Henry David Thoreau - Civil Disobedience - Research Paper Example

Henry David Thoreau, “Civil Disobedience” “Civil Disobedience” is a political essay written by David Thoreau, an American transcendentalist. This essay is divided into three sections. In this essay Thoreau emphasized on the rights of human beings to not allow the governments to play havoc with their consciences. He wrote this essay to inform the citizens that if they let the governments play with their conscience; injustice, slavery and anarchy are inevitable. That is why this essay is also entitled as “Resistance to Civil government”. David Thoreau wrote this essay because he was revolted by the aftermath of the Mexican-American War. In addition to that, the slavery which caused intense issues in England motivated Thoreau to write this article. After seeing and experiencing the intolerable environment, Thoreau first gave a speech in 1848. This speech later took form of an essay and then was known as the “Civil Disobedience”. According to Thoreau, a man’s own opinion matters a lot and is in no way derogatory to the political decision. If a political decision is taken for the mankind, a man’s own decision is also very important for himself and his loved ones. So it is wrong to nullify that personal decision in order to bring their (governments’) own perspective. As Thoreau says: “[i]t 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... Law never made men a whit more just; and, by means of their respect for it, even the well-disposed are daily made the agents of injustice” (Thoreau). Thoreau goes on to say that an individual should not be tagged as a traitor or rebel only because he disagrees with the government’s point of view because he has the right to have his own opinion and to practice his own beliefs. Thoreau’s writing style, when it comes to this essay, is quite blunt and straightforward. Moreover considering the political upheaval of that time, the American Mexican War and the issue of slavery, writing this essay was a gigantic and a bold step. In his essay, Thoreau also gives references to the Massachusetts environment and writes: “who (people of Massachusetts) are more interested in commerce and agriculture than they are in humanity, and are not prepared to do justice to the slave and to Mexico, cost what it may... 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” (Thoreau). Thoreau shares his opinion about the government from the very beginning of the essay by saying: “That government is best which governs least.” According to him, a government only helps in snatching away the rights of the people and presents their will as the public’s will. So the overall result is convoluted and perverted. This is why he keeps on giving the example of Mexican American War. The behavior of the people is also affected by the government so what Thoreau is trying to say in this essay is that a government governs less or the public should be provided with a better government. He writes: “Must the citizen ever for a moment, or in the least degree, resign his conscience to the legislator? Why has every man a conscience, then? I think we should be men first, and subjects afterward” (Thoreau). Thoreau writes in this essay that the people who are extremely obedient of the law are not humans. He quotes the example of the soldiers. He says that soldiers are so to say the “good citizens” of a country but they never practice their own morals, or what their conscience tells them to do. They only take orders from their seniors and so they are no better than machines. Similarly, the very agents of the government; politicians, ministers and legislators do not know the meaning of morality. In cases when the rule grows more tyrannical, people decide to rebel. But then certain men are of the view that already the city is in rags, and what good would it do if only one rebels. In that particular scenario, Thoreau puts in that it is not a right but everyone’s responsibility to rebel. According to Thoreau, “power should never dominate the sense of justice”. Justice should be the first priority of everyone even if the cost is one’s life. Thoreau writes, “If I have unjustly wrested a plank from a drowning man, I must restore it to him though I drown myself” (Thoreau). He gave this example in reference to Mexican American War, saying that American citizens must put a stop to the war even if their own existence is at stake. Despite everything, Thoreau believed that the American government had some redeeming qualities and was better than many other governments. So, he thought that as the makers of this government were also liable to mistakes, one could discuss things with them. In the second section of this essay, Thoreau focuses on the “voting technique” to choose a government. He says that voting is just another way to let others rule us. He also comments on the lack of intelligence of mankind because they seldom question the politics. The “feebly” submit to everything and let their conscience be shattered. He further says that a person always has a choice of choosing between right and wrong and he should always “wash his hands of injustice”. He also says that “If I devote myself to other pursuits and contemplations, I must first see, at least, that I do not pursue them sitting on another mans shoulders” (Thoreau). This means that if a person is too meek to stop the injustice and ill doings, he should not point out other people’s weaknesses. Thoreau also asserts the fact that evil exists in the world. It wouldn’t be natural if it didn’t. But ultimately things concur at the same point: what should a man do to separate himself from all the evil? Therefore, the existentialist approach also comes in; that whether a person should go with his fate or he should be brave enough to side up with free will. He also writes that instead of going up on a mission to demolish evil from the world, people should work on keeping themselves away from evil. He says that you can begin to fight with the unjust government by small matters like fighting with a tax collector when he comes at your doorstep. “For it matters not how small the beginning may seem to be: what is once done well is done for ever” (Thoreau). According to Thoreau, “Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also a prison (Thoreau). Here he means to say that it is better to live in a jail than to preside in a world which is governed by unjust government and laws. This essay, as already has been said, is quite scathing at times but Thoreau is not completely unaware of what will happen if the people turn completely against the government. Their properties and assets will be taken away from them and the family will have to live in penury. You cannot have that either. So he concludes that a person should be self-sufficient. He says that comfort and justice seldom work together simultaneously. His conclusion or rather the motto of this essay is to “live within yourself” (Thoreau). The third section of the essay deals with Thoreau’s personal experiences when he took the liberty to disobey government. When at first he didn’t pay his tax, he was sent to prison but he says he didn’t lose hope. He knew that there were many more walls to be broken in addition to the jail wall in order to live freely. When he was taken as a prisoner for one night, they injured his body but the officers couldn’t beat his soul, claims Thoreau. He goes on to say that the higher law is his own conscience and self and he is accountable to it before anyone else. But he also realized that his friends were not ready or not brave to raise voice against the injustice taking place in their land. Plus many of them turned against him because they wanted to save themselves from the wrath of the government and its agents. But when Thoreau refused to pay taxes, he took a stand against the entire state. He waged a silent war against the government because of the ideals and principles he believed in and had enough courage to face the difficulties too. He also asserts that this going against should also result in something and must not be a hollow revolt. He beautifully incorporates the simile of a parent for the country and asks all citizens to treat the state as such. He further opines that instead of pursuing personal motives and the desire to rule, all citizens should learn to become conscientious which will improve the government much more than anything else (Thoreau). According to Thoreau, a man should be respected for what he is, not because of his material assets or because of which country he belongs to. He describes the progress politically by explaining that mankind has evolved absolute monarchy to partial or limited monarchy. From here, it has jumped onto democracy, but is democracy the final answer? Are there no more ways to govern that could be better? Because of such questions being raised, this essay caused a lot of hush-hush in the world and many people were also influenced by it not only in Thoreau’s life but also afterwards. Gandhi quoted in one of his speeches that one of the reasons America is free from slavery today is because of Thoreau’s significant work in the form of “Civil Disobedience”. He also said that “He [Thoreau] was one of the greatest and most moral men America has produced….he wrote his famous essay "On the Duty of Civil Disobedience". He went to goal for the sake of his principles and suffering humanity (Gandhi). Martin Luther is also among the very prominent figures who were deeply moved by this essay. In his autobiography, The Autobiography of Martin Luther King Jr., he relates that he had read this essay during his student days for the first time and it introduced him to the first ever “theory of non-violent resistance.” Martin Luther King also said that he was so deeply moved by this essay that he read it many times, and the more he read it, the more respect he felt for the legend and the amazing step Thoreau took for the humanity who did not think about his own existence but for the others only (King Martin & Carson 14). This essay is considered as an abstract work regarding politics and also a commentary on the scenario of the world. This style is observed in all three sections of the essay. After reading it, one immediately realizes that the writer was, undoubtedly, skeptical and weary of the government. But his opinions and ideas were the result of that day’s scenario. After reading the essay, the reader will realize that the writer is not against the government just for the sake of creating hullaballoo but he is only against unjust government that only pretends to work for the welfare of mankind. However, in reality such governments work only for the benefit of a select few who further their personal agendas through the power bestowed upon them. Though, similar opinions can be implied to the present day situation as well, back in the days, it caused multiple reactions. The government was shocked and outraged. Some people were amused by it while others supported the essay. However, in a nutshell, the essay is quite pragmatic and even so many years after its creation is applicable and gives food for thought to lead citizens in the right direction. Works Cited Gandhi, M.K. “For Passive Resisters”. Indian Opinion. 1907. Print. King, Martin L, and Clayborne Carson. The Autobiography of Martin Luther King, Jr. New York: Intellectual Properties Management in association with Warner Books, 1998. Print. Thoreau, David. “Civil Disobedience”. A Yankee in Canada, with Anti-Slavery and Reform Papers. 1849. Print. Read More