Successful democracies rely on an active citizenry. They require citizens to participate by voting, serving on juries, and running for office. But what happens when those citizens purposefully opt out of politics? Exit-the act of leaving-is often thought of as purely instinctual, a part of the human ""fight or flight"" response, or, alternatively, motivated by an anti-participatory, self-centered impulse. However, in this eye-opening book, Jennet Kirkpatrick argues that the concept of exit deserves closer scrutiny. She names and examines several examples of political withdrawal, from Thoreau decamping to Walden to slaves fleeing to the North during the Civil War. In doing so, Kirkpatrick not only explores what happens when people make the decision to remove themselves, but also expands our understanding of exit as a political act, illustrating how political systems change in the aftermath of actual or threatened departure. Moreover, she reframes the decision to refuse to play along-whether as a fugitive slave, a dissident who is exiled but whose influence remains, or a government in exile-as one that shapes political discourse, historically and today.

"This fine study explores the compatibilities and tensions between rule by the people and the rule of law. Grounded in history, it offers a rich and articulate analysis of actual violent conflicts. Informed by political theory, it provides a sophisticated and timely reflection on manifestations of conflicts of values in American democracy and their implications for liberal justice and politics."--Marianne Constable, University of California, Berkeley

"Jennet Kirkpatrick has done something quite remarkable in this book. She has taken a set of unsavory characters--vigilantes, members of lynch mobs, and far-right militiamen--studied their arguments, and placed them within the tradition of political theory. She demonstrates that understanding is the necessary prelude to criticism. And she adds militant abolitionists to the mix so that we can't resist the demonstration. The result is a wonderfully illuminating argument."--Michael Walzer, professor emeritus, Institute for Advanced Study

"Kirkpatrick has written a wonderful book--thoughtful, provocative, elegant, and unexpected. She begins with a jolting historical point: the United States has a long history of domestic terrorists. These are not revolutionaries seeking to overthrow the American regime but rather men and women pursuing democratic ideals and, as they see it, the promises made by the Constitution itself. This is an important book."--James A. Morone, author of "Hellfire Nation: The Politics of Sin in American History"

"Kirkpatrick presents a clear and important argument, namely that the wish for an immediate and coherent connection between the moral values or will of any group and what the law says or does is dangerousand ultimately incompatible with democratic politics. "Uncivil Disobedience" is an intriguing study of the origins and philosophies of violent citizen action groups in the United States."--Austin Sarat, Amherst College

"An outstanding piece of scholarship. Kirkpatrick refers to the 'dangerous potential of democratic ideas.' This is a very apt phrase, and it is an expression of what she explores in this very original and thought-provoking book. Kirkpatrick is not at all hostile to American democracy, but she is very alert to its pitfalls. She is a social scientist in the best sense of the term."--Richard Maxwell Brown, University of Oregon

Successful democracies rely on an active citizenry. They require citizens to participate by voting, serving on juries, and running for office. But what happens when those citizens purposefully opt out of politics? Exit-the act of leaving-is often thought of as purely instinctual, a part of the human ""fight or flight"" response, or, alternatively, motivated by an anti-participatory, self-centered impulse. However, in this eye-opening book, Jennet Kirkpatrick argues that the concept of exit deserves closer scrutiny. She names and examines several examples of political withdrawal, from Thoreau decamping to Walden to slaves fleeing to the North during the Civil War. In doing so, Kirkpatrick not only explores what happens when people make the decision to remove themselves, but also expands our understanding of exit as a political act, illustrating how political systems change in the aftermath of actual or threatened departure. Moreover, she reframes the decision to refuse to play along-whether as a fugitive slave, a dissident who is exiled but whose influence remains, or a government in exile-as one that shapes political discourse, historically and today.