Civil Disobedience Of Henry David Thoreau And Martin Luther King Jr.

According Thoreau’s Civil Disobedience, he mentions that to require civil disobedience, the circumstances must be like America’s. Circumstances like practicing war, deriving power from the people, having unjust laws, and supporting slavery. Thoreau writes, “must the citizen ever for a moment, or in the least degree, resign his conscience to the legislation?” (Thoreau ). He mentions how no man should be subdued to any government or institution, especially if it portrays unjust. Therefore he also implies that if a law exhibits unjust, the population should not follow the law with the knowledge of the consequence. Similarly, Thoreau establishes, “when . . . a whole country is unjustly overrun and conquered by a foreign army, and subjected to military law, I think that it is not too soon for honest men to rebel and revolutionize,” (Thoreau ). He explains how it expresses the duty of Americans to rebel and use civil disobedience, it is not just a right, but it drives Americans to be aware of and completely use for the advantage of society. Thoreau further explains the unlawful government by stating, “I cannot for an instant recognize that political organization as my government which the slave's government also,” (Thoreau ). He describes the circumstance of America as a prejudiced institution, which rightfully allows citizens to use their duty of civil disobedience. A government should require unjust laws, slavery, aggressive law, and strength over intelligence to cause civil disobedience. However, civil disobedience a citizen’s duty and they must maintain it.

In Thoreau's Civil Disobedience, he argues that when civil laws conflict with an individual's morality, the individual should follows his conscience. Thoreau like many Transcendentalists felt a less involved government was best. Thoreau wrote, "That government is best which governs not at all." Obviously, Thoreau realized that he could afford to take this open opinion on government because of the American government. But he felt that government's authority should be limited to physical matters of the country, such as infrastructure and orderliness. He felt a government that become involved in moral matters such as sobriety and slavery was a government over-stepping its boundaries. Ultimately, Thoreau and other transcendentalists felt a utopian society would be the best.

In other words civil disobedience indicates that the main objective of disobedience is to bring changes in the social or political order that would affect the freedom of citizens. Nonviolence is the right answer to moral issues and is crucial in politics for any government on our time the need for human mankind to overcome oppression avoiding violence without resorting to oppression with violence.

Martin Luther King Jr.’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail” and Henry David Thoreau’s “Civil Disobedience” collectively persuade their audiences to disobey authority when it concerns social injustice. King takes a more assertive yet respectful approach, and makes it a point to explicate the intolerable treatment that the black community had to endure under the encroachment of segregation laws. In addition, Thoreau expounds why it is so important for citizens to object and take action upon the corrupt laws that the government had imposed on the blacks, insisting that civil disobedience is a means of freedom. Both of these influential men successfully utilize occasion, purpose, tone, appeals and rhetorical strategies to

On April 29, 1992, the City of Los Angeles was surrounded in a riot in response to the "not guilty" verdicts in the trial of four white Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) officers accused of unlawfully beating Rodney King. Six days later, when the fires were finally extinguished and the smoke had cleared, "estimates of the material damage done vary between about $800 million and $1 billion, 54 people had been killed, more than 2000 injured, in excess of 800 structures were burned, and about 10,000 people were arrested."(Khalifah 89) The 1992 riots in the City of Los Angeles were arguably the most devastating civil disturbance in the history of the United States.

Civil disobedience is defined as the “refusal to obey civil laws in an effort to induce change in government policy or legislation, characterized by nonviolent means”; theories on this topic have been debated for centuries. (American Heritage Dictionary 3rd Edition pg161) Henry David Thoreau was well known for his refusal to participate in the political systems or activities of his era, not only by refusing to pay his poll taxes for six consecutive years, but also by announcing that he did not wish to be regarded as a member of any incorporated society. In Civil Disobedience, Thoreau stresses the need to prioritize one’s conscience over the dictates of laws. A person should not be obligated to devote his or her life to eliminating evils from the world, but is only obligated not to participate in such evils themselves. He argues that the government rarely proves itself useful and this derives from the power from the majority because they are the strongest group, not because they hold the most legitimate views. Justice is the quality of being just, impartial or fair. Thoreau doubted the effectiveness of reform within the government, and argued that voting and petitioning for change served useless. He felt that justice had different standards for each different group. Which raises the question, is justice fair for everyone? When a government is unjust, people should

What is justice? Is it a fitting punishment for a crime? Or a court or officer of the law? Is it the law itself? It has many definitions and interpretations, depending on various people. Some interpret it very simply, saying that it is fairness in every situation. Others give the word more complication, saying that it is doing what is morally right and fair. Oxford Dictionary defines it as many things, including, “Just behaviour or treatment...The quality of being fair and reasonable.” Black’s Law Dictionary defines justice as, “The constant and perpetual disposition to render every man his due.” All are various meanings and interpretations of one, single, word, that has been explored in many books and novels, including one by Harper Lee. In her novel To Kill a Mockingbird, Harper Lee uses the characters of Atticus and Mr. Raymond to show the meaning of true justice and how it transcends prejudicial divisions.

Thoreau believes that, “ That government is best which governs not at all” stating that the government should not only represent the people but should be run by them as well (Thoreau 940). Thoreau’s beliefs explain his position on civil disobedience, stating that civil disobedience is needed when the government implements policies that are against the individual's conscience and beliefs. Thoreau gives an example of when civil disobedience is needed by expressing his objections towards the American government's involvement in the Mexican war, “file of soldiers ...marching in admirable order over the hill and dale to wars, against their wills”(Thoreau 941). While the soldier's duty is to serve their country, if their country is asking them to disregard their own judgement to become useful for their benefit, the individual must refuse allegiance and become useful as a person and not a machine the government can use at their own will. The people that the government uses, are used to invade other countries and are enforcing their policies, making them become a popular vote government as well, “we are all made at last to pay homage to and support our own meanness” ( Thoreau 945). Thoreau is implying that civil disobedience is required in order to follow one’s own voice, to follow through to their morals, even if it means not being included in the popular vote. Thoreau states that civil disobedience is a duty that is required to indicate the necessity for change in the government, “whole country is unjustly overrun...not too soon for honest men to rebel

     Any one can say that a law is unfair and unjust. However, who is really willing to accept the consequences for going against an unjust law? Is breaking this law really worth the punishment? The government is the one to decide whether a law is reasonable, but what if a member of the public believes that a law is not? Should he rebel against this law? Henry David Thoreau and Martin Luther King Jr. answered yes to this question and believed that one should speak out against an injustice. They both believed that government had many flaws. Even though they shared many beliefs in many of the same subjects concerning Civil Disobedience, they had many different

“They think that, if they should resist, the remedy would be worse than the evil. But it’s the fault of the government itself that the remedy is worse than the evil. It makes it worse.” In this quote from his essay Resistance to Civil Government, Thoreau defines the folly of thinking that perturbs the everyday citizen, that if they rebel, they will receive punishment for standing up for what they believe in, and that the consequences are not worth the plight. Thus, he implores that it is the government's fault that this change cannot take place, for the fallacy is in fact that our country was built on average citizens standing up against the British taxing the colonists unfairly, therefore our own government has impeded the change that laid the groundwork for the nation that we are today, and also were at the time this was written. Thoreau believes in the imperative duty of the citizens to stand up to the injustice of government, despite the consequences, due to our own personal moral duty to ourselves and our fellow man. In this essay, Thoreau states, at least three things that he wants the reader to do, and they are: take moral responsibility for doing the right thing despite the government wishes, avoid association with the government, and to disobey unjust laws.

Throughout history, people's opinion on how the government should govern has shifted back and forth. Some men think that it should be all ruling and powerful, while others think that it should have a very menial role in society. One of the men that thought it should have a menial role in society was Henry David Thoreau and he made that evident in his document called Civil Disobedience. Thoreau believed he was simply asking for a "better government" but in reality he was stirring up the thoughts of many others. Thoreau's opinions are presented in a clear, strong, powerful, convincing and intelligent manner,

"That government is best which governs least." Or is it? Should the American people be free to rebel against laws they consider unjust? Henry David Thoreau addresses these issues in his essay, Civil Disobedience. Thoreau wholeheartedly accepts the declaration that the government is best which governs least, and would like to see it acted upon. One day, he hopes, we will be able to carry it out to the point where men can have a government that does not govern at all. Government "never of itself furthered any enterprise". He claims that the character of the American people, rather than the government, has kept the country free, settled the west and educated the people. If the government had not interfered, the people would have

The term justice is used in some of America's most treasured and valued documents, from the Pledge of Allegiance, to the Constitution, and the Declaration of Independence. Everyone wants to be treated justly whether it's in the courtroom or the local bar. Most people would feel confident giving a definition for justice, but would it be a definition we could universally agree to? Given that justice is a very common term, and something we all want, it's important to have a precise definition. For hundreds of years philosophers have argued, debated, and fought over this topic. Justice can clearly be defined as the intention to conform to truth and fairness. This is true justice.

Justice, as one definition in the Oxford-English Dictionary, is the quality of being just or right as a human or divine attribute; moral uprightness; just behavior or dealing as a concept of principle. Those that deserve justice can be both good and bad people, but sometimes outside forces affect whether or not that justice is served, or if it is served in the right way at all. Two classic novels, To Kill A Mockingbird and The Great Gatsby both show how justice can work in both directions, even though both books have characters that did not get what they deserved in the end.