Desobediência civil: teorias, críticas e a experiência nacional

Abstract

The debate on the right to disobey legislation and government policies that are considered unjust, immoral or unconstitutional extends throughout recorded history, with various narratives in philosophical thought about the type of action that is now known as 'civil disobedience', albeit under a different name (Consiglio Filho, 2019, p. 114). The tradition of civil disobedience, however, has as its canon the work of Henry David Thoreau, the American activist who popularized the term, and inspired from Gandhi to Martin Luther King Jr. The works and actions of the aforementioned individuals continue to influence demonstrations and protests around the world, so civil disobedience is still present today, energetically adapting and avoiding the exhaustion of the repertoire of contestation (Celikates, 2019, p. 35). However, such protests and demonstrations do not escape criticism; accused of encouraging criminality (Dos Santos, 2023, p.04), they are targets of persecution and public condemnation. In an attempt to rid civil disobedience movements of this criminal image (Dos Santos, 2023, p.05), American theorists in the 1960s and 1980s determined the requirements that would come to define civil disobedience: a public, non-violent, conscious and nonetheless political act (Rawls, 1997, p.404).This was the creation of a liberal tradition, which remains current to this day, influencing the understanding of students, activists and government agents (Dos Santos, 2023, p.08). This liberal theory of civil disobedience has been interpreted by some authors as limited in its perception of the importance of popular movements for political reforms, neutralizing civil disobedience and maintaining a 'status quo' that is recognized as unjust (Scheuerman, 2018, p.53-54), and is therefore the target of new criticisms that seek to revise the Rawlsian canon and make the requirements of the concept more flexible. The aim of this research is to study, in three chapters, what is known as 'civil disobedience', with a focus on the national scenario and the consequences of liberal limitations in the approach to more recent social movements, as well as the repercussions of critical theories, also criticizing the indiscriminate use of the term 'civil disobedience', in order to avoid using the word for anti-democratic purposes. Finally, it is important to emphasize that civil disobedience is not examined as an antidote capable of solving all the problems of democracy in modern times, but as an important element for improving and reaffirming the Democratic Rule of Law, in order to keep the divergence between legality and legitimacy present, a conflict that keeps democracy alive. The methodology used is of a qualitative nature, developed through documentary bibliographic research procedures 10 centered on consulting books, scientific articles, dissertations, theses, governmental and non-governmental statistics, as well as case law.