Is opposition to tyranny justified? Is it coincidence that the places with the strictest rules against businesses (especially small businesses) and against religion are rules by a political party that has become well known for its opposition to both free enterprise and religion? Once the government allows (de facto) gatherings for secular or commercial purposes, but specifically bans religious gathering, it transforms a legitimate (even if misguided) public health policy which falls under the scope of Dina Malchusa Dina, into a specifically anti-religious policy which we can ignore. Once the Democrats in New York moved from public health concerns to using Covid19 to implement broader social and economic policies, the respect owed the sovereign dissipates.
Was it wrong for American Americans, with much help from others, to have engaged in peaceful protests and civil disobedience against “Jim Crow”, rather than engaging in armed resistance (the only other alternative offered)? Would it have better if the zionists had engaged only in civil disobedience and peaceful protests against the British (as did the people in India), rather than in armed resistance (and at the time most gedolim were opposed to armed resistance against the British).