Henry David Thoreau in his 1849 essay, “Civil Disobedience” claims that our top priority is to do the things that we think is right, and our second priority is to do what the government thinks is right. However, I believe this order that Thoreau suggest we follow is very disagreeable, and our political obligations should be prioritized in comparison to the other things we do.
Our modern day political obligations are part of countless examples in which our priority should be to what our government thinks is right, not what we think is right. Noone is ever excited about Jury duty, opening their mailbox one day and finding that their presence in court is mandatory is not exhilarating. Although for some its against their own wishes the obligations they have to the government to help decide the faith of another citizen is part of their civil duty as a citizen of the United States. Thoreau’s belief that we should prioritize what we think is right over what the government thinks is right is proven false under this example in our modern day lives. We owe to our government our presence to help give our opinions in the court of law. If we did not follow our political obligations and support the government then why would they protect us if we do not help to support ourselves. We may think that our presence is unnecessary, and otherwise think that our daily activities are more important but the amount of people it affects is less substantial than our presence in court, otherwise making what we think is right less of a priority then what the government thinks is right.
Yet another example in our modern day society proving Thoreau’s claim as invalid is in the United States Military the obligations the soldiers have to the government need to b...
... middle of paper ...
...ze the government over what she thought was right. For Katniss opposing the ideas of what the government had wanted her to do put so many people she knew and loved at risk making it her responsibility to prioritize and answer to the governments issues first. With the use of “The Hunger Games” Thoreau idea that one should prioritize what they want above what the government wants is suppressed.
While Thoreau claims that our number one priority is to do the things that we think is right, and then our second priority is to do what the government thinks is right, in actuality through my understanding on the world around me his statement is protestable. Certainly doing what we think is right first is good but the benefits that doing what the government wants has a greater impact on many of those around us making it important to expedite our obligations to the government.
Thoreau talks about the politics, power and civil disobedience in his works. He believed that when many thought alike, the power was stronger within that minority. I think that Thoreau's intention was to point out that those people who dare to go against what seems to be unjust and go against the majority, and stand erect, are the people who transform society as a whole.
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
“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.
Thoreau is targeting all of the American citizens with this essay. He is making a statement to them and trying to convince them that as a whole we need to make a stand against the American government. Thoreau is attempting to demonstrate his self-reliance against the government. He upholds his specific principles and encouraged nonaggressive acts of political resistance to protest government policy. An example of his resistance is when he states “that he cannot without disgrace be associated with it. I cannot for an instant recognize that political organization as my government which is the slave's government also”. The two major issues occurring during the writing of this essay were the Mexican-American war and slavery. During this time period many northerners began to push against slavery causing a divide in the American society. The Mexican-American War ...
In Thoreau’s view, he felt that the government was insufficient. At times such as these, government may not always be the best way to turn, yet it provides guidelines. This theme in his essay is just another opinion. Justice cannot be fully defined in one sentence by every person. It depends on the background and the experiences one has had.
This letter covers the ways in which peaceful protest and standing up against injustice can lead to positive results. Both pieces conveyed a similar message of standing up for what is right. The strongest rhetorical methods which Thoreau uses are allusions, logos, ethos and rhetorical questions. However, King’s use of Thoreau’s piece was written prior to the civil war, and was in response to the Mexican-American war and slavery in some territories. It was intended for US citizens; more specifically, those who are unhappy with the way the United States government is ran.
Thoreau was against the The Mexican American War and the act of Slavery in our society and was very skeptical towards the U.S government regarding these issues. The U.S government did more to harm the citizens of America more than it did to protect them and Thoreau realized that and was not afraid to speak his mind.. The law will never make men free; it is men who have got to make the law free” Thoreau is saying that don't just wait for change to come, make the change happen. He stand for what is right regardless of the consequences, therefore, he wanted the citizens of America to be bold enough to do the same.
Rather, he should always protest for his autonomy. Thoreau expands on this subject in Civil Disobedience. After expressing his desires for a small government, he questions the idea of government itself: “Must the citizen ever for a moment...resign his conscience to the legislator?...[W]e should be men first, and subjects afterwards” (Civil Disobedience 171). Placing the individual over the government, Thoreau shows his passion for the self. That person’s actions may go awry, but, at least, the person still has the right to learn from his or her wrongs. Thoreau likens a meaningful existence with unyielding trust in a person’s inner voice. Without nurturing this voice, an individual loses his or her personhood. Such unwavering loyalty to the self best characterizes the transcendental ideal life, where one only needs to follow intuition to be
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.
Thoreau explains “There are thousands who are in opinion opposed to slavery and to the war, who yet in effect do nothing to put an end to them; who, esteeming themselves children of Washington and Franklin” (Thoreau 3). George Washington and Benjamin Franklin are two prominent figures of American nationalism and independence, and many American citizens regard them as idols. Thoreau exploits their credential to motivate people to take actions against an ineffective government and oppose the war and slavery in the U.S. Thoreau also questions citizens by explaining what is ethical as a citizen. Thoreau states “but they do nothing in earnest and with effect. They will wait, well disposed, for others to remedy the evil, that they may no longer have it to regret” (Thoreau 4). Thoreau explains that people of the U.S. do not put in their efforts to change such as voting or protesting, yet they still expect other people to discard evils such as corruption, slavery, and government tyranny. Thoreau justifies the uselessness as unethical and condemns the citizens. By using the word such as evil, Thoreau wants people to fight against the evil, government tyranny, and express the true American nationalism. The author employs ethos throughout Civil Disobedience to make the people of the U.S. ethical and become more involved with the problems about the
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.
...goals, they both discuss similar topics of morality and justice under a government’s rule. In hopes of informing and motivating people, Thoreau and King explain how and why these people should take non-violent action towards unjust laws. From each author’s vivid examples and brilliant analogies, we learn the importance of fighting for justice and maintaining morality. Most importantly, Thoreau and King argue in favor of civil disobedience not only to inspire a fight for freedom from the government, but also to ensure that the people’s God given rights and rights to individuality are preserved for generations.
In “Civil Disobedience” Thoreau claims that men should act from their conscience. Thoreau believed it was the duty of a person to disobey the law if his conscience says that the law is unjust. He believed this even if the law was made by a democratic process. Thoreau wrote that a law is not just, only because the majority votes for it. He wrote, “Can there not be a government in which the majorities do not virtually decide right and wrong, but conscience?” (Thoreau, P. 4). Thoreau wanted a government in the United States that would make the just laws based on conscience, because the people of the country would not let the elected representatives be unfair. Thoreau did not think people can disobey any law when they want to. He believed that people should obey just laws; however, Thoreau thought that not all laws were right, and he wrote that a man must obey what is right, not what is the law: “It is not desirable to cultivate a respect for the law, so much as for the right. The only obligation which I have a right to assume is to do at any time what I think right” (Thoreau, P. 4).
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).
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...