Dienst van SURF
© 2025 SURF
In this article, the author will question the seemingly obvious boundary between civil disobedience, as conceptualised by Rawls and Arendt, and several examples of criminal, or simply annoying, activities which don't meet their criteria, such as the case of the ‘Top 50'. The ‘Top 50' are multi-problem Dutch-Caribbean men, who refuse to adapt to predominant norms in Dutch society. IThe author argues that political aspects of their behaviour should be acknowledged, even if they engage in criminal behaviour and don't present explicit political goals. Firstly, she questions the way in which Rawls based his definition on a centralistic conception of governmental power and contrast it with Foucault's conception of normalising power, in which power is diffuse and cannot be restricted to the enactment of formal laws. Secondly, she discusses what the minimum requirements are to be able to classifyacts as civil disobedience. Rawls and Arendt draw a clear line between criminal behaviour and civil disobedience, but their requirements may be too strict. We might miss signals of injustice if actions that do not meet these criteria are excluded from the political discourse. The conclusion is that comparing Arendt's and Rawls' conception of civil disobedience with the behaviour of a marginal migrant group may be useful in questioning the boundaries of this concept and in making it more inclusive. A wider conception of civil disobedience may help to explain the meaning of deviant behaviour in terms of social critique and to challenge the traditional understanding of civil disobedience.
Just like learning in the brain, social progress (development) is based on accommodating and assimilating. We structure the information from the outside world on the basis of what we already know (assimilate them in our knowledge structures). If the information does not fit in already present knowledge structures - accommodations - these structures are accommodated. Progress is based on both applying, and adjusting rules.
MULTIFILE
INAUGURAL LECTURE The world is in disarray. Species are extinct, climates are changing, we are becoming unhealthier.To liberate ourselves from this doom scenario we need to take care of ourselves and our environment. The solutions of former generations offer no future solace. Moreover, these caused the current problems. Instead of exploiting our environment for energy, resources and capacity we need to increase the potential for the recuperation of the environment, the planet and our minds. Instead of taking, giving!The reciprocity of the urbanized land we live in should be our main objective. The professorship Spatial Transformations - Sustainability will therefore design and plan for our physical and mentalcity and surroundings. This way the city becomes a purification machine for polluted water and acts as a net carbon sink. The city becomes a source of biodiversity, transformed into an urban nature reserve. Food will be produced that extends our lives. And wouldn’t it be nice to see the city as a place for contemplation so our mental abilities can grow instead of vegetating in dull offices? The city should offer people a healthy life, replenish resources and be beautiful. The professorship contributes to educating a new generation finding extraordinary solutions for current problems. With creativity, initiative and a healthy dose of disobedience this must work!