If an act of civil disobedience—willfully breaking a specific law in

Principle I: Civil disobedience cann't be justified if it is done for self and not out of a concern for others. (Can it be justified if it is done out of others? Don't know. But if it is justified, it mustn't be for oneself.)

Principle II: Civil disobedience is justified if it is required by one's conscience. (Is it not justified if it is not required by conscience? Don't know. But if it is not justified, it must mean that it is not required by conscience.)


(A) Keisha’s protest against what she perceived to be a brutal and repressive dictatorship in another country was an act of justified civil disobedience, because in organizing an illegal but peaceful demonstration calling for a return to democratic leadership in that country, she acted purely out of concern for the people of that country.
K acted out of concern for people. Therefore it is justified.
Not comforming to principle I. (In I we say if she acted out of concern for other people her action may or may not be justified, we don't know.)

(B) Janice’s protest against a law that forbade labor strikes was motivated solely by a desire to help local mine workers obtain fair wages. But her conscience did not require her to protest this law, so Janice didn’t perform an act of justified civil disobedience.
J's action was out of concern for others. J's action is not required by her conscious. Therefore it is not justified.
Not comforming to princeple I and II. We don't know if it is justifiable according to both I and II.

(C) In organizing an illegal protest against the practice in her country of having prison inmates work eighteen hours per day, Georgette performed an act of justified civil disobedience: though she acted out of concern for her fellow inmates rather than out of concern for herself.
G acted out of concern for others. Therefore G's action is justifiable.
Not conforming to Principle I. We don't know if it is justifiable.

(D) Maria’s deliberate violation of a law requiring prepublication government approval of all printed materials was an act of justified civil disobedience: though her interest as an owner of a publishing company would be served by repeal of the law, she violated the law because her conscience required doing so on behalf of all publishers.
M's action was required by her conscience. Therefore her action was justifiable.
Comforming to principle II.

(E) In organizing a parade of motorcyclists riding without helmets through the capital city, Louise’s act was not one of justified civil disobedience: she was willfully challenging a specific law requiring motorcyclists to wear helmets, but her conscience did not require her to organize the parade.
L's action was not required by her conscience. Therefore her action was justified.
Not comforming to Principle II. We don't know if it is justified.

(D)