13
How much control should a democratic government have over an individual’s freedom of action? Individual Freedom vs. Group Welfare

Individual Freedom vs. Group Welfare

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Individual Freedom vs. Group Welfare. How much control should a democratic government have over an individual’s freedom of action?. Rev. Martin Niemoller. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

How much control should a democratic government have over an individual’s freedom of action?

Individual Freedom vs. Group Welfare

Rev. Martin NiemollerIn Germany they first came for the Communists,

and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.

Then they came for me — and by that time no one was left to speak up.

FreedomFreedom to do what one wantsFreedom from being interfered with by

others

Canadian Bill of Rights (1960)Individuals “remain free only when freedom

is founded upon respect for moral and spiritual values and the rule of law.”

The state protects your freedom by restraining mine.

Obligation to obey the lawAmerican democracy “is founded on the principle

that observance of the law is the eternal safeguard of liberty and defiance of the law is the surest road to tyranny. ...Americans are free in short, to disagree with the law, but not to disobey it. For in a government of laws and not of men, no man, however prominent or powerful, and no mob, however unruly or boisterous, is entitled to defy a court of law.” President John F. Kennedy

No justification in disobedience because there is no guarantee that they will disobey only unjust laws.

Right to DisobeyDisobedience does settle some problems,

often for the better. Civil Rights movement of 1950s and 60s.

Brought about an end to legal segregation of African Americans

1955, in Montgomery, Alabama, Rosa Parks arrested and fined for not giving up her seat to a white passenger.

Martin Luther King Jr.King encouraged boycotting the

city’s bus company.Refused to answer violence with

violenceKing argued that it was

permissible to disobey unjust laws that were immoral and broke God’s laws.

Courage and leadership eventually contributed to the removal of legal segregation.

April 4, 1968, MLK Jr. assassinated in Memphis, Tennessee.

Mohandas GandhiBorn in India in 1869. Educated in

England as a lawyer.Moved to South Africa to help

improve position of Asians there.Returned to India in 1914, worked

to improve labour workers conditionsHunger strike

1920 began to work towards independent India.Non-cooperation movement; no

paying taxes, attending schools , hospitals or courts

GandhiBloody riots in 1921 leads Gandhi to teach

non-violence to IndiansMid 1920s protest on salt taxMarch to the coast with thousands of

supportersArrested by BritishHunger strike leads to British compromiseReturns to India to promote individual

disobedience rather than mass disobedience.

1948 assassinated “The light has gone out of our lives and there is darkness everywhere.” Nehru

Nelson Mandela, 1918-Worked with the African National

Congress (ANC) to help end racial segregation (apartheid)

ANC banned in 1960Mandela arrested in 1963, tried for

treason and sentenced to life imprisonment.Violence had become inevitable; he had

offered responsible leadership. Without violence, there would be no way open for African to succeed in struggle against White supremacy. Of the four forms of violence possible, sabotage was chosen...

Frederick W. De Klerk, president of South Africa, freed black prisoners in 1990 as a sign of good will in ending apartheid.

Civil disobedience in CanadaRiel rebellionWinnipeg General Strike 1919Doukhobor rebellion 19291935 On-to-Ottawa trek1960 FLQ crisis1990 Oka crisis

issuesDoes one have a moral responsibility to

disobey unjust laws?If one believes that civil disobedience can

sometimes be justified, what are the limits to its uses?

Is a democratic society ever justified in suspending democratic rights?

Is Canada’s protection of individual rights interfering with our ability to deal with crime?