Essay On Civil Disobedience And The Grapes Of Wrath

Many people have argued that the United States government is a corrupt institution. Henry David Thoreau in his essay, “Civil Disobedience,” justifies his refusal to pay taxes that support the Mexican-American War. John Steinbeck recants the journey and philosophy of migrant citizens traveling to California during the Great Depression in his novel, The Grapes of Wrath. Although these two works of literature may not always align with each other in every single aspect, they both possess the same ideology that the people are more powerful than the government when it does not conform to its rules. Grapes of Wrath and Civil Disobedience. The unity of the people is not based on the tactics of the government. Steinbeck elaborates on how multiple

Migratory family units “learned what rights must be observed” and, “although no one told them, what rights are monstrous and must be destroyed” (Steinbeck 265). On their own, the migrants develop an unofficial constitution with only the bare necessities that would create a functional society. This directly correlates with the idea “that government is best which govern least” and “government is at best an expedient” (Thoreau 1). In order to survive, people only need food, shelter, good health, and protection. As a result the government creates laws, agencies, and departments that intentionally help with this cause, but eventually their views are eclipsed by greed and corruption that alters their original goal. The people need a society they can rely on; one that has “good neighbors and friends” (Thoreau 11). Once one feels he or she lives in such a society that ensures their basic needs of survival, they can try to pursue the undeclared yet most important need: the need to find happiness. The people must know that each individual is capable of making the best out of their lives from the opportunities