Civil Disobedience Rhetorical Analysis

Non-violent civil disobedience occurs when the refusal to obey certain laws or governmental demands for the purpose of influencing legislation or government policy is characterized by the employment of techniques such as boycotting, picketing, and the nonpayment of taxes. Henry David Thoreau, author of “Civil Disobedience,” participated in a form of non-violent civil disobedience which involved a simple action of rebellion resulting in a night at prison. Thoreau’s essay and the march from Selma to Montgomery led by Martin Luther King Jr., both had the same outlook on unjust laws, the courage to act against the government, and the awareness of the consequences due to their actions.
100 years after the finalization of the Civil War, African

Americans were still facing barriers, which prevented them from having the right to vote. On a Sunday morning in March 1965, State Troopers of Alabama at the order of Governor George Wallace, were put to work on a group of African Americans leading a march across the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Alabama. Using whips, clubs and even tear gas, the troopers tortured defenseless protestors, injuring 57. The march was originally planned to start in Selma, Alabama and end at the state capitol, Montgomery. This was organized by voting rights leaders after civil rights activist, Jimmie Lee Jackson, had been murdered during a protest. The march was organized by chairman of the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) John Lewis and Hosea William who were assistants of Martin Luther King, Jr. The voting rights campaign led by the SNCC had targeted Selma because it had one of the lowest ratios of African-American voters to white voters, and they figured that the brutality of the local law would bring about national attention, causing President Johnson and Congress to create new voting rights. More than half of the population in Selma were African Americans but only 200 were registered to vote.
The event became known as ‘‘Bloody Sunday,’’ and national publicity such as televised coverage, triggered intense national outrage. Lewis, who was severely beaten, stated: ‘‘I don’t see how President Johnson can send troops to Vietnam. I don’t see how he can send troops to the Congo. I don’t see how he can send troops to Africa and can’t send troops to Selma,’’ (Reed, ‘‘Alabama Police Use Gas’’). That evening King began a bombardment of telegrams and public statements, calling for religious leaders from all over the nation to join in a peaceful, nonviolent march for freedom. While King and Selma activists made plans to renew the march again, a few days later Federal District Court Judge Frank M. Johnson, Jr. informed the movement attorney, Fred Gray, that he would issue a restraining order that prohibited the march until at least March 11th. President Johnson also pressured King to call off the march until the federal court order could provide protection to the marchers. Forced to consider whether to disobey the court order, King proceeded to the Edmund Pettus Bridge on the afternoon of March 9th.
King directed more than 2,000 marchers including hundreds of clergy who had responded to his call on short notice.

Many marchers were critical of King’s unexpected decision to push on to Montgomery. President Johnson, issued a public statement: ‘‘Americans everywhere join in deploring the brutality with which a number of Negro citizens of Alabama were treated when they sought to dramatize their deep and sincere interest in attaining the precious right to vote’’ (Johnson, ‘‘Statement by the President,’’ 272). Johnson assured to introduce a voting rights bill to Congress within a few days. On May 15th, in a televised address to a joint session of Congress, Johnson compared the events in Selma to the events in Lexington and Concord during the Revolutionary War. He then proceeded to unveil his voting rights bill to the legislators and the nation. That August, Congress passed the Voting Rights Act, which suspended the use of literacy tests as a requirement for voter registration and guaranteed the right to vote. The passage of the law also encouraged Johnson, King, and other activists to think more sincerely about tackling other pressing issues, which divide Americans along racial

lines.
Henry David Thoreau, author of “Civil Disobedience,” took on in a form of non-violent civil disobedience, which involved the nonpayment of taxes.

Thoreau believed that taxes shouldn’t be paid because they were specifically aiding the Mexican-American War, which he deeply opposed as well as slavery. Because of his actions, he was sent to jail to face his consequences. While in jail, Thoreau wrote a famous essay known as, “Civil Disobedience." Thoreau's "Civil Disobedience," expresses the need to emphasize conscience over law. It criticizes American institutions and policies, and mostly focuses on slavery and the Mexican-American

War.
Thoreau begins his essay by arguing that government rarely proves itself useful and that it derives its power from the majority because they are the strongest group. When a government is unjust, people should refuse to follow the law and distance themselves from the government in general. A person is not obligated to devote their life to eliminating harm from the world, but they are obligated not to participate in such troubles. This includes not being a member of an unjust institution such as the government, as Thoreau expresses. Thoreau then argues that the United States fits his criteria for an unjust government, given its support of slavery and its participation of aggressive war. He presents his own experiences as a model for how to relate to an unjust government.
Since its publication in 1849, "Civil Disobedience" has motivated many leaders of protest movements globally. This non-violent approach to political and social resistance has influenced American civil rights movement activist Martin Luther King Jr. and also Mohandas Gandhi, who helped India win independence from Great Britain, among many others. The ideas and thought processes of Martin Luther King Jr., and Thoreau, both revolve around the unjust power of the government. Both men chose to rebel and accept the consequences due to their actions. Yet African Americans, like Martin Luther King Jr., followed in Thoreau’s footsteps by partaking in acts of civil disobedience. Protests and peaceful gatherings drew attention to the issue while keeping it from escalating into a much more violent problem. The ideology that was created by Thoreau aided the activists and the government in their quest for equality and a more just system of law. Both Martin Luther King Jr. and Henry David Thoreau have the same ideas, but view them differently. King wanted to ultimately raise awareness and open doors for the better of a group. However, Thoreau wanted more individual rights for people.