What Is Thoreau's Claim In Civil Disobedience

Government laws are necessary for our communities because if people do not agree with the government, it does not mean government decision are incorrect. In “Civil Disobedience,” Thoreau talks about government and points out the flaws in the government system. On the other hand, in “ The Grapes of Wrath,” Steinbeck talk on the birth of civilization from physical and governmental issues. Although, many cases Thoreau and Steinbeck perspectives on government contradicts with each other however they both share similar thoughts about self-government.

But they put themselves in a level with wood and earth and stones [...] than men of straw or a lump of dirt’’. Henry’s ethos shows the audience of his strategy of going against the government corruption. Henry’s speech was well-planned out to shows his audience of his experience when rebelling the government; in addition, receiving forced punishment for not paying his poll-tax. He thought out things that made himself to commit this disobedience against the government and wanted to express his experience of his ideas and strategy to disobey the government.

“You must be the change you wish to see in the world” These astonishing words that Mahatma Gandhi said made me suppose that Civil Disobedience is a Moral Responsibility of a citizen because when breaking certain laws, a citizen perhaps incorporate a good intention or a bad intention for breaking it. Citizens break the law occasionally to have their beliefs be heard so change can be assemble. Some ways that Civil Disobedience can be a Moral Responsibility would be breaking the law for the right intentions. An example of breaking the law for the right intentions could be The Salt March that Gandhi Created or, Rosa Parks standing up for her beliefs about her actions, MLK wanting equal rights with caucasian. Illegal Immigrants coming into the

What does it mean to be politically correct? Political correctness, often shortened to PC, is defined as agreeing with the idea that people should be careful not to use language or behave in a way that could offend a particular group of people. However, through generations of usage by the American government and the nation as a whole, it is obvious that this type of censorship is only a curtain for people to hide behind their real thoughts on “offensive” matters, such as sexuality and race. Many people argue that political correctness is a destructive force, one built on the foundational belief that by avoiding certain topics, the offensiveness of them will disappear entirely. It is because we as a nation are fearful of what we say, write, think, and especially of using the wrong words that may be denounced as insensitive, racist, sexist, or homophobic, that we give political correctness an unintentional, threatening power.

In Civil Disobedience by Henry David Thoreau, Thoreau attempts to persuade citizens to deliberately disobey and isolate themselves from the government. Thoreau creates a metaphor where injustice impacts a government machine. First, he writes that citizens can let the government or machine try to fix itself or try to find the injustice within itself, “…but if it is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then I say break the law. Let your life be a counter friction to stop the machine” (Thoreau, 1847, p. 134). Thoreau identifies that ultimately if citizens want change from injustice, citizens must disobey.

So Thoreau was very angry with that. He wrote the Civil Disobedience and the A Plea for Captain John Brown to try to help people to have their own base line. Thoreau is a radical and a person who want to destroy the slavery. Civil Disobedience is one of the most important book for the world peace. Martin Luther king was effected by this book so he use Thoreau’s point in the Civil Right Movement and let the blacks get the same power that

It just expresses how much King is against war in general, just like how “Letter from Birmingham Jail” expressed how people were discriminated because of their race. Rather than it being just about how war is bad, it was also directed for certain people, including Lyndon Johnson because of being so violent and being so commanding with his people. The speech clarifies how bad war is for the poor and how useless it is to send blacks to fight in Vietnam where back where they’re from, they don’t even have the necessities to survive. He said, “In 1957 when a group of us formed the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, we chose as our motto: 'To save the soul of America.’” This shows that his opposition to the war is affirmative and that his decision is not going to change any time soon.

Breaking the law for a cause is definitely justifiable, if that cause is being pushed by people working for a greater good. The foundation of America was built on civil disobedience. If it wasn’t

In the novel, the government makes use of their absolute authority in order to dehumanize and

Civil Disobedience plays much significance into current American values. Throughout the country, there are many non-violent protests that take place against the government due to the decisions that are being made. If an individual believed the government was not doing their job, they could disobey the law to prove their point, much like Thoreau. Thoreau displayed his act of civil disobedience by

“Civil Disobedience" is an essay written by Henry David Thoreau who was an “American transcendentalist society in 1849” (“Give Me Liberty”, chap 9). In this essay Thoreau argued that people should not allow their government to override or weaken their consciences because they have a duty to avoid allowing any agreement to authorize the government to make them the proper workers of discrimination. An evidence that gives us this form of information is “The government itself, which is only the mode which the people have chosen to execute their will, is equally liable to be abused and perverted before the people can act through it” (“Civil Disobedience”, par 1, pg 1). Thoreau meant that the government sometimes proves itself useful and that it

Purely in terms of common sense and logic, I do not believe that a society can be created solely based on the ideals that Thoreau has stated in his essay. Thoreau claims that one has not only a right, but a duty to disobey the government if one doesn’t believe in its system of rule. Although I agree with his statements, I cannot see past that action of rebellion. What would happen after the people unite to stop recognizing said government?