Thoreau uses the Mexican American War as the example of civil disobedience within the government. He claims the will of the people is no longer a priority for the government. Since the governments supports slavery and its practice of aggressive war. Thoreau states this fits his criteria for an unjust government. After six years of Thoreau not paying his taxes, which is him no longer participating in the institution he is arrested.
In his essay, “Resistance to Civil Government,” often times dubbed, “Civil Disobedience,” Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862) argues against abiding to 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.
...cience?? He believed that conscience should tell a person what to do not just a majority vote. To follow a government blindly ruins people they should only trust what they believe is right. The use of civil disobedience is a respectable way of protesting a governments rule. When someone believes that they are being forced into following unjust laws they should stand up for what they believe in no matter the consequences because it is not just one individual they are protesting for they are protesting for the well-being of a nation.
In Henry David Thoreau’s “Civil Disobedience”, he writes about why citizens should disobey government’s unjust laws. The American government was established to execute people’s wills, and this should not be forgotten. Citizens who totally rely on government believe that government symbolizes honesty, justice, rights and protection. In this way, citizens will comply with all the laws which the government formulates without thinking whether they are right or not. However, while the time is changing, government has been changing its morality principal.
The North did not believe in slavery and wanted no part in owning another human being because that believed that it was wrong and unhuman and that god had not approved of owning a slave. The Northern parts and Southern parts of America experienced the session crises very differently, with the Northerners looking at ending slavery over a graduated period of time and the Southerners demanding the rights that they own come to them from the Constitution of America and states’ rights that were given to them with the help of their Southern leaders who were more responsible for the session crisis than the Northern leaders were. The civil war was a war between the Union and Confederacy in the United States or between the North and the South. One of the major causes why the civil war broke out was because of slavery. In the book At the Precipice
The Government has the power to send men against their will to fight in a war that they probably do not even understand. Men with good intentions are under the control of people with selfish intentions. Thoreau states that it isn’t the American Government that has led to all the success of the nation, but the American people. It is better to respect what your conscious deems as morally right as what the law permits as a right. Thoreau protests the manipulation of the Government by corrupt individuals, and believes that in order to be a true countrymen you must be willing to stand against the rampant corruption and abuse that is your Government.
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.
The violent Civil War would never have started without the rise of political and social conflicts. Political issues such as the Dred Scott Decision and the Election of 1860 developed tensions that led to the Civil War. When Dred Scott, an African American, sued for his freedom, the Supreme Court formed the Dred Scott Decision. Scott sued based on the Missouri Compromise, and stated that he had been in free land when his owner died, therefore he should be free. This application to sue was deemed invalid by the Supreme Court it ruled that any African Americans, including Scott, would never become citizens.
Civil disobedience originated from Henry David Thoreau in his essay in which he refused to pay the state poll tax that was embedded by the American government in order to raise money to start a war in Mexico and to enforce the Fugitive Slave Law (Furtak, 2005). In my understanding civil disobedience refers to the refusal to follow certain laws or to pay taxes and fines, in a non-violent form of political protest. Any individual out there will find a law in which they don’t wish to agree with, it could be for personal reasons, religious reasons, or it may just go against their beliefs. Thus it is unethical to stop someone from expressing his or her beliefs in a form, which does not cause any form of trouble. I will argue for the view that citizens do indeed have a moral right to engage in acts of civil disobedience in a mannerly form.
When California, New Mexico, and Utah applied to be admitted as states in 1849, the perplexity of preserving equilibrium baffled the government and its people. According to southerners and those who were pro-slavery, the Constitution had, in fact, recognized slavery. Since Southern men had aided in the acquirement of the new lands, they also believed ... ... middle of paper ... ...each region considered the other its enemy. Ever since the establishment of America, the Constitution vowed to conjoin the nation and bring the people together. Although this was the dream of the Founding Fathers, it failed to achieve its peak when slavery came into argument.