Rebellion Against Oppressive Law: A Citizen's Duty

When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty is a quote often attributed to Thomas Jefferson, the third president of the United States and the writer of the Declaration of Independence. However, there is no evidence that he ever said this, and the Thomas Jefferson Foundation has called the quote spurious. The quote has also been credited to other famous figures such as Nelson Mandela, but its true origin remains unknown. Despite this, the sentiment expressed in the quote captures some of the ideas that Jefferson conveyed in the Declaration of Independence, and he is known to have expressed similar thoughts in his letters, such as I like a little rebellion now and then. It is like a storm in the atmosphere.

Resistance to unjust laws

The concept of political obligation asserts that citizens ought to abide by the laws of their state. However, this notion is challenged when laws are deemed unacceptable or unjust by the people. In such cases, blind obedience to unjust laws can lead to revolutions and regime change. The nature of law itself is ambiguous, and its definition is subject to varying interpretations. Nonetheless, laws are generally understood as a set of rules, regulations, and principles established by a competent authority to maintain order, protect rights, and promote prosperity in society.

The purpose of law is also a subject of debate among political thinkers. Some argue that laws should maintain law and order, protect the rights of citizens, and promote prosperity. In recent times, the focus has shifted towards the concept of a welfare state, where the state assumes broader responsibilities for its citizens. One important purpose of law is distributive justice, which aims for a fair division of social benefits and burdens among all members of society. Ultimately, the goal of law is justice, and a law-abiding society is generally preferable to lawlessness or anarchy.

When it comes to unjust laws, the debate revolves around the relationship between morality and law. While morality pertains to ethics, law relates to jurisprudence, and the two are not always aligned. The moral basis of obligation is a matter of personal choice, and individuals must decide whether to obey laws that conflict with their moral compass, particularly when those laws are political in nature.

Natural law theorists, such as Locke and Rousseau, sanction disobedience to immoral laws, while positivists like Hobbes argue that disobedience to law is not legally valid, even if the law is morally wrong. German jurist Gustav Radbruch proposed a middle ground, suggesting that a positivist enactment cannot be valid if it violates fundamental moral principles.

In conclusion, resistance to unjust laws is a complex and multifaceted issue. While the rule of law is essential for maintaining order and stability, it is also crucial to recognize that laws can be unjust and oppressive. In such cases, individuals and societies may find it necessary to engage in acts of civil disobedience or revolution to bring about social change and uphold their rights and freedoms.

The right to rebel

The phrase "when law becomes oppression, rebellion becomes duty" is often misattributed to Thomas Jefferson, the third president of the United States. While Jefferson did believe in rebellion and conveyed this sentiment in his letters, there is no evidence that he used this specific phrase. The Thomas Jefferson Foundation, which maintains his property at Monticello, could not find the saying anywhere in Jefferson's writings.

Despite this, the phrase captures some of the ideas that Jefferson expressed in the Declaration of Independence, such as the notion that when a long train of abuses and usurpations evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is the right and duty of the people to overthrow such a government.

The idea of a right to rebel against oppressive laws has been expressed by other notable figures as well. For example, Henry David Thoreau, a 19th-century American author and philosopher, is known for his essay "Civil Disobedience," in which he argued that individuals have a duty to resist and disobey unjust laws.

In conclusion, while the phrase "when law becomes oppression, rebellion becomes duty" may be misattributed to Thomas Jefferson, it reflects a long-standing debate about the right to resist and overthrow oppressive governments. This right to rebel is a complex and contentious issue that has been discussed by philosophers, activists, and politicians throughout history.

Moral responsibility

The phrase "when law becomes oppression, rebellion becomes duty" is often misattributed to Thomas Jefferson. While he did advocate for rebellion in his letters, the phrase itself has no evidence of being coined by him. The phrase first appeared in 2006, although it had been in circulation for decades, and was likely popularized by social activists in Australia.

Thomas Jefferson, in his letters, expressed a similar sentiment, stating, "The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions, that I wish it to be always kept alive... I like a little rebellion now and then. It is like a storm in the atmosphere." He recognized the importance of challenging authority, even if it may sometimes be misguided, as a means to preserve freedom and ensure that the government does not become tyrannical.

The moral responsibility to rebel against oppressive laws stems from the belief that individuals have inherent rights, such as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, that should not be infringed upon by unjust laws or governments. When a government or legal system becomes oppressive and fails to uphold these rights, it is the duty of the people to resist and overthrow such a government.

However, it is essential to recognize that the interpretation of what constitutes "oppression" or "injustice" can vary among individuals and communities. What may be considered oppressive to one group may not be viewed the same by another. Therefore, moral responsibility in this context also entails a duty to critically analyze the impact of laws and to collectively organize and act in pursuit of a more just society.

In summary, when law becomes oppression, rebellion can be seen as a moral duty. This responsibility arises from the belief in inherent individual rights and the understanding that resistance is necessary to safeguard those rights when they are infringed upon by unjust laws or governments. While the interpretation of what constitutes oppression may vary, the collective pursuit of justice and freedom remains a fundamental aspect of this moral responsibility.

The duty to protect country from the government

The phrase "when law becomes oppression, rebellion becomes duty" has been attributed to Thomas Jefferson, although it has not been found in his writings. It captures some of the ideas that Jefferson expressed in the Declaration of Independence, such as the right and duty of the people to overthrow a despotic government.

This idea underscores the notion that it is the duty of citizens to protect their country from an oppressive government. When a government engages in a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing a consistent object of absolute despotism, it is the right and duty of the people to resist and overthrow such a government.

In the context of the United States, the Constitution and the Supreme Court play a crucial role in safeguarding citizens' rights and liberties. The Fourteenth Amendment, for example, prohibits the government from taking lives or liberty without due process, while the Fourth Amendment prohibits unreasonable seizures. The Supreme Court has interpreted the Constitution as restraining the government from depriving individuals of their liberties, such as freedom of speech, protection from unreasonable searches, and freedom from cruel and unusual punishments.

However, the Supreme Court has generally been reluctant to find that the Constitution imposes affirmative obligations on the government to protect citizens from harm caused by private actors. For instance, in the case of DeShaney vs Winnebago Department of Social Service (1989), the Court ruled that the state had no constitutional duty to protect an individual from an abusive father, absent a "special relationship" such as in state institutions.

Despite this, citizens have a duty to resist and rebel against an oppressive government when it infringes on their fundamental rights and liberties. This duty is rooted in the belief that the government should serve the people and protect their freedoms, rather than become a tool of oppression.

The spirit of resistance

Throughout history, there have been countless examples of the spirit of resistance in action. From the American Revolution, led by Thomas Jefferson and his compatriots, to the civil rights movement, where figures like Martin Luther King, Jr. and Rosa Parks risked their lives to challenge unjust laws and demand change. In both these cases, and many others, people recognised that the laws and systems in place were oppressive and unjust, and they knew that it was their duty to resist and create a better, more equitable future.

Resistance can take many forms, from peaceful protests and civil disobedience to more radical acts of rebellion. It is a powerful tool that can be used to create positive change and uphold the values of freedom, equality, and justice. However, it is important to remember that resistance is not without risk. Those who choose to resist often face backlash, punishment, or even violence. But despite these risks, the spirit of resistance persists, driven by the knowledge that the cost of inaction is often far greater than the cost of standing up for what is right.

Frequently asked questions