IMHO version of "Effective, massive, unprecedented civil disobedience in protest of SC re Roe?"

OK, as a prefatory note, this was posted originally in “Great Debates” but closed by a mod because he felt it was encouraging people to offer illegal suggestions and also because, in his view, I was calling on the good people of the Straight Dope to rise as one and storm the castle, beheading our foes and stabbing babies with pitchforks and whatnot, so I want to specifically and clearly have it known at the outset that nothing of the sort is intended. Rather I am hoping to have LEGAL means of expressing outrage posted here, and (once we have a few suggestions posted of the sort I have in mind) then discussing which of them might be most effective, rather than most satisfying emotionally.

What I am proposing would weirdly still seem to fall under the heading of “Great Debates” to me, so I want to be clear also that I do not consider this topic to be “less-than-cosmic.” Indeed, I consider it to be gravely challenging to my basic human rights and certainly to my rights as an American citizen. I am asking for proposals for truly radical (but LEGAL!!) means of effecting a change in the Supreme Court’s abortion decision, such that any harm to American citizens might be practically mitigated in the short term. Such suggestions as “Vote!” or “Shout Slogans in Large Groups!” are NOT what I’m seeking here–these things are perennials, and while well-intended, haven’t been very effective so far and don’t look to be effective in the short term. (They are, of course, still necessary, just not germane to the OP here.)

Anyway, enough preface. The original OP (the OOP, if you will) is posted below this paragraph. If you read any calls to action, or inciting to illegal acts, into it, that is purely your inference–I am implying nothing of the kind:

While I share the frustration of all the people turning out to demonstrate against SCOTUS, the only effect that has on the white-supremacist minority is to please them and amuse them. What would be the most effective form of civil disobedience that might have some effect?

I’m asking you to think outside the box, but realistically too. It would almost necessarily have to be something that was difficult to organize and costly to those engaging in it. Maybe it’s very expensive too so there would need to be a lot of fundraising done, and it might have a long learning curve involved to educate enough women and men to participate–I’m talking about a longterm, serious, dedicated effort that will, unlike screaming your head off in a public park, make the white supremacists think, “Wow, we’ve gone too far this time” or even “Maybe we need to leave the U.S.” OK, that last one was crazy talk, but you know what I mean here.

I think.

And just to be safe, as the Mods are trying to figure out exactly how “civil disobedience” figures into their prohibition of discussing illegal acts on the SD (a Mod just PMed me to tell me such a discussion is ongoing), maybe we can broaden the term “civil disobedience” to include other tactics that might not come under that category, strictly defined. A large-scale boycott, for example, on a scale never seen in American history, isn’t exactly an act of civil disobedience but it’s in a similar general category.

No thank you. “Civil disobedience” has a very specific definition, and history is full of very brave people who broke the law and accepted the consequences - just and unjust - of their actions with open eyes. There’s absolutely no reason to water down the term.

Since you’re still have trouble understanding the concept, here again is a definition to take to heart:

civ·il dis·o·be·di·ence

/ˈsivil ˈˌdisəˈbēdēəns/


  1. the refusal to comply with certain laws or to pay taxes and fines, as a peaceful form of political protest.

You’re still calling for illegal activity while pretending otherwise. Whether or not such activity is justified is another matter, but it would be a good idea to stop talking about “civil disobedience” here, even in a nudge-nudge-wink-wink fashion.


Closed until an IMHO mod gets here.


Yes, civil disobedience has a specific meaning. And that meaning includes breaking the law to do it. While i admire several people who have broken laws for good causes, I note that the terms of service is this site explicitly forbid anything encouraging illegal activities. And that includes civil disobedience.

If you (@Roger_That ) want to continue posting here, you need to recognize that and stop pushing the boundaries.

Oops, i didn’t see that @Chronos had closed the thread. I’m going to leave it closed while the mods discuss the situation. It’s likely to remain closed. My mod note stands, however.

Okay, This thread is staying closed. It’s possible a similar thread, that does not refer to “civil disobedience” may be allowed, but the mods are working on clarifying the rules around “calls to action”, and I think it would be best to wait until then to try another thread.