Humanity In Henry David Thoreau's Civil Disobedience

Like Martin Luther King Jr once said “One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.”  With these words in mind, I affirm the resolution resolved: Civil disobedience in a democracy is morally justified. I offer the following definitions to help clarify the round: Civil disobedience is nonviolent refusal to follow the laws or demands of government to prove a point and the person participating in civil disobedience has to accept the consequences. A democracy is a government by the people, where the people elect representatives or the leader. Not everyone has to vote in a democracy but, the leaders or representatives have to be decided by the majority of eligible voters.

Throughout history, occasions arise in which a subjugated people disobey the authority of their government. Many of the individuals participating in these acts of disobedience cite a contradiction of beliefs as their primary motive for rebelling. In the article, “Politics drawn from the very words of scripture”, by Jacques-Benigne Bossuet and the article, “Civil Disobedience”, by Henry Thoreau, the authors both provide varying opinions on rebelling against authoritative figures. Bossuet argued that monarchs received their authority directly from God. This view required all subjugated people to obey their king without argument.

What is the price you are willing to pay for your so called “freedom”? Is it worth being silenced and having to obey unjust laws? People like Mahatma Gandhi, David Thoreau, Martin Luther King Jr., Ralph Waldo Emerson and Bernie Sanders have shown their thoughts against the prejudiced by preaching and showing examples of civil disobedience. The term civil disobedience means “refusal to comply with certain laws or to pay taxes and fines, as a peaceful form of political protest.” Theories on this term have been around for a long time.

Civil disobedience is a refusal to obey a law or non-payment of taxes. Many of them like Martin Luther King Jr. and Mahatma Gandhi has disobey the laws and changed the world. Although some may argue that civil disobedience cannot be justified as a democracy, I assert that it can be justified as a democracy because unjust laws are made by a democratic legislatures and also can be changed by a democratic legislatures. Civil disobedience in a democracy is justified as morally. It is refusal to obey government law and act as non-violent.

In Civil Disobedience, Henry David Thoreau questions what men should do when unjust laws exist. He asks, "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 says that most people wait until the majority have been persuaded to alter the unjust laws. Socrates would agree that most people do wait until the majority believes that the law is unjust. In the short account that Socrates shares when the oligarchy was established, Socrates and four other men were summoned to the Hall by the Thirty.

Civil disobedience is the refusal of something in a friendly manner. Politically, America is in a rough situation. America as a whole is slowly separating as a nation. For instance, African-Americans believe they are experiencing prejudice from “white” people. In Baton Rouge, Louisiana there a revolt organized by the infamous “Black Lives Matter” organization.

Henry David Thoreau’s “On the Duty of Civil Disobedience” (first presented in 1848 and first published 1849) insists, — “That government is best which governs least”, or alternatively, — “That government is best which governs not at all.” Thoreau develops and supports his thesis statement by explaining what government is at best (an expedient) and usually is (inexpedient), and by giving a specific and current example to his readers. The author’s purpose was to educate the masses regarding civil disobedience, teaching them not only that it’s allowed, but that it’s a duty upon them in order to create an ideal government or even world. Thoreau’s intended audience is clearly the people who, as Thoreau himself said, “would not have consented to

Throughout all of time, people have needed to live according to their own agendas. Being forced to live a certain way has only caused trouble. That is why Henry David Thoreau supported civil disobedience to help people live according to their own beliefs. In the essay “On Civil Disobedience” by Henry David Thoreau, the author defined and explained the effect of civil disobedience. Thoreau defined it as, civil disobedience is any peaceful action that demonstrates the disagreement of a person or persons with their government.

“Civil Disobedience” by Henry David Thoreau, was written in 1846 because he was enraged about being put in jail over not paying his taxes. Thoreau did not support the southern government and slavery therefore he did not feel as if he should pay taxes. He did not agree with the war with Mexico and he felt as if it would only give southern states more power and more southern “slave” states. In jail alone and having time to think, Henry David Thoreau, wrote this essay on his experiences and beliefs.

Civil disobedience is the refusal to behave in accordance with certain societal norms or to obey certain laws that are seen as unjust. In short, civil disobedience can range from sit-ins, to protests, to marches. Civil disobedience is a tool often used by disenfranchised and downtrodden citizens to usher change from their governments in regard to laws or systems they see as unjust. It allows the citizens of a nation to bring about necessary change in their country without violence. Civil disobedience has proven time and again to be an effective tool in ushering in change throughout history and even today.