Martin Luther King And Civil Disobedience Thoreau

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

In Henry David Thoreau’s Civil Disobedience, he is writing to the American people. He is trying to spark a desire for change, for people to oppose their government without actions. He uses this work to criticize the American institution of slavery as well as the Mexican-American War. Thoreau is attempting to convey the importance of listening to one’s conscience over the laws, believing that it is more important to do what they feel is right rather than listen to the laws given by the majority. Thoreau feels that people should protest against their government, but not using violent actions. He is trying to persuade the people to voice their opinions and break the chain of majority rule. Thoreau is writing during the time of the war between the United States and Mexico, which took place between 1846 and 1848. He writes to oppose the government’s actions and policies during this time period. He refused to pay a tax that would support the war and was imprisoned for a day. Thoreau uses ethos, logos, and pathos to persuade his audience to agree with his view of the American government and to voice their oppositions.

Henry David Thoreau was a great American writer, philosopher, and naturalist of the 1800’s who’s writings have influenced many famous leaders in the 20th century, as well as in his own lifetime. Henry David Thoreau was born in Concord, Massachusetts in 1817, where he was later educated at Harvard University. Thoreau was a transcendentalist writer, which means that he believed that intuition and the individual conscience “transcend” experience and are better guides to truth than are the senses and logical reason (Prentice Hall 1174). Thoreau is well known for writing Walden Pond, Excursions, The Maine Woods, Cape Cod, and A Yankee in Canada. In 1849 Henry David Thoreau wrote an essay

The Statue of Liberty is an American symbol of justice and freedom from oppression, yet in Henry Thoreau's opinion, the U.S. government is completely antithetical. In Thoreau’s essay on civil disobedience, he introduces and accepts the motto, “That government is best which governs not at all.” In his eyes, the government does more harm than good for its people. Underneath his seemingly main idea, Thoreau implies an overall antithesis where he defines who, in his eyes, is allowed to be disobedient. In order to advance this main idea and reinforce this mottos throughout the essay, Thoreau uses metaphors and juxtaposition to strengthen this subtle antithesis found throughout the essay.

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

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

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

One of the two most prominent figures in literature, Henry David Thoreau and Doctor Martin Luther King Jr., have very similar but yet vastly different writing styles. Their writing styles can be shown through their most well known pieces of writing, “On the Duty of Civil Disobedience” by Henry David Thoreau and “Letter from Birmingham Jail” by Martin Luther King. A way to compare and contrast their styles is through their use of rhetorical devices in order to persuade their readers into viewing a particular opinion and central argument, in this case they both use pathos, the appeal through conveying emotion, in seperate ways in order to persuade readers into the similar idea of promoting civil disobedience.

     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

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.

The two pieces of literature, Henry David Thoreau’s “Civil Disobedience” and Harlan Ellison’s “’Repent, Harlequin!’ Said the Ticktockman”, are two very distinct pieces of literature, but they are also very closely related. The quote is related to the short story because the concept of the quote is exemplified by the story. The machines are the people who conform, the leaders of the state by their heads are the Ticktockman and his staff, and the hero and enemy is Everett C. Marm, who is also known as the Harlequin. A way that the quote is exemplified in the story is that each element of the quote, the machines, leaders of the state by their heads, and the hero that is seen as an enemy, are personified in the short story.

In his famous essay, “Letter from Birmingham Jail,’’ Martin Luther King, Jr. cites conscience as a guide to obeying just laws and defying unjust laws. In the same way, Henry David Thoreau wrote in his famous essay, “Civil Disobedience,” that people should do what their conscience tells them and not obey unjust laws. The positions of the two writers are very close; they use a common theme of conscience, and they use a similar rhetorical appeal of ethos.

Both, Thoreau and King, in their works “Civil Disobedience” and “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” successfully and effectively delineates arguments for the importance and necessity of civil disobedience. Although both essays present very similar ideas, it is important to note the similarities and differences which are evident through the use of language and the presentation of the arguments and ideas because if it were not for the proper use of language, tone, and presentation of the idea of civil disobedience in Dr. King’s letter, he might not have been successful in his campaign; Thoreau initially presented the idea of civil disobedience in 1848, but his contemporaries dismissed his political essays.

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,