Although, Thoreau does not like the way government rule however his not an anti-government. He believes the government is necessary for ruling the country, but the corrupt government is not beneficial at all because it is only benefiting people who are involved in the politics. He believes government power should come from the people and citizens should receive all the advantage than political leaders. Therefore, Thoreau thinks the current government is flawed; thus, we must create new form political system. When he mentions this statement his intentions become more clear “I ask for, not at once no government, but at once a better government.
Even if we assume, however, that Hobbes’ state of nature is true, it still would not justify obeying a tyrannical government. Having to live under a tyrannical government that does not protect one’s rights is in no way better than having to compete with other people for survival. In competing with other people, at least everyone is on equal footing. However, when competing against a government, then there is a power imbalance and the government can use its power to oppress the people. Therefore, the people should have the right to rebel against such a government.
One his theories, stated in his book called Leviathan said that people are not able rule themselves because of how selfish mankind is and they need to be ruled by an iron fist. His political theory was that was also stated in Leviathan was that we should respect government authority under all circumstances to avoid violence. Hobbes was scared of the outcome of the social contract which meant people could get rid of the government if they were unhappy with what they were getting. In order to make well with the social contract he states in Leviathan that people should be completely obedient to the government. His reasoning was that if there was no government, there would be chaos.
However a problem in this system is the fact that the majority gets to decide which laws get passed and which don't. Democracy is a system where the majority rules. Peter Singer writes, ““It has long been recognized that there is a danger of injustice in democracy because the democratic system takes no account of the intensity with which views are held, so that a majority which does not care very much about an issue can out-vote a minority for which the issue is of vital concern. By civil disobedience the minority can represent the intensity of its feelings to the
Thoreau mentions it too, “..bt if it is of such nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then I say break the law” (Thoreau 6). They both encourage the individual to break the law if they believe it is unjust, there is nothing wrong with breaking the law if following would hurt you, the individual has the right to not follow any injustice. Both King and Thoreau want to end social injustice to improve the world. It is the responsibility of the individual to resist injustice since the government acts unjust due to the lack virtue, morality, and stamina from its people and leader. Although the government is filled with injustice Thoreau and King have hope that one day one individual will put an end to social
However, when I notice that our laws are not being followed by the people that we elect into office or public servants like police officers, I believe citizens should stand up against these officials. In this instance, my thinking matches that of Thoreau’s. Although I do agree with Thoreau throughout most of his essay, my thinking does differ in the instances of going against the law regardless of what the law is. As an individual, I do feel a disjoint
Martin Luther King Jr. once said, “One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.” If Martin Luther King Jr. and countless others had not protested during the Civil Right movement there would still be segregation and inequality. Without a doubt, there are times when it is justifiable to break a law in a democratic society. If rights are being denied, if the majority feel it is an unjust law, or even if the minorities (being that they are experts on the subject) feel it is wrong as well. Despite the social contract, it’s a citizen’s responsibility to go against the government at times. Citizens have that right to protest against the government because there are basic rights that the government must provide for their citizens.
The decision than lies in front of every individual, whether to follow the unjust laws, or not. Thoreau would definitely choose the second option and he even urges everyone to follow his example – to be the “counter-friction”, as it fits to his metaphor, where he compares the government to a machine and the injustice as a friction. “For it matters not how small the beginning may seem to be: what is once done well is done for ever.”
(AGG) As Daniel J. Boorstin had clarified, “The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge.” (Goodreads) This relates to the government form Fahrenheit 451 trying to hide the truth from the society, and had eventually killed them. (BS-1) The government tries to control the amount of knowledge and take advantage of the lack of knowledge. (BS-2) The effort to control this trait, while helping the society, will eventually damage the society. (BS-3) The lack of memory power will help avoid controversies while damaging many relationships, but, this can be fixed by slowing your thoughts and clearing your mind. (TS) In the book, Fahrenheit 451, Bradbury 's key message is to remind his readers about the value of knowledge and memory, and the dangers of trying to control them.
It also helps those who are afraid to speak out on hate crime or who have no opinionated voice be strong. Legislation allows for certain people to be protected under the law from hate crimes against them regardless of a prejudice. However, the disagreement against this is that if the government focuses too much on those who are afraid and defenseless, than those who wish to banish them have an easier time to criticize them because the government is so focused on making them an example of someone to protect. In effect, this makes them just as vulnerable for the focus being directed