In this thesis, I problematize a widespread assumption in theories of civil disobedience. The assumption is that destruction of property is violence. I examine if the destruction of property which is most common to civil disobedience can reasonably be viewed as violent. I put forth three sufficient criteria for viewing destruction of property as violence and use them to evaluate two representative cases of civil disobedience in Denmark. I conclude that destruction of property can be viewed as violence in cases where it results in significant physical or psychological damage to persons or substantial violations of the right to private property. However, the destruction of property most common to civil disobedience does not result in significant physical or psychological damage to persons or substantial violations of property rights, and thus cannot reasonably be considered violence. Destruction of property, as it relates to civil disobedience, can therefore not be unquestionably viewed as violence.
|Uddannelser||Forvaltning, (Bachelor/kandidatuddannelse) Kandidat|
|Udgivelsesdato||14 feb. 2014|
|Vejledere||Torben Bech Dyrberg|
- Luk Lejren
- Civil disobedience
- civil ulydighed