Civil disobedience in a democracy is morally justified.

It is indeed a pleasure, Having read your argument I was astonished by your use of such an excellent quotation. And indeed, such is the case. With totalitarian rulers. However, the very essence of democracy means that you yourself can vote for a government. A government picked by a majority, which, in the very definition of democracy, can be rid of by the ballot. Going against the will of democracy is, by definition, going against the will of the majority. Protest is not necessary, the power of the people lies in the vote. Is it not wrong to oppose a government which your people themselves have chosen? Is it not necessary that people comply with the will of the majority, something proven to be the safest form of government and most secure, due to the removal of the chance of tyranny. Is it not fatuous if the people oppose what they themselves have chosen? Especially considering as the government can be replaced with a vote. So, assuming that the people in general agree with the government I would also like to question why a small group of people, with whom the average person disagrees why should the people rise up against the government. For me indubitably, the argument you have stated, is quite a twisted one. The very nature of a democracy is that it provokes and shall provoke change depending on the will of the people. It is democracy that has brought us all the social reform, as politicians have had to make promises specific to certain groups. The arguments you have used, firstly, the declaration of independence, that was not a democracy for the Americans. They were under the foot of the British government and they freed themselves. Also who are we to claim that such a government is acting tyrannically, who are we to question the morality of that government? We are merely a majority. Out of social protest many evils have risen. A lot of unnecessary change has happened. The prime example being the nationalist socialist rise to power. Another example could be Mr Vladimir Putin, a Russian dictator who has risen out of a turbulent Russian democracy. These examples have led to the deaths of many people. The reason for this is that the mob mentality, whereby a protest may just go too far. And it shall often do so, causing a lot of harm. Democracy in itself is a catalyst for change, social movements can reverse it and can cause to a lot of death and pain. People are easy to manipulate, a truth that has been exploited many times. Not as individuals but as a mob. Hence why there are so many quotes encouraging us to be ourselves, to be independent. This allows us to separate ourselves from the words of those who try urge us on, to form a mob and to march against something can be very dangerous and can easily escalate. We should do everything to fight this sort of protest. After all: " Mob law is the most forcible expression of an abnormal public opinion; it shows that society is rotten to the core", as Timothy Thomas Fortune once said. Before I end, I would like to emphasise that it is democracy that has brought change and evolution to the system. People are naturally moral creatures and it is the people that rule in a democracy. Social protest can now show itself through politics and through voting, hence I'd say that the days of violent civil disobedience have passed. Would you not agree that people have evolved to more peaceful means of serving such matters, through democracy itself? For me the dangers of violent protests are too much, in any democracy there should be no such thing, everything should be sorted purely through democracy. I thank you for allowing me to speak and for this great opportunity of debating with you. and I am happy to debate such an important topic.