This document is a classic American essay by Thoreau in which he expresses his philosophy and criticises the state. It has influenced many social movements and thinkers. However, it has some weaknesses and contradictions in his argumentation and some assumptions and prejudices that he does not explain or justify. What are your thoughts on this?
Some weeks ago I was reading Thoreau's "On the Duty of Civil Disobedience" aloud at bed-time to my son, who of course does not understand it but appreciates the sound of the words all the same, when I discovered that its famous title was in fact not the original! The original title was significantly more radical: "Resistance to Civil Government."
It's quite short, and I would encourage everyone here to read (or re-read) it. It is still tremendously relevant. Re-reading it with the original (un-sanitized) title in mind, it lands even harder.
These days, Thoreau would probably get his door kicked in.
Here's a free link to the Project Gutenberg copy: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/71/71-h/71-h.htm
Share your favorite quotes, after reading.
Discussion
Firstly, Thoreau's essay is a powerful call for civil disobedience, but it is not the only way to resist injustice. There are many examples of peaceful and effective social movements that have changed the world without using violence or breaking laws. Here a few examples: https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/peace-protests-dallas-response/
5 Peaceful Protests That Led to Social and Political Changes (globalcitizen.org)
Secondly, Civil disobedience is not a panacea for every problem. It depends on the context, the consequences and the alternatives. Before you decide to follow Thoreau's advice, ask yourself: Is this the best way to achieve my goal? What are the risks and benefits? Are there other options? Think critically and act responsibly.
Thirdly, Thoreau wrote his essay in a different time and place than we do. He was reacting to specific problems he faced, such as slavery and the Mexican-American War. His arguments may not be applicable to our situation today or may need to be updated or modified. Do not take his words as gospel, but question them, challenge them and compare them with other perspectives.
Fourthly, Thoreau had a noble vision of a government based on conscience and justice, not majority rule or expediency. But he also recognised that such a government was not yet possible and that people were not yet ready for it. He did not reject all forms of government, but he wanted a better one. How can we work together to create a more just and democratic society? How can we improve our existing institutions and laws? How can we hold our leaders accountable?
Fithly, Thoreau was a man of principle, but also a man of privilege. He could afford to break the law and go to jail because he had friends who supported him and bailed him out. He did not have to fear losing his job, his family or his life. He also did not think about the impact of his crime on others who might suffer even more than he did. How can we balance our individual rights and responsibilities with our social duties and responsibilities? How can we stand up for ourselves without harming others?