Insurrection is "armed revolt". A rioter who throws a Molotov Cocktail at a riot is potentially guilty of insurrection. When he picks up a brick and throws it he might be guilty of insurrection.
The tricky thing about "Insurrection" in cases like this is that "intent" is very difficult to prove. Forcibly taking over, occupying and then burning a police station is a clear attack on public order. But did a troubled youth throw a brick to destroy public order or was he breaking a window to loot a store?
Sedition is incitement for insurrection or resistance to lawful authority.
By the second half of the definition for "Sedition", Mahatma Gandhi and Desmond Tutu were guilty of "Sedition" because they questioned the legitimacy of the "lawful authority" of the government.
Under the second half of the definition, resisting arrest is a form of sedition. Because of the broadness with which the second part can be applied, the term is generally reserved for events where there is strong evidence of "insurrection".
Without physical evidence of weapons or tools to breach doors or maps identifying specific targets it is inappropriate to call the events of January 6 "Insurrection" and a stretch to call it "Sedition".
I will call the demon cats response “evil political venders”.
ReplyDeleteInteresting ERJ. I would have colloquially defined insurrection as an armed attempt overthrow an existing government and sedition a non-armed attempt to overthrow the government forcefully. And to your definition, both Gandhi and Tutu (and others; Lech Walesa comes to mind) would have certainly been accused of one or both: governments do not like to have their authority challenged.
ReplyDeleteGandhi has been on my mind of late, partially because of a friends' research paper but also partially because he had a very different way of getting results.
Vendetta- spejjcheck at work.
ReplyDeleteThe government as The Mad Hatter, "The word means what I say it means!"
ReplyDeleteLike beauty, it's in the eye of the beholder.
ReplyDeleteThe BLM riots were/are insurrection.
ReplyDeleteConcur with all.
ReplyDeleteYou didn't say what it was though.
ReplyDeleteIn any case, the supreme court is going to rule on it. That will be very interesting.
Questioning the legitimacy of a government or the honesty of the process said government used to attain power is NEVER seditious. Neither is peacefully protesting such a questionable path to power. Attempting to imprison or destroy anyone doing the above is defacto proof of the illegitimacy of such a government.
ReplyDelete