Civil Disobedience Rhetorical Analysis

1391 Words3 Pages

“Civil Disobedience” by Henry David Thoreau discusses the negative impact of the American government, focusing on how a good government is most beneficial when it does not govern. Thoreau additionally discusses how the government continuously loses its integrity as people take advantage of it. The government gets in the way of the good the people can do. In contrast to Thoreau’s ideas, the Canadian government benefits society and provides services that improve quality of life. In addition to the differences in government styles between the countries. “Civil Disobedience” was written during a time when slavery was prevalent in society. The government provides services such as employment which allows people to contribute and gain self-dependence. …show more content…

1). 1). The adage of the adage. Overall, the government organises police services that act to enforce laws and protect the people living under the government. The government provides services such as employment, healthcare, and military and police services in order to improve the quality of life for everyone. In contrast to Thoreau’s idea that the government is taken advantage of by its people, it can also be used to benefit people. The government provides job opportunities, due to their importance. Not only for the purpose of earning money, but also for mental health purposes. Comparatively, the provision of healthcare still needs to be improved; however, the need for improvement is recognized by the government. Furthermore, military and police services are organised by all levels of government to enforce laws and for public protection. Thoreau discusses the negative aspects of government, during a time of slavery. In addition to the misuse of the government by the people. In contrast, the government can have many positive effects on life. The government can improve and negatively affect quality of life through its

Open Document