory ‘last resort’, has to be appropriate motives
Emile Durkheim- Sociologist witnessed social disunity. Offered theory of Social Integration.
The recent surge in protest activity both nationally and internationally and the inclusion of violent means within these protests opens up a debate as to whether a violent protest can ever be justified. The aim of my project is to explore the possibility of a justification of violence; my context is therefore that of ethics, politics and law. Through the method of axiological critique, I intend to consider the value of violence and whether it is applicable in a protest situation. As protest is generally a part of the political realm it is a political justification of violence that I aim to find. The main philosophical theories that are engaged with in the project are theories which closely explore the notions of protest and violence and are therefore extremely relevant. They are:
– The Just War Theory
– John Rawls’ Theory of Civil Disobedience
– Sartre’s discussion of violence
– Foucault’s discussion of resistance
With regards to the Just War theory, I aim to establish whether the principles which already justify violence in war can justify violence in a protest. An exploration of John Rawls’ Civil Disobedience argues the case for non-violent means of protest. In contrast, Sartre’s discussion of violence considers the necessity of violence as a form of protest. Exploring violent protest in relation to Foucault means considering his views on resistance and power.
Ultimately, I hope to reach a credible conclusion as to whether violence can be proven to be a justified means of protest using the support of political philosophical theories.