More handpicked essays just for you.
Comments And Questions About Civil Disobedience By Henry David Thoreau
Thoreau essay on civil disobedience
What makes Thoreau and / or his essay "Civil Disobedience" unique or different from gandhi and the freedom riders
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Both Gandhi and King were influenced by Thoreau’s “Civil Disobedience”. King was influenced by Gandhi. Thoreau first coined civil disobedience, but the likes of Jesus, and many other historical figures practice some form of breaking current laws to pressure governments to change laws or promote what they believed morally right. Each of these men practiced this and they did so while starting it could be done peacefully.
King summed up his own definition of civil disobedience by explaining the four steps that comprise it in one of the important quotes from “Letter from Birmingham Jail”: “collection of the facts to determine whether injustices exist; negotiation; self- purification; and direct action”. In this way, the reader sees that King has built upon Thoreau’s conceptualization of civil disobedience as a process of becoming right with oneself then following up with an action. King also stated “’The turn-the-other-cheek’ philosophy and the ‘love-your-enemies’
…show more content…
God is the image of the vow for He never strays from His own law. Truth is the first premise: nothing exists except the Truth and Truth is God and God is the Truth. Without Truth there is no true knowledge. Loyalty to the Truth is the only reason of existence. This requires Truth in speech, thought and action. Realizing truth requires single-minded devotion and often involves self-suffering and even death, with no trace of self-interest.
In his essay on civil disobedience Thoreau encourages, in one of the important quotes from “Civil Disobedience”, “every man make known what kind of government would command his respect as one step toward obtaining it”. Civil disobedience is the strategy for believing one’s beliefs. As this thesis statement for “Civil Disobedience” suggests, the author acts on civil disobedience by explaining the thoughts and emotions that should guide it, and these include having a sense of rightness and moral
"an unjust law is no law at all."- quote by St. Augustine who was an Christian theologian and philosopher, whose writings influenced the development of Western Christianity. Martin Luther King Jr. was a baptist minister and civil rights leader that made advancements for civil rights peacefully, exclusively for African Americans in America. Mohandas Gandhi was a non-violent leader of the Indian independence movement against British rule. Accordingly, both MLK Jr. and Gandhi were leaders for civil rights that practiced and preached non-violent approaches for their freedom.Martin Luther King Jr. and Mohandas Gandhi were both valid in their judgment to break the law for their peaceful protests.
King and Thoreau?s approach to civil disobedience is a more civilized way to protest than those at the WTO. King in his letter of response to the Birmingham clergy, ?Letter from Birmingham Jail? he list four basics steps to a non-violent campaign: collection of the facts to determine if injustice exist; negotiation; self-purification; and direct action (174). In his letter he points out that the individuals involved in the campaign attended a series of workshops on nonviolence. During the workshops individuals were to ask themselves if they were able to accept blows without retaliating and if they could endure the ordeal of jail (174). Thoreau?s approach is slightly different at an individual level but yet was nonviolent. He refused to pay his poll tax, which he felt was unjust. The result was he was arrested and jailed. He applied a type of civil disobedience without eliciting violence.
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 of the need for a civil protest to the unjust laws created against the slaves and the Mexican-American war.
In his essay “On the Duty of Civil Disobedience,” Henry David Thoreau starts off by saying, “Government is best which governs least” (Thoreau 98). Thoreau clearly states that he is not an anarchist and does not believe that government should be abolished. Rather, he believes that we are entitled to a better government that is based upon morality and justice. Thoreau explores the idea of civil disobedience and challenges the role of government by describing his own incarceration for refusing to pay taxes during the Mexican-American War to expand slavery. When the government ceases to act morally, Thoreau argues that it is up to the individual to disobey and withdraw him or herself from the government. Thoreau...
...y, and also fidelity to the law. Acts of civil disobediences are aimed to defend principles of justice. In King’s case he aims to persuade the local government and the businesses to comply with desegregation laws. It was important for him to communicate fidelity to the law. You should lovingly break a law, because your reason behind protesting to to achieve what you see as a higher good. You are not directly hurting the people. King’s argument ultimately is you can break the law to make the law more just. You are attempting to break the law to show that the law is unjust, and it is an act of saying that the law can be made better than it is now. He’s gathered his facts and understanding of the law, it is 100% clear there’s a problem. For civil disobedience to be justified a real injustice must exist, or else it wouldn’t addresses a sense of justice of the majority.
Comparing the Civil Disobedience of Martin Luther King Jr., Henry David Thoreau, and Mohandas Gandhi
History has encountered many different individuals whom have each impacted the 21 in one way or another; two important men whom have revolted against the government in order to achieve justice are Henry David Thoreau and Martin Luther King Jr. Both men impacted numerous individuals with their powerful words, their words carried the ability to inspire both men and women to do right by their morality and not follow unjust laws. “On the Duty of Civil Disobedience” by David Henry Thoreau along with King’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail”, allow the audience to understand what it means to protest for what is moral.
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 has 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 in 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.
Justice is often misconceived as injustice, and thus some essential matters that require more legal attentions than the others are neglected; ergo, some individuals aim to change that. The principles of civil disobedience, which are advocated in both “Civil Disobedience” by Henry David Thoreau and “Letter from Birmingham Jail” by Martin Luther King Jr. to the society, is present up to this time in the U.S. for that purpose.
King viewed civil disobedience as an obligation if laws were unjust, especially if the proponents of the unjust laws were not willing to negotiate as well as compromise the laws and situations. King states “You are quite right in calling for negotiation.
The ideas of King are very similar to the ideas of Thoreau. Moreover, the “Letter from Birmingham Jail” shows that King, read the writings of many famous people. From these two reasons, King had probably read “Civil Disobedience” as an important document regarding justice and injustice. Therefore, the positions of the two writers are very close, and they cite conscience as a guide to obeying just laws.
Doctor Martin Luther King Jr.’s essay “Love, Law, and Civil Disobedience” has two main features. The first feature of King’s essay is a call for action; action to bring about change. The second feature, the more easily viewed feature of this essay is a call for a specific type of action to bring about a specific type of change. The change King wishes to bring about is a peace and equality brought about through non-violent actions.
There are many different opinions on whose moral responsibility civil disobedience is. Who should the responsibility fall to? The moral responsibility of civil disobedience should fall to the citizens being led, ruled, or governed.
Gandhi and King both agreed that nonviolence is accomplished by revolutionizing the relationship between adversaries, and that its strength lies in their commitment to justice. However, Gandhi puts emphasis on a need for personal suffering in the practice of nonviolence, a stance that is somewhat less aggressive than