More handpicked essays just for you.
Thoreau essay on civil disobedience
Thoreau essay on civil disobedience
Analysis of Henry David Thoreau's Civil Disobedience
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Henry David Thoreau argues “That government is best which governs least…That government is best which governs not at all” (1) as the first statement in his essay Civil Disobedience. They have thoroughly stated Thoreau’s attitude towards the idea of government and he later expresses more in the essay. Thoreau is a prominent American poet, philosopher, essayist, and lifelong abolitionist during the 19th century. As the supporter of Transcendentalism movement, he publishes many works to protest against the general state of intellectualism and spirituality at that time. His essay Civil Disobedience is one of his famous works to stand up for the ideas of prioritizing people’s conscience and ability of thinking before the policies of government, denouncing the corrupted United States government, and criticizing American social institutions and …show more content…
issues such as slavery and the Mexican-American War. In addition, he believes that the government should be merely a tool for carrying out the will of the people, but it also can become a tool of abusive power since most people follow its orders without any question. In other words, his viewpoints completely oppose the concept of “nationalism” because its definition is to be loyalty and devotion to one’s own nation and national goals and dictates above one’s own will; these interpretations may seem dangerous and dehumanized to Thoreau.
Hence, in the essay Civil Disobedience, he uses the three rhetorical devices which are pathos, ethos, and logos to demonstrate his strong stance on nationalism and persuade the audience to accept his point of view and fight against the evil government together. In order to provoke readers’ emotions of anger and sympathy, Thoreau not only use various and provocative descriptions in the essay, but he also shares his personal story to enlarge people’s bad feeling toward the government. In the fifth paragraph of his essay, he argues “The mass of men serve the state thus, not as men mainly, but as machines, with their bodies” (2) because he thinks that people who work for the government or the state cannot consider as human at all; they are governmental machines from spirit to body. Furthermore, Thoreau uses contemptuous attitude to describe these servile followers; he classified them as “a lump of dirt” and “worth only as horses and dogs” (2) to enrage the targeted audience like officials and government employees to make them rethink where are their existences as independent individuals, not just the puppets of the government. Moreover, Thoreau illustrates his point by relating his own experience. He states: “I have paid no poll-tax for six years.
I was put into a jail once on this account, for one night… I could not help being struck with the foolishness of that institution which treated me as if I were mere flesh and blood and bones, to be locked up… As they could not reach me, they had resolved to punish my body” (8).
By this narration of living in jail, he wants the readers to feel pity on his situation and disgusts with government. For instance, he emphasizes how bad the prison guards treat him; there is no any respect to him as a human being and they punish him physically. Overall, Thoreau skillfully uses pathos as a great tool to awaken the audience’s conscience and ability of thinking. .
By proving his credibility and reliability to the readers, Thoreau wields ethos to strengthen the persuasiveness of his essay. For example, in the third paragraph of part 2, he
writes: “Unjust laws exist… Why does it not cherish its wise minority? Why does it cry and resist before it is hurt? Why does it not encourage its citizens to be on the alert to point out its faults, and do better than it would have them? Why does it always crucify Christ, and excommunicate Copernicus and Luther, and pronounce Washington and Franklin rebels?” (5) At the beginning of this paragraph, he gives a strong statement first to make the audience have a premise that injustice exists in the society; then he throws out many rhetorical questions, including the stories of historical figures like Jesus Christ to let them evaluate “government’s justice” again. In addition, Thoreau also appeals the moral sense from his audience. He writes that government officials such as politicians, legislators, or ministers are “the standing army, and the militia, jailers, constables…there is no free exercise whatever of the judgment or of the moral sense…they are as likely to serve the devil, without intending it, as God” (2) because they just follow government’s order and never think does it right or wrong. Thus, Thoreau uses these well examples to wake up and escape from government’s brainwashing. Last but not least, Thoreau applies logos to prove his readers that even though just only one person protest against the government, his power will grow bigger and bigger until the government transform. He explains “if one HONEST man, in this State of Massachusetts, ceasing to hold slaves, were actually to withdraw from this copartnership and be locked up in the county jail therefore, it would be the abolition of slavery in America” (6). In fact, this powerful statement is the main theme that he wants to tell the audience because an important historical movement actually only needs few men to begin, just like he says no matter “how small the beginning may seem to be: what is once well done is done forever” (6). Therefore, by using the statistic example, Thoreau tries to encourage more and more people to take action and stop the injustice things such as slavery. Ultimately, Thoreau’s Civil Disobedience truly demonstrates his minds, beliefs, and thoughts. He believes that government is useless and not helpful to its citizens because it brainwash people in order to make them follow its rules blindly. For instance, it proposes many injustice laws like Fugitive Slave Act to against human rights and liberty. As the result, he writes this essay to stimulate people’s minds and conscience, and he hopes if more and more people stand up, they can accomplish the reform and establish a new type of government with righteousness and morality. Additionally, I think that this essay is a masterpiece on how to persuade people. Throughout the entire article, he skillfully uses the three rhetorical devices – pathos, egos, and logos to strengthen its effects on the readers. He uses diverse techniques including storytelling, rhetorical questions, statistics, and etc. to impress the audience profoundly. Overall, Thoreau truly demonstrates his ideal dream of the U.S. government by using these three devices.
In conclusion, the play The Night Thoreau Spent in Jail focuses on the character and historic transcendentalist Henry David Thoreau. During Act I, Henry and Ellen Sewell share multiple interactions in which each character has their own intentions. Henry desires to teach Ellen how to be an individual and also to make Ellen genuinely happy. Ellen, on the other hand, desires to learn from Henry’s lifestyle and beliefs to become a better educated woman but does not intend more than that. Therefore, Ellen and Henry do not share mutual intentions which leads to the failure of their
Henry David Thoreau was a poet, social philosopher, and educator in the early to mid- 1800s (Hampton). He graduated from Harvard University in 1837 and, upon his return to his hometown of Concord, Massachusetts, befriended Ralph Waldo Emerson, also a philosopher and poet (Hampton, “Ralph Waldo Emerson”). Emerson was also the leader of the Transcendentalist movement which was based on the idea that people should lead by example -- social reform begins with the individual, not the government -- and that the movement should be peaceful (Woodlief, Ruehl). Thoreau agreed with this approach until the United States invaded Mexico in May, 1846 (Brown, Witherell). Opposed to slavery, Thoreau saw the invasion of Mexico as an attempt by the government to extend slavery westward. In his essay “On the Duty of Civil Disobedience,” published in 1849 with the original title, “Resistance to Civil Government,” Thoreau protests against the government and states that is a man’s duty to rise up against the government when the government commits a wrong (Thoreau). In his writings, Thoreau uses the three rhetorical approaches of Pathos, Ethos, and Logos in his attempts to persuade his readers to his point of view (Heinrichs).
Thoreau conveys many points in his writing and a large recurring one is the state of society. As stated before, he believed that people are too focused on physical gain and modernization which leads them into desperation. He adds on to this belief later in the book asking that above all else whether it be money or fame he be given honesty (Thoreau 246). To Thoreau, the truth is more important than anything measurable in status. Thoreau believes that a minimalist lifestyle is a good lifestyle, similar to Mccandless. He speaks of how it is good that he can put all of his belonging in one pile in his yard because it removes the clutter from his life (Thoreau 85). He also says that his best quality in life is to want very little, because it keeps himself true to himself and keeps him from distraction. Thoreau also believes that every man should be one in himself not oppressed by the government. He says that everyone should be able to be themselves whether is is in accord with the government or not (Thoreau 240). He is essentially saying that the government should not be a part of people's life decisions only to maintain the
Throughout the passage many devices appear so the reader can have a deeper understanding of Thoreau’s attitude towards life. “Let us spend one day as deliberately as Nature, and not be thrown off the track by every nutshell and mosquito’s wing that falls on the rails. Let us rise early and fast, or break fast, gently and without perturbation;
“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.
Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862) was an American philosopher, author, poet, abolitionist, and naturalist. He was famous for his essay, “Civil Disobedience”, and his book, Walden. He believed in individual conscience and nonviolent acts of political resistance to protest unfair laws. Moreover, he valued the importance of observing nature, being individual, and living in a simple life by his own values. His writings later influenced the thoughts of Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr. In “Civil Disobedience” and Walden, he advocated individual nonviolent resistance to the unjust state and reflected his simple living in the nature.
In conclusion, by temporarily removing himself from society and thrusting himself into nature, we are better able to understand how Thoreau conveys his attitude towards life. He believes that in order to enjoy it one must free himself or herself from the high-tempo nature of society, live life more simplistically, and experience the reality that is hidden by all the things that are irrelevant in our
His ideas of taking action against government corruption instead of just shyly agreeing or sinking into the shadows of the societal majority is a universal message that can apply to anyone at anytime. Like his revolutionary predecessors, Thoreau establishes a compelling argument that resonates in the hearts of man and pushes them to rise up. America is founded upon the ideals of democracy and being governed by the people. Thoreau, almost a century after America gained its independence, reestablishes these importance of these principles in our society through his essay. He is not only a Transcendentalist, but also a
In his essay, “Resistance to Civil Government,” often times dubbed, “Civil Disobedience,” Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862) argues against abiding by one’s State, in protest to the unjust laws within its government. Among many things, Thoreau was an American author, poet, and philosopher. He was a firm believer in the idea of civil disobedience, the act of refusing to obey certain laws of a government that are felt to be unjust. He opposed the laws regarding slavery, and did not support the Mexican-American war, believing it to be a tactic by the Southerners to spread slavery to the Southwest. To show his lack of support for the American government, he refused to pay his taxes.
Would everyone like to see how the community is affected ? The community and neighborhood is facing some major consequences. According to “Excerpts Civil Disobedience” by Henry David Thoreau described how this one person refused to pay the taxes to the government he decides to say something but his saying resulted to him being sent to prison for trying to stand up to the government. The government has not been telling us the actual issues . Based on the excerpt from the “Civil Disobedience” there are exactly three main points to the story. The first main idea is the people have been using their own ideas to try to get a way to end the government way for all of us to live because we need to see the point for all of us to live a life in
When Thoreau returned home his family noticed a change in his personality. He was no longer accepting people’s opinions as facts but would shock people with his own independent and unconventional opinions. He desired to live his life with the freedom to think and act as he wished. He obtained a local teaching job and refused to Flog children as punishment. Instead he would give moral lectures. The community objected to this method of punishment and forced Thoreau to flog his incorrigible children. That day Thoreau flogged six students and then turned in his resignation. He did so believing that physical punishment should have no place in education.
While Emerson and Thoreau certainly have difference of opinions, they recognize the need for public discussion and discourse. Emerson declares “a foolish consistency” to be “the hobgoblin of little minds” (Emerson 367). This is shown in their essays “Self-Reliance” and “Civil Disobedience” in which they support individuality and personal expression. Despite their contrasting views of society and government, the two most prominent transcendentalists in literary history share a passionate belief in the necessity that every American must exercise their constitutional rights and make known their views even and especially if it challenges the status quo.
The purpose of this short story was to inform uneducated citizens of his opinion on the state and give a bit of reason behind it, its also meant to criticize the government and social policies like slavery. Thoreau induces emotion among readers and forces them to think logically about his way of life and what he’s suggesting. Overall Thoreau wrote the paper to justify his stand and explain his way of thinking.
Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862) was a philosopher and writer who is well known for his criticism of the American government during the time. During Thoreau’s life, there were two major issues being debated in the United States: slavery and the Mexican-American War. Both issues greatly influenced his essay, as he actually practiced civil disobedience in his own life by refusing to pay taxes in protest of the Mexican War. He states that the government should be based on conscience and that citizens should refuse to follow the law and have the duty not to participate and stay as a member of an unjust institution like the government. I argue that the notion of individualism and skepticism toward government is essential to the basis of many important reform movements in the modern society.
Henry David Thoreau was an American philosopher lived in 19th century, when young and feeble American society was not powerful as nowadays. His illustrious work called as “Civil disobedience” demonstrated his polar point of view towards unjust government. Objection to pay taxes, protests, follow own conscience are only some of the methods of disobeying. His main point is that any man, who treats himself as a conscience man, should differentiate laws in order to determine which law is right or wrong, and consequently no to obey that unjust law. I mostly agree with this statement, and this essay will show how does he reach such conclusion and will provide arguments for and against to this statement.