Civil Disobedience and Peaceful Resistance
Civil disobedience and peaceful resistance were the crux of Henry David Thoreau's beliefs and those beliefs abide to influence today’s activists. Thoreau did not believe that we shouldn’t have a government, just a better, more improved and less involved government. Thoreau said "I heartily accept the motto, 'That government is best which governs least, and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly and systematically"(Thoreau). He also believed if the government would not improve, then its our duty to refuse to obey it. Thoreau wrote, "but it is his duty, at least, to wash his hands of it, and, if he gives it no thought longer, not to give it practically his support"(Thoreau). Thoreau believed that if the laws were
…show more content…
He also wrote, “A wise man will not leave justice to the chance of a majority vote. The majority will end up voting their interest, voting for what will benefit them. A principled person must follow his conscience” ( Civil Disobedience). He believed that people should do what they believe is the right thing to do, and if a person does find the law to be unjust then that person has an obligation to decline the government's law and distance oneself as a whole from the government. Thoreau believed that no one person is obligated to allocate his whole life to annihilating evils from the world, but he is obligated to not engage in the evils( Civil Disobedience ). Thoreau was convinced that anyone could not see how bad the government really was if they were working for it. Thoreau saw it as hypocritical if a person praised a soldier for refusing to fight, but then paying the taxes that sustains it. Thoreau was very big individualist; he wanted to fight what he believed, but didn’t want to have anyone else do it for him. Thoreau wrote, "If I devote myself to other pursuits and contemplations, I must first see, at least, that I do not pursue them
Thoreau talks about the politics, power and civil disobedience in his works. He believed that when many thought alike, the power was stronger within that minority. I think that Thoreau's intention was to point out that those people who dare to go against what seems to be unjust and go against the majority, and stand erect, are the people who transform society as a whole.
Henry David Thoreau and Martin Luther King, in “Civil Disobedience” and “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” respectively, both conjure a definitive argument on the rights of insubordination during specified epochs of societal injustice. Thoreau, in his enduring contemplation of life and its purpose, insightfully analyzes the conflicting relationship between the government and the people it governs. He considerately evokes the notion that the majority of people are restrained by the government and society from making decisions with consideration of their conscience and that people need to overcome the reign of the government to realize their own ethics and morals. King, in accordance, eloquently and passionately contends the injustice presented in the unfair treatment of and the discriminatory attitude towards Blacks. Even though, Thoreau successfully accentuates his main concerns in his argument, his effectiveness in persuasion—appeals, conclusion, and practical application—pales in comparison to that of King’s.
Many throughout history shared Thoreau’s opinion, especially those who were on the receiving end of the government’s unjust practices. Thoreau felt that a better government was needed and I would argue, that his words are still relevant today. There is always room for the government to improve. Thoreau wanted a government that didn’t just look to the interests of the powerful majority, one in which individuals with consciences lead, instead of a collective power making decisions for the individuals. The people have the right to resist a government that isn’t serving them properly or is treating them unjustly, or is using their funding for immoral causes; in fact, it is the people’s duty to do so, for only through civil disobedience can the people simulate change. Only through a changed government, a better government, will the American people experience true
Henry David Thoreau in his essay “Civil Disobedience” Thoreau asserts that men should react from their conscience. Thoreau believed it was the duty of a person to defy the law if his conscience says that the law is unjust. He believed this even if the law was made by a democratic action. Thoreau
In Chavez's argument, he explained the importance of nonviolence during the Civil Rights Movement. He used Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s movement as an example of successful protest using nonviolence. Although Dr. King's example proved to be effective, after he died, several members of the movement resorted to violence which caused the death of thousands of Americans. Chavez argued nonviolence is the only way to protest violence in order to attract support for his cause: the farm workers' movement. Chavez's rhetorical choices, through his tone and allusion to history, effectively influenced farmers to protest without violence.
Thoreau starts off his work by highlighting his acceptance of the motto "the government is best which governs the least", president-elect Donald Trump has made many claims that would call for him changing many of the systems set in place in the United States, giving the
In “Civil Disobedience” Thoreau claims that men should act from their conscience. Thoreau believed it was the duty of a person to disobey the law if his conscience says that the law is unjust. He believed this even if the law was made by a democratic process. Thoreau wrote that a law is not just, only because the majority votes for it. He wrote, “Can there not be a government in which the majorities do not virtually decide right and wrong, but conscience?” (Thoreau, P. 4). Thoreau wanted a government in the United States that would make the just laws based on conscience, because the people of the country would not let the elected representatives be unfair. Thoreau did not think people can disobey any law when they want to. He believed that people should obey just laws; however, Thoreau thought that not all laws were right, and he wrote that a man must obey what is right, not what is the law: “It is not desirable to cultivate a respect for the law, so much as for the right. The only obligation which I have a right to assume is to do at any time what I think right” (Thoreau, P. 4).
Thoreau begins his essay by stating “That government is best which governs not at all” (1). This statement sums up most of Thoreau’s overall view on government: that it would be better off nonexistent. Although he understands that this ideal, no-government situation is impossible or nearly impossible to exist, Thoreau makes many points to back up his idea of the perfect society.
Thoreau argues that the United States is an unjust government, and professes that people should always fight for what they know is just. He also believes in never obeying anything they do not believe in. Thoreau compares the government to a “wooden gun to the people themselves”
To conclude, Thoreau believed that people should be ruled by conscience and that people should fight against injustice through non-violence according to “Civil Disobedience.” Besides, he believed that we should simplify our lives and take some time to learn our essence in the nature. Moreover, he deemed that tradition and money were unimportant as he demonstrated in his book, Walden. I suggested that people should learn from Thoreau to live deliberately and spend more time to go to the nature instead of watching television, playing computer games, and among other things, such that we could discover who we were and be endeavored to build foundations on our dreams.
While it is true both Thoreau and King believe that individuals should do what they believe is right according to their beliefs and that it is equally appropriate to refuse unjust government rule, they both have contrast between the ways they are seen in the eyes of the government. While King stated that there should be some sort of governmental guidance, Thoreau said that society should take it upon themselves to function without a government. Thoreau was unsure of the effectiveness of reform within a government and based on the judgement of his own experiences, he was able to argue that petitioning for change achieves very little. These petitions led to their somewhat different views toward breaking unjust laws. Thoreau stated that 'if the injustice is part of the necessary friction of the machine of government, let it go', and he complemented this idea by saying that if the law 'is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then... break the law'.
In Henry David Thoreau’s “Civil Disobedience”, he writes about why citizens should disobey government’s unjust laws. The American government was established to execute people’s wills, and this should not be forgotten. Citizens who totally rely on government believe that government symbolizes honesty, justice, rights and protection. In this way, citizens will comply with all the laws which the government formulates without thinking whether they are right or not. However, while the time is changing, government has been changing its morality principal. For example, some high level governors might misuse government’s right for individual interest. Also, Henry David Thoreau argues that the American government uses the excuse of benefiting
Envision marching on the capital for something that can affect the whole country.Now Imagine doing this without harming anyone or any type of violent action,That's what civil disobedience is. The exact definition of civil disobedience is “ a peaceful form of political protest. Civil disobedience ideals are not that radical and it has been around for many years.These are just some examples we have seen thorough the ages. “The declaration of independence”, “Non Violent resistance” (Gandhi),and “A letter from the birmingham jail”(MLK) all show many examples of civil disobedience.
My thesis and argument is that civil disobedience is a beneficial technique for people to express and potentially receive what they want. In addition to MLK, even if it’s not necessary for negotiation, I believe that civil disobedience helps people make positive changes within their society. MLK thought that civil disobedience was sometimes necessary for creating the conditions of negotiations. He believed that the government would not know that people have issues with the laws if they did not protest. Civil disobedience in a society is a way for minorities to be heard within their society. It causes more attention than some other forms of protests, and therefore the protesters have a higher chance of being heard. If people do not protest,