I don't think politicians do view their actions toward us with a moral (i'll use 'moral' instead of 'altruistic') light. I think they should. Kind of a guide to judge how they really treat us.
When civil disobedience is justified is a very tough question. I'll say when it violates conscious, then civil disobedience is morally justified. This is a more stringent requirement, i think, than merely thinking the law to be unfair. I'm not sure whether we should criminally punish those who partake in civil disobedience though (draft dodgers for example). I've read arguments on both sides, and I'm leaning towards that we should criminally punish them. But I see the obvious paradox.
so tough to many dispicable actions have been done with "moral" intentions. It isnt up to the govt to determine morals in my mind. The govt is set to govern the constituents given the parameters that are constrained by not set morality in the US. To say that their actions are based in morality is overstepping their bounds in my mind.
What about the means and ability to be disobidient?
you do realize that even with ability without the means to do so the disobedience will not be succesful right?
If you agree that their is a time and place for civil disobedience against a government then you must agree that the govt must have a healthy fear of its constituents.
If not then civil disobedience is nothing more than political masturbation.