Does Thoreau's Civil Disobedience suggest that he is a strong anarchist - Annotated Bibliography Example

?Does Thoreau's Civil Disobedience suggest that he is a strong anarchist? Introduction Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862) is one of the American’s 19th celebrated civil rights activists and a renowned writer of his time. He is widely remembered for having developed the popular concept of civil disobedience in his seminal essay On the Duty of Civil Disobedience (1849). This concept calls upon the citizens to rise up and disobey laws that are unjust as well as political regimes that are unjust or tyrannical. Since the 18th century, when it was introduced by the scholar, the concept of civil disobedience has become a very popular, yet highly controversial subject of political philosophy and legal jurisprudence. Thoreau wrote on this doctrine in response and opposition to the Mexican-American War that occurred between 1846 and1848, and the slavery that was prevalent in the American society then. This work was later to have an overwhelming motivation to future political protests, particularly by Martin Luther King Jr. as well as Mahatma Gandhi who vehemently opposed political actions and regimes of their times. Whereas on the face of it Thoreau would be seen as advocating for anarchy and violence (Petrulionis Para 6 ) Thoreau’s radical concept is merely a strong condemnation of political injustices and abuse of political rights. Background to Henry David Thoreau       Henry David Thoreau had many talents and he worked tirelessly to develop them. Henry was born in 1817 and grew up close to John, his elder brother who worked as a teacher in order to raise money for settling the tuition fee for Henry at Harvard (Hoeltje 359). One of Henry’s childhood memories was that he could sometimes stay awake at night just to look at the stars to find out if he could be able to spot God behind those stars. A look at his entire life may lead on to conclude that he never seized to look into the nature to find the ultimate truth.       Henry also served as a teacher with his brother John till 1842 when John cut himself in the process of shaving and lost his life to lockjaw right in Henry’s hands. By then Henry was 25 and he was highly traumatized by the experience. He served as a surveyor and helped his father in making pencils for sometimes. When Henry was 28, that is in the year 1845, he decided to go to Walden Pond where he built himself a cabin an land belonging to Emerson. He went there with the aim of whiting his first book.       Thoreau did a lot of reading and writing at Walden besides spending a lot of time touring nature. He was at one point briefly imprisoned for failing to pay the poll tax. He went back to Concord after two years and two moths where he took to surveying and making pencils having realized that only a few people were interested in buying his books. For nine years, he did these activities as part time jobs but concentrated more on writing and rewriting his book, the Walden. In fact, he made seven full drafts of the text before finally trying to have it published. He did the surveying and made a few lectures mostly on the experiences he had at Walden pond to raise money for his support.       Thoreau was strongly against the idea of the government waging the war in Mexico as evidenced in the text Resistance to Civil Government. He also held an abolitionist lecture against slavery basing his arguments on the brief experiences he had in jail, as recorded in Slavery in Massachusetts. After meeting him in Concord, Thoreau also became a strong supporter of the efforts of John Brown to bring slavery to an end, as recorded in A Plea for Captain John Brown.       In 1862, when Thoreau was 44 years of age, he passed on as a result of tuberculosis. Thoreau left behind a lot of written work under his name including two books, several essays and a huge Journal which was later published in 20 volumes. One common feature in Thoreau’s works is the complex contradictions in them that stimulate the readers to creatively rethink their own lives as he did. About Thoreau’s civil disobedience       From the text "Civil Disobedience", it is clear that Thoreau highly values the freedom of conscience. He wrote the text   as a way of responding to his imprisonment in the year 1846. Thoreau was imprisoned because he had refused to submit a poll tax that he felt violated his conscience. In this text, he is wondering if the citizen at any given moment or to any given extent should leave their conscience to be controlled by the legislature. In his opinion, men were given conscience so that they are able to be the men that they are first before they are subjects. He emphasizes that the respect for the rights should be upheld more than the respect for the law. To depict this, he poses a number of rhetorical questions, and then presents his views: Why has every man a conscience, then? I think that we should be men first, and subjects afterward. It is not desirable to cultivate a respect for the law, so much as for the right. The only obligation which I have a right to assume is to do at any time what I think right. It is truly enough said, that a corporation has no conscience; but a corporation of conscientious men is a corporation with a conscience. Law never made men a whit more just; and, by means of their respect for it, even the well-disposed are daily made the agents of injustice. A common and natural result of an undue respect for law is, that you may see a file of soldiers, colonel, captain, corporal, privates, powder-monkeys and all, marching in admirable order over hill and dale to the wars, against their wills, aye, against their common sense and consciences, which makes it very steep marching indeed, and produces a palpitation of the heart. They have no doubt that it is a damnable business in which they are concerned; they are all peaceably inclined. Now, what arethey? Men at all? or small moveable forts and magazines, at the service of some unscrupulous man in power? (Thoreau 5). Thoreau believes that his only obligation is to ensure that at any given time he does whatever he thinks is right.       Thoreau has a contemptuous attitude towards the state. He fast had a direct encounter with the state powers when he was imprisoned. In his text, he explains that the state neither confronts intellectual nor moral sense intentionally, it does so only to a man’s body. In his view, the state is only armed with the physical strength rather than superior intelligence or honesty. He asserts: The mass of men serve the State thus, not as men mainly, but as machines, with their bodies. They are the standing army, and the militia, jailers, constables, posse comitatus, &c. In most cases there is no free exercise whatever of the judgment or of the moral sense; but they put themselves on a level with wood and earth and stones; and wooden men can perhaps be manufactured that will serve the purpose as well. Such command no more respect than men of straw, or a lump of dirt. They have the same sort of worth only as horses and dogs. Yet such as these even are commonly esteemed good citizens. Others, as most legislators, politicians, lawyers, ministers, and office-holders, serve the State chiefly with their heads; and, as they rarely make any moral distinctions, they are as likely to serve the devil, without intending it, as God (Thoreau 6). Thoreau strongly believes that he was not born to be forced and he will do whatever he deems right. He says that time would tell who between him and the state is stronger.       Evidently, Thoreau had a critical attitude towards the laws of the state. Before he was arrested, Thoreau had been living quit a solitary life in an isolated pods called Walden located in the woods roughly one and a half miles away from Concord. When he returned to Walden, he was pondering about several questions. To begin with, he was wondering why some people could afford to submit to the laws without questioning how just or unjust they were. Another question that disturbed him was why some people would obey the laws that they felt are wrong.       The imprisonment did nothing to change his attitude towards life; in fact, his previously held attitudes became stronger (Fuhrer Para 1). He says that those who imprisoned him were mistaken in thinking that his greatest desire as a prisoner was to find his way out of the prisons, judging from the threats they directed towards him. He points out that the experience made him believe that the state was timid, half-witted and had no ability to distinguish its friends from its enemies. He plainly puts it that he had lost his remaining respect for the state, and developed pity for it instead.       Towards the end of his life, Thoreau was asked weather he had made peace with his God. To this, he answered that he did not remember having quarreled with God in the first place. To him, had he paid the poll tax, he would have quarreled with his conscience which virtually meant quarrelling with God. Since he did not, he remained true to his conscience and hence true to his God.         Thoreau strongly opposes the idea of the government subjecting its citizens to automatic obedience without giving the citizen’s conscience a chance. In his view, obedience is something that can only be earned and in case the government becomes unfair, then this obedience should be withheld from it. In view that he calls upon people to disregard the government, on the surface can be viewed as calling for rebellion and anarchy. On the other hand, it may be viewed as a call for accountable and a duty-conscious governance. Since the government governs on behalfe of the people, those in authority ought to put the interest of the citizenry at heart, and not their selfish interest (Bedau 20) Thoreau’s most popular essay “Civil Disobedience” has had a deep seminal influence a number of activists. The most notable ones are the globally and historically celebrated activists like Martin Luther King, Jr. of the United States and Mahatma Gandhi of India (Rosenwald Para 6). King, in reference to and reliance on Thoreau's essay, in the wake of Montgomery bus boycott, wrote as follows: I remembered how, as a college student, I had been moved when I first read this work. I became convinced that what we were preparing to do in Montgomery was related to what Thoreau had expressed. We were simply saying to the white community, “We can no longer lend our cooperation to an evil system.” (King 429). King’s writing therefore provides another perspective of viewing Thoreau’s actions, by emphatically reiterating that their (King and associated activists) are motivated by evil system. The evil system is therefore not the entire system, nor the achievements so far made by the government, but the specific injustices perpetrated by the system. In King’s context, it was the discriminative policies that were put in place by the government. Thoreau’s position should therefore not be associated with anarchy or violence; rather, it ought to be viewed as a legitimate response to injustices. The inspirational effect of this nature of response is reflected on the high degree and profoundness at which it inspired others who were faced by similar injustices. Whereas as at the time the civil disobedience appeared rebellious, illegal and therefore a kind of anarchy, much of the freedom that is right now enjoyed by the citizens in the United States among many other democratic counties are to a large extent inspired by Thoreau’s essay or actions of Martin Luther King Jr and Mahatma Gandhi ( who are themselves inspired by Thoreau. Gandhi, having read the essay in 1906, applied the principle stated thereat to mobilize opposition against the British, resulting to independence of Indians, first in South Africa, and later in India (Rowensel 429). Apart from the globally celebrated figures, Thoreau’s’ essays, stemming from his civil disobedience, as well as the act of civil disobedience it itself, has formed an inspirational foundation for activists elsewhere. However, whereas King dissociate Thoreau’s actions and essays from any form of violence, beyond pursuing what rightfully and civilly belongs to the citizens, some people have associated the actions with violence. In Dutch for instance, an anonymous participant in Dutch resistance is quoted saying as follows: Thoreau's "Civil Disobedience" stood for me, and for my first leader in the resistance movement, as a shining light with which we could examine the policy of complete passivity which our government had ordered for the whole Danish population. ... I lent Thoreau's books to friends, told them about him, and our circle grew. Railroads, bridges, and factories that worked for the Germans were blown up (“Thoreau and the Danish Resistance” 20) This perception associates civil disobedience not to fighting the injustices themselves, but venting anger on other state’s amenities. Taking this approach, the most probable conclusion to be drawn from Thoreau’s civil disobedience is to the effect that it amounts to anarchy. Conclusion Thoreau's Civil Disobedience may be interpreted differently bay various people. He is often cited as an authority to the effect that people ought to rebel against unjust laws and regimes, which is the main ideas behind civil disobedience. Whereas on the face of it Thoreau would be seen as advocating for anarchy, Thoreau’s radical concept is merely a strong condemnation of political injustices and abuse of political rights. Works Cited Bedau, Hugo Adam (ed.). Civil Disobedience: Theory and Practice. New York: Macmillan, 1969. Fuhrer, Mary, B. “Henry David Thoreau Spends Night in Jail July 23, 1846.” Mass Moments, 2005. Accessed at http://massmoments.org/moment.cfm?mid=214 > May 7, 2011. Hoeltje, Hubert H . “Thoreau in Concord Church and Town Records.” The New England Quarterly, Vol. 12 (2) (June 1839), 349-359. Martin Luther King, Jr., “Stride Toward Freedom,” in A Testament of Hope, ed. James Melvin Washington. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1986. Petrulionis, Sandra, H. “Editorial Savoir Faire: Thoreau Transforms His Journal into „Slavery in Massachusetts.?” The Thoreau Reader 2007. Accessed at May 7, 2011.  Rosenwald, Lawrence. “The Theory, Practice, and Influence of Thoreau?s Civil Disobedience.” The Thoreau Reader. Ames, Iowa: 2007. Accessed at .    Richard J. Schneider, “About Henry David Thoreau.” The Thoreau Society, 2007. Accessed at . Rosenwald , Lawrence, “The Theory, Practice, and Influence of Thoreau?s Civil Disobedience.” The Thoreau Reader. Ames, Iowa: 2007. Accessed at http://thoreau. eserver.org/ theory.html> May 7, 2011. Thoreau and the Danish Resistance: An Anonymous Memoir [1940], in Thoreau In Our Season (TOS), ed. by John H. Hicks. Amherst (MA): University of Massachusetts. Thoreau, Henry, D. On the Duty of Civil Disobedience. 1849. [Electronic Copy] Accessed at May 7, 2011. Read More