Henry David Thoreau's Principles Of Civil Disobedience
“It is not always the same thing to be a good man and a good citizen” (Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics). Although civil disobedience may cause divisive rhetoric and chaos, nonviolent resistance positively impacts a free society by providing an impetus for progress and starting a dialogue about injustice.
Our nation was founded on principles of civil disobedience. In Federalist #51, James Madison proclaimed, “If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary.” Instead, it is up to humankind to ensure that our government protects the rights of all people. Since the time of the Boston Tea Party, countless acts of peaceful resistance have moved our society toward greater freedom and enfranchisement …show more content…
When Henry David Thoreau refused to pay poll taxes in protest of slavery and the Mexican-American War, he did not end slavery or stop the war. However, no one can deny the rippling effects he had on culture and the course of history. Thoreau inspired great leaders such as Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr. to practice peaceful resistance. In addition, his actions remain relevant today. The Mexican-American War began after an imperialist President invaded a foreign country based off unsubstantiated evidence and with possible ulterior motives. If that sounds familiar, it is due to the parallels with the Iraq War of 2003. Sure enough, that conflict also galvanized an antiwar movement, resulting in numerous protesters being imprisoned, much like Thoreau 200 years ago. Similarly, regardless of whether we agree with extensive government surveillance, Edward Snowden exposed information that allowed us to decide for ourselves. I predict that government transparency will become a prevailing issue of the 21st …show more content…
However, if we consider civil disobedience to negatively impact a free society, only two options remain: bitter violence or acceptance of the status quo. The premise that violence is worse than pacifism is easy to accept. People who attempt to evoke social or political change through violence are not revered; they are called terrorists, and they shut down the conversation about whatever injustice they are protesting. For every Martin Luther King, there will be a Malcolm X; for every Mohandas Gandhi, there exists a Rash Behari Bose. Although all four contributed to their cause, only two left behind a legacy of hope that carries on to this day. And although a martyr can strike the match of revolution, it takes a peaceful leader to feed the flames, to effect real
Our nation was founded on principles of civil disobedience. In Federalist #51, James Madison proclaimed, “If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary.” Instead, it is up to humankind to ensure that our government protects the rights of all people. Since the time of the Boston Tea Party, countless acts of peaceful resistance have moved our society toward greater freedom and enfranchisement …show more content…
When Henry David Thoreau refused to pay poll taxes in protest of slavery and the Mexican-American War, he did not end slavery or stop the war. However, no one can deny the rippling effects he had on culture and the course of history. Thoreau inspired great leaders such as Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr. to practice peaceful resistance. In addition, his actions remain relevant today. The Mexican-American War began after an imperialist President invaded a foreign country based off unsubstantiated evidence and with possible ulterior motives. If that sounds familiar, it is due to the parallels with the Iraq War of 2003. Sure enough, that conflict also galvanized an antiwar movement, resulting in numerous protesters being imprisoned, much like Thoreau 200 years ago. Similarly, regardless of whether we agree with extensive government surveillance, Edward Snowden exposed information that allowed us to decide for ourselves. I predict that government transparency will become a prevailing issue of the 21st …show more content…
However, if we consider civil disobedience to negatively impact a free society, only two options remain: bitter violence or acceptance of the status quo. The premise that violence is worse than pacifism is easy to accept. People who attempt to evoke social or political change through violence are not revered; they are called terrorists, and they shut down the conversation about whatever injustice they are protesting. For every Martin Luther King, there will be a Malcolm X; for every Mohandas Gandhi, there exists a Rash Behari Bose. Although all four contributed to their cause, only two left behind a legacy of hope that carries on to this day. And although a martyr can strike the match of revolution, it takes a peaceful leader to feed the flames, to effect real