A Rhetorical Analysis Of Civil Disobedience By Thoreau

422 Words2 Pages
Throughout history there have been many political changes that are either supported, or not, by citizens. In the given passage from, "Civil Disobedience," by Thoreau, a perspective of disagreeing with the government ways, is provided. Thoreau explains how a government should be in comparison to how it really is by utilizing his words to set the tone and mode, imagery to achieve his audience's understanding, and diction to make his writing scholarly. Although tone and mode are not directly stated, you can infer that Thoreau meant for his writing to be taken as serious and powerful. His implementation of words such as, "inexpedient," "execute," " integrity," and "command," makes one think about their lawful rights and reflect on what rights are supported or…show more content…
Towards the beginning of the passage, it is said, "the standing army is only an arm of the standing government." This gives the readers the image of the government as a person in which the army is only but an arm. The arm is an important limb of the body, such as the army to the government, but it is not the only thing that helps the body function. The government is not just relying on the support from its army, but from every other aspect, such as the citizens. The passage also says, "trade and commerce, if they were not made of Indian rubber, would never manage to bounce over the obstacles which legislators are constantly putting in their way. This use of imagery gives the reader the visualization of a rubber ball bouncing over building blocks which are put there to try to prevent it from going through. If the ball did not reply on what it is made from, it would simply roll into the blocks and be stopped. Similarly, if businesses did not have outside, reliable factors aside from the government, the legislators would prevent it from moving forward by having to follow the rules
Open Document