Essay about Henry David Thoreau and the Patriot Act

From the start of man fighting for freedom or his beliefs, the question has consistently been whether a person can wage a battle using words rather than actions. The notion of civil disobedience would seem to be an inept weapon against political inequity; history, however, has persistently proven it to be the most dynamic weapon of the individual. By refusing to pay his taxes and subsequently being imprisoned, Henry David Thoreau demonstrated this very defiance. Thoreau’s Resistance to Civil Government conveys the effectiveness of the individual conscience, renounces hypocrisy, and cultivates a sense of urgency where inaction creates a moral conflict. This path of responsibility paved by Thoreau gave our leaders of today the means they

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.

    Thoreau seems to be a very educated political thinker. He can be very stubborn but humble when it comes to his beliefs, “I have contemplated the imprisonment of the offender, rather than the seizure of his goods -- though both will serve the same purpose -- because they who assert the purest right, and consequently are most dangerous to a corrupt state… ”(Thoreau 24. 218). Thoreau has lived in the woods for over six years, without paying state taxes. When the police officer asked him to pay, the non-violently compiled and spent a day in jail. Thoreau did not want to fund the American Mexican war through taxes and believed that people shouldn't be forced to do what they don't think is right. He is also a very optimistic person and believes that the people themselves should be good people, live good lives and therefore we wouldn't need as many laws, “when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have.” (1. 210). Thoreau believes that the government is doing the best when doing the least, “I heartily accept the motto, -- “That government is best which governs least” …” (1. 210). Although Thoreau might have an unpopular opinion, he sticks with his beliefs throughout this essay. As he presents his opinion, he does it in the most classy yet confident arguments. He had the thought of the people in mind while writing, showing his good intentions of improving our government.

Thoreau's Civil Disobedience talks about politics, government and the issues concerning these areas today. "Government is best which governs least." This motto means that the government should not have complete power over the people. The people's opinion is what matters the most. Individualism is stressed throughout his writing. To stand up for what you believe in and not bend backwards for the government is necessary. He speaks of Slavery and the war in Mexico and how is must be put to a stop. The people are responsible for this happening. Many people opposed these things yet did nothing to change it. Allowing yourself to be a part of injustice makes you a part of the negativity. Paying taxes to a corrupt government makes you

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 paragraph 26 of “Civil Disobedience,” Thoreau claims the state punishes people who aren’t deserving, therefore all people deserve to be punished. In fact, Thoreau writes, the only place to be true to who you are is in jail. Thoreau thinks that jail is the only place that your opinion matters, as you’re in jail because of an action, and once in jail those same actions are better accepted by your peers. Thoreau adds that it is difficult to fight for what is right if you don’t know what is

Thoreau questions society and essentially the core of its practicality, posing the question: Is the idea of a civil citizen possible without loosing ones’ principles? In his essay he articulates, “Unjust laws exist: shall we be content

“Shall we be content to obey them, or shall we endeavor to amend them and obey them until we have succeeded, or shall we transgress them at once? (Thoreau 184).” The choice of acting upon unjust laws is up to the person whether they want to follow with what they believe is morally right no matter the consequences. Thoreau, for example, was arrested for not paying poll taxes for six years. Thoreau peacefully served his time in his night in jail, having known beforehand the consequences for his actions, yet he went along and committed the crime. Even though the crime Thoreau committed didn’t harm anyone, it made a general statement to what he stood for, that government cannot change his beliefs and make him follow laws that are unjust to him. “When I meet a government which says to me, "Your money or your life," why should I be in haste to give it my money? It may be in a great strait, and not know what to do: I cannot help that. It must help itself; do as I do. It is not worth the while to snivel about it. I am not responsible for the successful working of the machinery of society.(Thoreau

     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

Thoreau’s essay represents his beliefs about the government in 1849. He uses several logos with credible examples, and uses the emotions of the audience to support his argument. The first example of logos he uses is when he says, “The objections which have been brought against a standing army, and they are many and weighty, and deserve to prevail, may also at last be brought against a standing government.” His claim is that it is unconstitutional to have an army standing or ready when everything is peaceful. The government should act under this same rule; if there is peace then the government should not be standing so to speak. Throughout the essay he continues to provide credible examples of why the government abuses its power and is useless; such as when he says “Yet this government never of itself furthered any enterprise, but by the alacrity with which it got out of its way. It does not keep the country free. It does not settle the West. It does not educate. The character inherent in the American people has done all that has been accomplished; and it would have done somewhat more, if the government had not sometimes got in its

Thoreau and King address the idea of just and unjust laws in their essays. Thoreau writes, “Unjust laws exist; shall we be content to obey them, or shall we endeavor to amend them, and obey them until we have succeeded, or shall we transgress them at once? Men generally, under such a government as this, think that they ought to wait until they have persuaded the majority to alter them. They think that, if they should resist, the remedy would be worse than the evil” (Thoreau 7). Thoreau believes that there are just laws and

The Patriot Act, an act passed by Congress in 2001 that addressed the topic of privacy in terrorist or radical situations, is controversial in today's society. Although it helps with protection against terroristic events, The Patriot Act is not fair, nor is it constitutional, because it allows the government to intrude on citizens' privacy, it gives governmental individuals too much power, and because the act is invasive to the 4th amendment right. To further describe key points in the act, it states that it allows investigators to use the tools that were already available to investigate organized crime and drug trafficking, and it allows law enforcement officials to obtain a search warrant anywhere a terrorist-related activity occurred.

Henry David Thoreau was an American writer and protester, who wrote the influential essay “Civil Disobedience”. In his essay, he advocates for citizens to protest against government actions that they deem unjust and to stand up for one’s rights, putting morals before law,

Thoreau believed that the government should not be ruled by the minority just because “they are physically the strongest,” instead, we should be ruled by conscience. Furthermore, Thoreau stated that “…a corporation has no conscience,” because the corporation only cared about money, without caring about the multitude. This is still happening even nowadays. For instance, the cigarette companies are still selling cigarettes to the multitude even though they know that there are some carcinogenic materials in cigarettes that smoking cigarettes can cause cancers. They only care about money, without caring about the people who buy their products. As a result, most of the corporations had no conscience. Besides, people should also be conscientious. We should use our brains to think before we act. For example, the soldiers of the army had no conscience because they act like machines without thinking what they were doing. “The mass of men serve the state thus, not as men mainly, but as machines.” In brief, Thoreau believed that we should be ruled by conscience instead of the inexpedient government which had no conscience. Besides, we should do something to stop the “machine.”