Civil Disobedience, Henry David Thoreau

1158 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Thoreau’s philosophy

"That government is best which governs least." Or is it? Should the American people be free to rebel against laws they consider unjust? Henry David Thoreau addresses these issues in his essay, Civil Disobedience. Thoreau wholeheartedly accepts the declaration that the government is best which governs least, and would like to see it acted upon. One day, he hopes, we will be able to carry it out to the point where men can have a government that does not govern at all. Government "never of itself furthered any enterprise". He claims that the character of the American people, rather than the government, has kept the country free, settled the west and educated the people. If the government had not interfered, the people would have accomplished even more. Thoreau goes on to claim that we should not decide what is 'right' by majority, but rather by individual conscience. If an individual believes a law to be unjust, he should not obey the law. Thoreau had some good, high-sounding ideas, but it appears he did not understand the reasoning behind some of what the government does. His views do not match up to the views found in the Constitution and the Bible.

Thoreau claims that we should not decide right by majority, but by conscience. The majority are not necessarily right; they are only in power because they are the strongest group of people. Any government in which the majority rules in all cases cannot be based on justice. Thoreau asks why there cannot be "a government in which majorities do not virtually decide right and wrong, but conscience? ... Must the citizen... resign his conscience to the legislator? Why has every man a conscience, then? I think that we should be men first, and subjects afterwards." One should cultivate a res...

... middle of paper ...

... what is right and wrong morally will have complete power, which can easily lead to a tyrannical ruler.

Thoreau says we should not obey unjust laws - yet, if everyone did this, people would begin to call 'unjust' laws that they did not particularly like or that were hard to follow. In addition, this exhortation is completely against Biblical teaching. We are to obey governing authorities unless their laws go against God's law. Minorities can influence the government, but not in the way that Thoreau advises. We should instead be an influence as Peter counsels us to be an influence,

"For it is God’s will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish men. Live as free men, but do not use your freedom as a cover-up for evil; live as servants of God. Show proper respect to everyone: Love the brotherhood of believers, fear God, honor the king."

Show More
Related

  • Comparisons On The Advocacies Of Henry Thoreau vs Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

    950 Words  | 2 Pages

    Although King, Jr. took many steps beyond Thoreau's advocacies of civil disobedience, his actions rang true to the central theme of standing powerfully, and non-violently, against an unjust system of government. Both advocated disconnecting oneself from social law as to better follow the divine laws set forth by God, and despite the great diversity in which each man carried out his beliefs, the underlying fact still remains: "we cannot, by total reliance on law, escape the duty to judge right and wrong" (Alexander Bickel), the distinction between just and unjust rests on the shoulders of mankind and it remains the duty of each individual to act accordingly.

    Read More

  • Civil Disobedience In The Civil Divergent, By Henry David Thoreau

    1024 Words  | 3 Pages

    Throughout a series of books, and now movies known as Divergent they hit a lot of points as to what is believed as a “good society”. In the series, Divergent all must conform and fall into a certain category Dauntless, Abnegation, Erudite, Candor, or Amity . If one fails to do so, and falls into all of the categories they are known as “Divergent," and must be killed for failing to conform to traditional society standards and rules. This relates to Civil Disobedience by Henry David Thoreau, because he talks about humans not needing a form of structure set by a hierarchy, such as a government. A good society according to Thoreau, is one with little to no government involvement, one that respects laws to a certain extent, and one that follows

    Read More

  • Rhetorical Analysis Of David Thoreau's Civil Disobedience To The Mexican War

    1646 Words  | 4 Pages

    In 1848, David Thoreau addressed and lectured civil disobedience to the Concord Lyceum in response to his jail time related to his protest of slavery and the Mexican War. In his lecture, Thoreau expresses in the beginning “That government is best which governs least,” which sets the topic for the rest of the lecture, and is arguably the overall theme of his speech. He chastises American institutions and policies, attempting to expand his views to others. In addition, he advances his views to his audience by way of urgency, analyzing the misdeeds of the government while stressing the time-critical importance of civil disobedience. Thoreau addresses civil disobedience to apprise the people the need for a civil protest to the unjust laws created

    Read More

  • Henry David Thoreau's Civil Disobedience and Martin Luther King's Letter from Birmingham Jail

    817 Words  | 2 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • On The Duty Of Civil Disobedience Rhetorical Analysis

    765 Words  | 2 Pages

    “All machines have their friction―and possibly this does enough good to counterbalance the evil… But when the friction comes to have its machine… I say, let us not have such a machine any longer” (Thoreau 8). In Henry David Thoreau’s essay “On the Duty of Civil Disobedience,” the author compares government to a machine, and its friction to inequity. He believes that when injustice overcomes a nation, it is time for that nation’s government to end. Thoreau is ashamed of his government, and says that civil disobedience can fight the system that is bringing his country down. Alas, his philosophy is defective: he does not identify the benefits of organized government, and fails to recognize the danger of a country without it. When looked into, Thoreau’s contempt for the government does not justify his argument against organized democracy.

    Read More

  • Henry David Thoreau and Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Justification of Defying Unjust Laws

    1828 Words  | 4 Pages

    In his famous essay, “Letter from Birmingham Jail,’’ Martin Luther King, Jr. cites conscience as a guide to obeying just laws and defying unjust laws. In the same way, Henry David Thoreau wrote in his famous essay, “Civil Disobedience,” that people should do what their conscience tells them and not obey unjust laws. The positions of the two writers are very close; they use a common theme of conscience, and they use a similar rhetorical appeal of ethos.

    Read More

  • Thoreau's Civil Disobedience and Walden

    1527 Words  | 4 Pages

    In “Civil Disobedience,” Thoreau stated that government should be expedient and conscientious. He started off his essay with his motto, “That government is best which governs least” and “That government is best which governs not at all.” He meant that we did not need a government that made rules and that the government should let the people do whatever they wanted to do. He believed that government should be expedient, not inexpedient. “Government is at best but an expedient; but most governments are usually, and all governments are sometimes, inexpedient.” He used a lot of examples to justify the inexpedient government. One of them was the Mexican-American war. “Witness the present Mexican war, the work of comparatively a few individuals using the standing government as their tool; for, in the outset, the people would not have consented to this measure…” It was inexpedient because war was just a tool for a few powerful individuals and did not have consent of the multitude. He believed that the government should help most of the people, not just a few rich people. In addition, the minority rule, in w...

    Read More

  • Justice in Henry David Thoreau’s Civil Disobedience

    934 Words  | 2 Pages

    ...for him to do). Instead Thoreau believes that as unjust and imperfect as democracy is at that particular time, he looks to better times, a time when legislators have more wisdom and integrity and hold humanity in a higher regard. He recognizes that fairness exists in the hearts and minds of individuals, some whom he knows personally and he holds to a hope that men like these can and will transform what is in their conscience into a “state at last which can afford to be just to all men and to treat the individual with respect…”

    Read More

  • We Must Fight the United States Government

    1205 Words  | 3 Pages

    Throughout modern American culture certain laws passed by the majority have been considered unjust by a wise minority. However, with the logical and emotional appeal of hard fought battles, voices have been heard, and the minds of the majority can sometimes be converted to see the truth. Thoreau, after spending a night in jail and seeing the truth hidden behind the propaganda of the majority, became convinced that he could no longer accept his government’s behavior of passing laws that benefit the majority with degrading the minority. It’s quite ironic that by the government imprisoning Thoreau he became freer then ever before. He was able to see how the government turned peaceably inclined men into controllable machines. Thoreau saw how the government dealt with its citizens as only a body, while completely disregarding the sense, intellect, and moral beliefs of its people. In his essay “Civil Disobedience,” Thoreau stated that “a government ruled by majority in all cases cannot be based on justice.” He further believed that “under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also prison.” This point made by Thoreau can be seen as the truth throughout history. A just man never sits by quietly watching the majority degrade the minority to suit their own immoral purposes. Like Thoreau, another just man who stood out from the quiet minority was Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. King was, as well, willing to suffer for his views to put an end to racial segregation, and was arrested on numerous occasions for holding strong in his believes and spreading his message throughout the minds of all God’s children. King often cited conscience as a guide to obeying just laws and disobeying unjust ones. In an essay written by King titled “A letter from Birmingham Jail,” King clearly defines the interpretation of the differerence between the two kinds of laws. “An unjust law is a code that a numerical or power majority group compels a minority group to obey but does not make binding on itself. This is a difference made legal. By the same token, a just law is a code that a majority compels a minority to follow and that it is willing to follow itself. This is sameness made legal.” To further understand this King quotes from St. Augustine himself who once stated “any law that uplifts human personality is just.

    Read More

  • Antigone, by Sophocles

    857 Words  | 2 Pages

    In a democracy, people choose representatives to lead and govern. However, these representatives might take unpopular steps. In such instances, the people may show their disapproval of a policy and vent their grievances through acts of civil disobedience. Henry Thoreau said, “It is not desirable to cultivate a respect for the law, so much as for the right.” It is both the right and responsibility of a person to fight an unjust law, and civil disobedience allows one to convey his thoughts and ideas in a passive, nonviolent way.

    Read More

  • Civil Obedience And Henry David Thoreau's Civil Disobedience

    1338 Words  | 3 Pages

    Civil Disobedience occurs when an individual or group of people are in violation of the law rather than a refusal of the system as a whole. There is evidence of civil disobedience dating back to the era after Jesus was born. Jesus followers broke the laws that went against their faith. An example of this is in Acts 4:19-20,”God told the church to preach the gospel, so they defied orders to keep quiet about Jesus,” In my opinion civil disobedience will always be needed in the world. The ability to identify with yourself and knowing right from wrong helps to explain my opinion. Often in society when civil

    Read More

  • Comparing Martin Luther King Jr. And Henry David Thoreau's Civil Disobedience

    865 Words  | 2 Pages

    In Martin Luther King Jr’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” he cites conscience as a guide to obeying just laws and disobeying unjust laws. In the same way, Henry David Thoreau wrote in his famous essay, “Civil Disobedience,” that people should do what their conscience tells them and refuse to follow unjust laws. The positions of the two writers are very close; they both use a common theme of conscience, and they use a similar rhetorical appeal to ethos.

    Read More

  • Civil Disobedience: Henry David Thoreau

    781 Words  | 2 Pages

    Thoreau espouses that the democratic party listens to and answers the majority, which are the desires of the most powerful group. The problem with this is that the most virtuous or thoughtful group is left aside because the government only pays attention to what the strongest group says. A government functioning on this principle cannot be based on justice, because the ideas of what is right and wrong is decided by the majority, not by conscience. Thoreau writes, "Must the citizen ever for a moment, or in the least degree, resign his conscience to the legislator? Why has every man a conscience, then? I think we should be men first, and subjects afterward. (p.178 para. 4)" He claims that it is more important for people to develop a respect for the right, instead of having a respect for the law, for it is people’s duty to do what is right.

    Read More

  • Thoreau Vs Socrates

    2023 Words  | 5 Pages

    There has been a long-established controversy over the duty of a citizen in a democracy, on which the Athenian philosopher, Socrates, and the American writer, Henry David Thoreau, had their own thoughts. Both philosophers had varying views on numerous subjects relating to government and conscience. Should the citizen obey all laws, even unjust ones? Or, should they rebel for the sake of doing what is right? Democracy is ruled by the people, for the people. In both Socrates’ time, and Thoreau’s, the question remains on whether this was, in practice, true. The two iconic philosophers’ opinions regarding the duty of the citizen in a democracy, the role of conscience, and the importance of nonviolent resistance, still influence people to this day. Their views augment the understanding people have of the current democracy, how consciences deal with right and wrong, and roles as citizens questioning every issue. Philosophy is often ingrained in the history, politics, and the environment

    Read More

  • Democracy in Civil Disobedience, Slavery in Massachusetts, Benito Cereno and Bartleby the Scrivener

    1539 Words  | 4 Pages

    In "Civil Disobedience," Thoreau criticizes the American government for its democratic nature, namely, the idea of majority ruling. Like earlier transcendentalists, such as Ralph Waldo Emerson, Thoreau believes in the importance of the individual. In a society where there are many individuals with conflicting perceptions and beliefs, Emerson chooses passivity and isolation to avoid conflict with others. However, unlike Emerson, Thoreau rejects passivity and challenges his readers to stand up against the government that focuses on majorities over individuals. Thoreau argues that when power is in the hands of the people, the majority rules, "not because they are most likely to be in the right, nor because this seems fairest to the minority, but because they are physically the strongest" (Thoreau 64). Thoreau portrays this very fundamental element of democracy, w...

    Read More

More about Civil Disobedience, Henry David Thoreau

Open Document