Douglass and King: Advice They Might Have Accepted from Thoreau

The effects of slavery continue to be seen in the world to this day, but its time of full force was during the time of Frederick Douglass, an American slave who eventually learned to read and write. He escaped from slavery and began to tell his story, which became very famous for its raw description of the conditions of slavery. Although many think that slaves were the people most affected, Frederick Douglass reveals that the slaveholders were also greatly changed by the institution. In The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave, Douglass highlights the dehumanizing nature of slavery, both physically and mentally in both the slave and the slaveholder by providing insight into his relationships and experiences with

To me, civil disobedience is not following the rules or going against the rules especially if a rule you think is wrong or unjust and a good example of protest that happened recently is the protest outside of the Starbucks . Well, I also agree with your concept that everyone has the equal rights and that the civil disobedience is "disobedience to the

Civil Disobedience is defined as refusal to obey civil laws or decrees, which usually takes the form of direct action (Grolier’s Encyclopedia Online 2). Thoreau wrote that people practicing civil disobedience, break a law because they consider the law unjust. People want to call attention to its injustice. Thoreau voiced civil disobedience as, “An expression of the individual’s liberty to create change” (Thoreau 530). Years later Martin Luther King Jr. took the same idea of direct action to protest the injustices brought upon black Americans in the United States. One major example was the Birmingham bus boycott. Blacks where treated unjust and often had to give up their seats to whites, and had to listen to racial slurs made by the bus driver. King like Thoreau, did not take a violent approach, he often used sit-ins and rallies to unite the black community (Encarta

I believe civil disobedience is the refusal to obey certain laws, usually without violence, but only if it’s to make a point. In Thoreau’s essay about civil disobedience, there were points made which I agreed with, but there were things that I disagreed with. Some points he made that I agreed with was that if someone wants something to change, they should do something and do it wholeheartedly. An additional point he made which I agreed with was to depend and think for one’s self. While he’s made points which I agreed with, there’s one I didn’t which was when he said that the military was programmed to do whatever the government says.

     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

Martin Luther King, Jr. defines “civil disobedience” as a way to show others what to do when a law is unjust and unreasonable. As King stated in the letter from Birmingham, “Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust.” When Negros were being treated unfairly, Martin Luther King, Jr. stepped in to show people how to peacefully protest and not be violent. The dictionary definition of civil disobedience is the refusal to comply with certain laws or to pay taxes and fines, as a peaceful form of political protest (Webster Dictionary). That is what Martin Luther King, Jr. did when nothing was changing in the town after the law for public school to be non-segregated. In

While both Martin Luther King Jr. and David Thoreau recognized that society needed modification, they acquired contrasting perspectives about the dilemma. King writes out of concern for the African-American race and believes that even though law states, something is wrong, it could be right. Thoreau believes writes out of frustration and that "Government is best which governs not at all." (Thoreau 407). King and Thoreau agree that everyone has the ability to take charge, on the other hand, their actions are distinct in many ways.

      Both excerpts are from personal writings by these two men.  They each give a different perspective to the same time period.  They lived during the same time period, both being born in 1817.  On the one hand, Douglass was born into slavery, and was against it for obvious reasons, and eventually he found freedom.  Thoreau was a Harvard educated white

Thoreau wrote that people must be willing to go to jail if they want to change a law by disobeying the law. Thoreau went to jail instead of paying for his taxes because he believed the government used the money for unjust things. This is how Henry Thoreau thinks people can change unjust laws. He thought that if people willingly would to go to jail and quit their jobs, then the revolution will take a place and reform will come. Thoreau was willing to go to jail to change unjust laws because of his conscience.

Civil disobedience is a peaceful form of political protest for the refusal of certain laws or acts. In “Letter From Birmingham Jail” by Martin Luther King Jr., segregation is explained when, “Negroes have experienced grossly unjust treatment in the courts…

King and Thoreau both advocate for the right to disobey authority if there is an injustice done to them. This is the common theme between both documents, and it shows that even 100 years apart, ideologies of two different men are still comparable. Clearly, time hasn’t changed much in regards to the government, and people still feel the need to rebel against power. The most obvious similarity between the two documents is their overall themes.

On The Duty of Civil Disobedience, written by Henry David Thoreau, explains that civil disobedience is the act of standing for your beliefs even though they are against the law. Thoreau goes on to say that the government (because it is ruled by the majority) is not always right for everyone especially the individual and the minority. Over the course of American history, there have been many different groups formed for the purpose of civil disobedience. The two that I am going to focus on are the activists of the Civil Rights Movement and the Black Panthers of the Black Liberation Movement. The Civil Rights Movement began in 1954 with the case of Brown vs. the Board of Education. It was basically lead by Martin Luther King Jr.

Although both authors were unalike in some aspects, Birmingham, by Martin Luther King Jr., is grounded in the same principle philosophies as Henry David Thoreau’s essay civil disobedient. However this does not refute the fact that both are responsible for a vital impact in acquiring the freedom of African Americans. Thoreau, with the fugitive slaves in the 19th century through his strong reproach against slavery; Comparatively, King in leading non-violent demonstrations against the Jim Crows laws that segregated African Americans. Both conveyed a strong stance that there are some occasions in which it is essential to disobey a social law. Martin Luther King, Jr., in addition to Thoreau, articulate that when a civil law be found unjust one has

In the beginning of “Civil Disobedience” Thoreau said these words, “That government is best which governs the least” (305) he knew that the government has power to set laws and sometimes people had no say in such laws. The example of disobeying an unjust law goes back into history to the Holocaust. When Nazi Germany was still in power, the people regular citizens were by law required to give up the whereabouts or hiding places of the Jews. As in every situation there were the people that obeyed the law and some that decided that this law was unjust and refused to follow the laws because they knew in their mind that this law was unethical and went against their moral standards. I have

Civil disobedience is an illegal act made by one or by a group of people to make a point and taking full responsibility for the act when they have to face consequences. For example, a man named José Bové was a French sheep farmer who was an alter-globalization activist. He was sentenced to three months and served 44 days for destruction of a Mcdonald’s being built in Millau, Aveyron, France. He was jailed from June 19th to August 4th, 2001. The reason José has done such a thing was to save the small farmers around where he lives and doesn’t agree with junk food. When he explained why he did it, he said, “this is a fight against free trade global capitalism. It’s about the logic of a certain economic system, not an American system. It could