| Civil Disobedience (thoreau) |
Article Index for Civil |
Website Links For Civil Disobedience |
Information AboutCivil Disobedience (thoreau) |
|
''On the Duty of Civil Disobedience'', also known as '''''Civil Disobedience''''', is an essay by Henry David Thoreau . Published in 1849 under the title ''Resistance to Civil Government'', it expressed Thoreau's belief that people should not allow governments to overrule or atrophy their consciences, and that people have a duty both to avoid doing injustice directly and to avoid allowing their acquiescence to enable the government to make them the agents of injustice. Thoreau was motivated in part by his disgust with Slavery and the Mexican-American War . One of the most famous quotes often mistakenly attributed to either , 2006 A PARAPHRASED SYNOPSIS OF THOREAU’S ARGUMENT Government, if we need it at all, is only justified if it is helpful — but governments are typically more harmful than helpful. Democracy is no cure for this, as majorities simply by virtue of being majorities do not also gain the virtues of wisdom and justice. There is no reason to expect that the judgement of your own conscience is inferior to the decisions of a political body or majority. “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.… 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.” {Link without Title} Indeed, you serve your country poorly if you do so by suppressing your conscience in favor of the law — your country needs consciences more than it needs conscienceless robots. It is disgraceful to be associated with the United States government. “I cannot for an instant recognize as my government which is The Slave’s Government also.”[http://www.sniggle.net/Experiment/index.php?entry=rtcg#p07 I wouldn’t be making such a big deal about this if the government just ''happened to be'' a little corrupt or unjust in the course of doing its otherwise-important work, but in fact, the government is ''primarily'' an agent of corruption and injustice. Because of this, it’s “not too soon for honest men to rebel and revolutionize.” {Link without Title} Political philosophers have counseled caution about revolution because the upheaval of revolution typically causes a lot of expense and suffering. However, such a cost/benefit analysis isn’t appropriate when the government is facilitating an injustice like slavery: Such a thing is fundamentally immoral and even if it would be difficult and expensive to stop it, it must be stopped because it is wrong. “This people must cease to hold slaves, and to make War On Mexico , though it cost them their existence as a people.” {Link without Title} We can’t blame this problem solely on pro-slavery ” which also advances this argument.) Don’t just wait passively for an opportunity to ''vote'' for justice. Voting for justice is as ineffective as wishing for justice; what you need to do is to actually ''be just''. This is not to say that you have an obligation to devote your life to fighting for justice, but you ''do'' have an obligation not to commit injustice and not to give injustice your practical support. Paying taxes is one way in which otherwise well-meaning people collaborate in injustice. People who proclaim that the war in Mexico is wrong and that it is wrong to enforce slavery contradict themselves by funding both. The same people who applaud soldiers for refusing to fight the war are not themselves willing to refuse to fund the government that started the war. In a republic like ours, people often think that the proper response to an unjust law is to try to use the political process to change the law, but to obey and respect the law until it is changed. But if the law is itself clearly unjust, and the lawmaking process is not designed to quickly obliterate such unjust laws, then the law deserves no respect — break the law. In our case, the lawmaking process is of no help, and in fact the Constitution itself — which enshrines the institution of slavery — is evil. Abolitionists should completely withdraw their support of the government and stop paying taxes, even if this means courting imprisonment. “Under a government which imprisons unjustly, the true place for a just man is also a prison.… where the State places those who are not ''with'' her, but ''against'' her, — the only house in a slave State in which a free man can abide with honor.… Cast your whole vote, not a strip of paper merely, but your whole influence. A minority is powerless while it conforms to the majority; it is not even a minority then; but it is irresistible when it clogs by its whole weight. If the alternative is to keep all just men in prison, or give up war and slavery, the State will not hesitate which to choose. If a thousand men were not to pay their tax bills this year, that would not be a violent and bloody measure, as it would be to pay them, and enable the State to commit violence and shed innocent blood. This is, in fact, the definition of a peaceable revolution, if any such is possible.” {Link without Title} It is risky to rebel in this way, as the government will retailiate. The more you have to lose, the harder it will be, which is another reason why I prefer simple living. “I can afford to refuse allegiance to Massachusetts…. It costs me less in every sense to incur the penalty of disobedience to the State than it would to obey. I should feel as if I were worth less in that case.” {Link without Title} I was briefly imprisoned for refusing to pay the Poll Tax , but even in jail I felt freer than the people outside. It was an interesting experience, and I came out of it with a new perspective on my relationship to the government and its citizens. I don’t mind paying the highway tax, which goes to something of benefit to my neighbors, but as for taxes that support the government — even if I can’t tell if my particular contribution went to an unjust project or a beneficial one — I’m opposed. “I simply wish to refuse allegiance to the State, to withdraw and stand aloof from it effectually.” {Link without Title} This at least is what I believe today. At times I wonder whether it is as useless to rage against the stupidities and cruelties of government as it would be to shake my fist angrily at a tornado, but government is a man-made disaster, not a natural one, and so I have hope that its makers may be reasoned with yet. As governments go, ours, with all its faults, is not the worst and even has some admirable qualities. But we can and should insist on better. “The progress from an absolute to a limited monarchy, from a limited monarchy to a democracy, is a progress toward a true respect for the individual.… Is a democracy, such as we know it, the last improvement possible in government? Is it not possible to take a step further towards recognizing and organizing the rights of man? There will never be a really free and enlightened State until the State comes to recognize the individual as a higher and independent power, from which all its own power and authority are derived, and treats him accordingly.” {Link without Title} NOTES SEE ALSO EXTERNAL LINKS
|
|
|