Thomas Hobbes and a right of resistance.

Hobbes allows a right of resistence in only one case: where the sovereign seeks to kill, wound or imprison a subject, the subject is not obliged to suffer meekly; he has the right to resist. The subject submitted to the sovereign to get security, and it is therephore against reason that he should not resist when the sovereign seek to deprive him of it. Moreover, men are so made that they always act for their  own advantage. Therefore, when the resistance is clearly to his advantage, a man will resist, whether or not he has undertaken not to. He is not obliged to do what he cannot do and he cannot refrain from resistance where a grave evikl threatens him unless he believes that resistance is hopeless. The right of resistance is thus confined by Hobbes to the right of self-defence. No man may resist than the sovreign to defend other men or for the sake of a law higher than the sovereign's. Obedience is obligatory except where, on psychological grounds, it is impossible, and there must be no disobedience for conscience sake in no way abridges the right of the sovereign in carrying out his sentence. It is not a right dangerous to peace, for the man who exercises it stands alone against the sovereign. The man who threatens the peace is not the one who reists for dear life's sake or who by his crimes puts himself in a position where a desperate course is the least unsafe open to him; it is the man who challenges the sovereign on principle and has a cause which he expects other men to join.
Casalino Pierluigi, on June 28th 2014