When does it become ethical to overthrow your government?

It becomes ethical when the government becomes hollow, and starts reverting to tactics that it condemns. However, often this is not enough, to overthrow ones government one needs to ensure he has the support of all walks of life, not just his target audience.

As for the USA one might say that they got themselves into this mess as they nearly all voted for George Bush in the elections. Apparently they're not fed up with him yet.
O and V for Vendetta was the best movie i've seen in a dammn long time.
 
Challenger78 said:

As for the USA one might say that they got themselves into this mess as they nearly all voted for George Bush in the elections.
Click to expand...

While Bush's 2004 election is a disappointment above and beyond the usual, it must be pointed out that Bush won a slender victory (50.7% of popular vote) in a year that saw approximately 64% voter turnout. Bush was elected by approximately a third of the nation's vote-eligible. Yes, this is problematic in itself, &c., &c. And no, they're apparently not fed up with him yet. But still, it's hardly "nearly all". In fact, it's mostly the greedy and stupid that voted for Bush.
 
Tiassa said:
While Bush's 2004 election is a disappointment above and beyond the usual, it must be pointed out that Bush won a slender victory (50.7% of popular vote) in a year that saw approximately 64% voter turnout. Bush was elected by approximately a third of the nation's vote-eligible. Yes, this is problematic in itself, &c., &c. And no, they're apparently not fed up with him yet. But still, it's hardly "nearly all". In fact, it's mostly the greedy and stupid that voted for Bush.
Click to expand...

And who voted for the war to commence.....all of Congress so that puts them ALL in bed with each other I'd say. Don't just point at Bush when everyone else is voting with him and not trying to see the truth. Or perhaps they see the truth and just want to be as greedy as everyone else seems to be.
 
mountainhare said:
In your opinion, how 'bad' would the government of your country have to be before you were justified in overthrowing it, and bringing about chaos (V for Vendetta style)?
Click to expand...

I´m not much into violence, but un my opinion a Government needs to be overthrown at the moment they start going overseas to kill people for oil.
 
Cosmictraveler said:

And who voted for the war to commence.....all of Congress so that puts them ALL in bed with each other I'd say. Don't just point at Bush when everyone else is voting with him and not trying to see the truth. Or perhaps they see the truth and just want to be as greedy as everyone else seems to be.
Click to expand...

A fine point for a different discussion.
 
Like many things in life, this problem can be approached with a cost-benefit analysis. The cost of overthrowing a government is chaos for an indeterminate period of time. What's the benefit? Can the group that's plotting the overthrow, with the support they assume they have from disenfranchised citizens, build a better government than the one in power? History teaches us that in many cases they cannot.

The other issue is patience. Can you be sure that this government will not improve over time? Franco and Salazar died, and Spain and Portugal are now democracies. The Soviet Union collapsed under the weight of its fairytale economic experiment.

Finally one must consider the views of different communities of citizens. Do half the people have the right to overthrow a government that the other half like, resulting in all of them suffering and hoping that the same two groups will come up with a better system next time?

Or does overthrowing a government also include killing all the people who support it?
 
A government actually representative of the will of the people that protects fundamental liberties should never be overthrown.
 
Why? said:
A government actually representative of the will of the people that protects fundamental liberties should never be overthrown.
Click to expand...
Yes, but governments, like individuals, can go through bad patches. How do you decide that a government has finally become incorrigible? As I said, the people in Spain and Portugal were patient for decades and their patience was rewarded. The people in the USSR bode their time for almost a century.

How many bad presidents in a row should the American people tolerate before revolting? Especially since each one of them will have been the choice of a majority (ok, a near-majority) of the people who cared enough to vote. If the majority of the people don't vote, do they have a right to complain? To overthrow the government that was elected by the people who did vote?

What do you do when there is a genuine dichotomy in the country, when the will of half of the people is diametrically opposed to the will of the other half? Despotic leader or not, that was more or less the state of Iraq under Saddam.
 
mountainhare said:
In your opinion, how 'bad' would the government of your country have to be before you were justified in overthrowing it, and bringing about chaos (V for Vendetta style)?
Click to expand...

When the constitution is violated(in the U.S this should have happened AT LEAST by 1911).

In other words - now.
 
"When does it become ethical to overthrow your government?"

Ethical to whom? To the person doing the overthrowing? Or to the government officials who are being overthrown? Or to the innocent bystander who don't know what the fuck is going on?

To be "ethical", don't we have to have to be given some perspective of view?

Baron Max
 
How is it not apparent?

Baron, read the topic post. Combine it with the title. Here, we can do it together:

Title: When does it become ethical to overthrow your government?

Topic Post: In your opinion, how 'bad' would the government of your country have to be before you were justified in overthrowing it, and bringing about chaos (V for Vendetta style)?​

See the words "you" and "your"? I think that pretty clearly establishes the point of reference. The author--in this case Mountainhare--gets the implicit role of "me". He is asking "you", in this case, any reader who comes across the question and is willing to give it consideration. That "you" includes you Baron. When I read the question, I was assigned the role of "you". When you read the question, you are assigned the role of "you".

The question asks for your ethical assessment, Baron.
 
Last edited:
It's ethical to overthrow the government when you can find better people to run it. If you choose the wrong people you'll be screwed even more.
 
Tiassa said:
Baron, read the topic post. Combine it with the title. Here, we can do it together:

Title: When does it become ethical to overthrow your government?

Topic Post: In your opinion, how 'bad' would the government of your country have to be before you were justified in overthrowing it, and bringing about chaos (V for Vendetta style)?​

See the words "you" and "your"? I think that pretty clearly establishes the point of reference. The author--in this case Mountainhare--gets the implicit role of "me". He is asking "you", in this case, any reader who comes across the question and is willing to give it consideration. That "you" includes you Baron. When I read the question, I was assigned the role of "you". When you read the question, you are assigned the role of "you".

The question asks for your ethical assessment, Baron.
Click to expand...

In that case, it would only be ethical to me when the greater majority of the people being governed agreed that the government should be overthrown.

One person's idea of a poorly run government should have almost no place in determining when to overthrow ones government. By the same token, one person's idea of the "ethical right" to overthrow a government is an exercise in foolishness and egotism.

Baron Max
 
Mountainhare said:

I didn't think I'd ever be saying this, but thanks Tiassa. I tried to make my question as clear as possible.
Click to expand...

It happens now and again. I actually owe you an answer from somewhere earlier in the topic. I'll get back to it as soon as ... uh ... yeah, soon.
 
mountainhare said:
In your opinion, how 'bad' would the government of your country have to be before you were justified in overthrowing it, and bringing about chaos (V for Vendetta style)?
Click to expand...

Anytime you have enough support and charisma to become the new government.
 
mountainhare said:
In your opinion, how 'bad' would the government of your country have to be before you were justified in overthrowing it, and bringing about chaos (V for Vendetta style)?
Click to expand...

When it's infringing upon the people's right to a subservient government that protects their rights.

draqon said:
You are not justified in overthrowing the government...
Click to expand...

That's quite a dictatorial way of thinking. I'm divided on whether to call it fascist or communist.

draqon said:
unless you hold more power than that government.
Click to expand...

And when does the citizenry hold more power than the government?

EmptyForceOfChi said:
in my own mind it is ethical to blow up the house of parliment right now. but ofcourse i cant do that because its against the law, but not against my ethics.
Click to expand...

Would a government ever make such a thing legal? :p

draqon said:
no such thing,

I got more nukes, so I win. the end.
Click to expand...

It doesn't mean you're moral. You would have a better argument if you didn't bring morality into the question in the first place.

Hapsburg said:
The founders of the US rebelled about taxes on tea. And not even very good tea, at that. :D
Click to expand...

More specifically, they rebelled about taxes on tea and other things levied without the colonists being given the opportunity to vote on it, or to choose people who would vote on it for them. They were taxed without representation.

Challenger78 said:
As for the USA one might say that they got themselves into this mess as they nearly all voted for George Bush in the elections.
Click to expand...

I never voted for Bush. Neither did a majority of the people in the US. So your assertion is false.

Challenger78 said:
O and V for Vendetta was the best movie i've seen in a dammn long time.
Click to expand...

Agreed!

Baron Max said:
In that case, it would only be ethical to me when the greater majority of the people being governed agreed that the government should be overthrown.

One person's idea of a poorly run government should have almost no place in determining when to overthrow ones government. By the same token, one person's idea of the "ethical right" to overthrow a government is an exercise in foolishness and egotism.
Click to expand...

The problem with this, Baron, is that it is incompatible with the idea that the minority's rights should be protected against the tyranny of the majority, an idea that I should hope all people on this Earth value, not just Americans.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top