It’s very interesting to read and re-read this material. And I’m currently on a civil war kick, reading several novels on the topic (fav so far is hymns of the republic by SC Gwynne). I’m 1849 when Thoreau wrote Civil Disobedience, the union was tearing itself apart. The Democratic Party was fractured between North and South primarily on the issue of slavery, westward expansion was in full swing as we ravaged Indian lands and captured lands from Mexico. Thoreau mentions both topics in this paper and was clearly thinking deep about the atrocities his government was commiting and his role as a citizen of it. Was he “complicit” by taking no action to stop these sins? He could be read as an “activist” and is ready to go to jail for his beliefs, which is quite laudable, yet he also seems to be one of those people who just wants the government to leave him alone. I can relate to that mix of feelings.