Civil Disobedience Thoreau Essay

Improved Essays
Imagine the idea of, “These United States”, instead of “The United States”. A country without controversy, is a country that doesn’t care. While a revolutionary is one that leads change, on the contrary, a rebel is one that elicits change. A rebel is intellectual, hard-headed, and critical of the current order of either government, society, or human nature. During the nineteenth century, Henry David Thoreau was a philosopher, writer, abolitionist, and most notably, had conflicting theory regarding the involvement of the government in daily life. Thoreau spent the latter years of his life living in the woods of Walden Pond, criticizing human nature; he believed in a more simplistic lifestyle. Thoreau’s unconventional perceptions of human nature …show more content…
Civil disobedience, in essence, is an individual’s refusal to comply with a law or regulation as a display of political protest. Thoreau clearly portrays his own application of civil disobedience in his essay, “Resistance to Civil Government”. In his essay, Thoreau states “No man with a genius for legislation has appeared in America.” (Thoreau). Thoreau actively criticized the people in government, and particularly in the legislative branch. The United States has always been a democratic state, and thus by a majority vote, the “way of the land” was created in 1789; the Founding Fathers set the country’s future precedent. Thoreau’s respect for authority didn’t cease here, however. In July of 1846, he was arrested on a charge of refusing to pay his poll tax for the past six years (Harmon). Thoreau claimed that his actions were a protest to the Mexican-American war, however his actions were illegal and ultimately landed him in jail. Unlike many revolutionaries such as Rosa Parks or Martin Luther King, Thoreau’s decision to disobey the law in order to peacefully portray his beliefs, was no heroic or honorable. It was an act of rebellion, and ultimately he wasn’t leading a movement, but instead creating further controversy over the morality of the …show more content…
It is human nature to be selfish, thus the government was formed as a democracy not to benefit the common people, but rather to create a ground for debate between career politicians. Thoreau criticized the common way people lived and governed themselves often, which stirred up controversy. In society, the purpose of a rebel, like Thoreau, is to cause the desire for change, not necessarily to lead the change; that is the duty of a revolutionary. In the world today, Thoreau is still an important figure, because he represents the need to for people (especially our evolving generation of young adults) to have their own views on various issues, and to strongly back these ideas with critical thinking. He has changed the

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    Henry David Thoreau, born July 12, 1817 in Concord, Massachusetts, was known to be an American transcendentalist and philosopher. Thoreau became known for the essay he wrote when he spent a night in jail due to his refusal to pay taxes in objection to slavery and the Mexican War. The essay was published and titled “Resistance of Civil Government” but also known as “Civil Disobedience.” It is unsurprising that the government is dirty and corrupt so the purpose of the essay was to influence readers to not fear but protest government laws and commands or vote them out. Thoreau’s opinion of the government is "That government is best which governs least" (Thoreau 964). Thoreau wanted the government to protect the people, to do for the people, but…

    • 1663 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Essay On Thomas Paine

    • 787 Words
    • 4 Pages

    He did not see God helping citizens with their problems. Democracy and democrat were to be key words amongst the rebels, sadly these terms had a negative connotation attached to them,…

    • 787 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The violence and taxes was too much for them, and it was time where they said enough is enough. From the Common Sense pamphlet, the colonists figured out why independence was necessary, and that the King did not care for the welfare of the Americans. Paine 's pamphlet caused the colonists to unite and stand up for each other as a nation. They wanted to be self governed and wanted their own democracy. After all, if the King read the Olive branch petition, maybe the Loyalist still would have stayed loyal to him, making the Common Sense pamphlet useless, but since it did not happen, America was now in a revolution for…

    • 1325 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Federalists did not find it necessary to have a Bill of Rights, they felt as if things were just fine the way they were. Anti Federalists on the other hand wanted the direct opposite. “The Anti-Federalists were the people who did not favor ratification of the Constitution.” (Pg.1) Anti-Federalists believed that the greatest threat to the future of the United States was in the government 's potential to become corrupt and take more and more power until its rule dominated the people. The hardest part was getting all of the states to agree with the Founding Fathers, and what they wanted to do. Not everyone agreed, or had the same opinion, which resulted in ratifications happening months and months after the new ideas first came about.…

    • 1297 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In the article, Founder’s Chic, Brand criticizes the use and abuse of the founding fathers in today’s political life. Brand begins the article by quoting a statement by John Adams that the history of the revolution will be one continuous lie. The author claims that by focusing too much on the founding fathers and praising them for starting a nation, the ordinary citizen is undervaluing himself or herself. Brand presents a compelling argument that while the founding fathers started the nation, they had their own faults. Looking at the evidence and arguments presented by Brand, it is evident that the Revolutionary legacy has definitely been abused.…

    • 1135 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    I think that the arguments of John Stuart Mill and Karl Marx ultimately fell short of this success because they used democracy to defend almost every point of their political doctrine and did not expand outside of this political school of thought like Hobbes and Rousseau. By failing to do this if you take away the defense of democracy to support their political doctrine then their works just become the opinions of men and their supposed utopias that they had wished to see enacted in the world instead of a concrete doctrine that if implemented could supposedly work in and even have the possibility of making society a better place. So ultimately it is in fact too easy to dismiss J.S. Mill and…

    • 1140 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    It was mentioned by only nine speakers and they only mentioned it once as evidence of instability. A historian said that “Shays’s Rebellion frightened [George Washington] out of retirement and into politics.” It is said that without the Rebellion, “Washington would not have attended the convention or have lent his name to the Federalists on behalf of ratification.” Madison and Hamilton were also concerned by the Rebellion but, like Washington, the rebellion did not give them new information. Therefore, it is hard to say that the rebellion simply changed the Founding Fathers’…

    • 731 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The Democratic party let Madison overturn the Embargo Act of 1807, much to the joy of Federalists, so America could trade with France and England. Madison’s action was from a Federalist idea originating at the Hartford Convention: “Congress shall not have the power to lay any embargo on the ships or vessels of the citizens of the United States…” (Doc E) Madison, a Democratic president, is executing a Federalist-inspired action, which would never happen in Jefferson’s presidency, showing the strict grip loosening on America. The Democrats were strongly against a powerful central army, but tensions with England caused them to…

    • 1207 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Governments are created by the people to protect their rights. When a government is corrupted and fails to do its job, the people rally against it because it has strayed from its purpose. Many different people have different viewpoints on their government. An excerpt of “Civil Disobedience” shows Henry David Thoreau’s ideal government, and how his current government went against the ideals he believed in. In Chapter Seventeen of “The Grapes of Wrath”, John Steinbeck explains how the camps of the migrant families create a union and a government, even for one night.…

    • 1190 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The author discuss on our American government is very hypocritical and indecisive. The issue whether or not our American government is a democracy or partisanship is an issue that has been present throughout history. When the first U.S. settlers came to America, they came because they were mistreated by their British parliamentary and had no representation in the British parliament. And they want a place where they are not oppressed and wanted a place where they could truly become a part of their government. In the end they end up oppressing other people like their British parliament and more corrupt with their…

    • 993 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays