Get hundreds more LitCharts at www.litcharts.

com

Civil Disobedience
believed in Ralph Waldo Emerson’s teachings that change and
INTR
INTRODUCTION
ODUCTION reform begin with the way an individual chooses to live one’s
life. Thus, as a follower of the Emerson’s transcendentalist
BRIEF BIOGRAPHY OF HENRY DAVID THOREAU movement, Thoreau practiced self-sufficiency and tried not to
Henry David Thoreau was born on July 12, 1817 in Concord depend too much on material goods. However, after America’s
Massachusetts, to John Thoreau, a pencil maker, and Cynthia declaration of war, though Thoreau still considered himself part
Dunbar. He finished his primary and secondary education in of the transcendentalist movement, he no longer believed that
Concord before completing his undergraduate education at an individual’s way of life was enough to spur change. He
Harvard. Though he suffered from medical and financial believed that an individual must act to bring about the change
hardships during his undergraduate years, he ultimately he or she desires, an idea that spurred his writing of “Civil
graduated with distinction in 1937. He briefly took a job as a Disobedience.”
teacher before starting work at his father’s pencil factory.
Thoreau returned to the education field when he decided to
RELATED LITERARY WORKS
start a school in Concord with his brother in 1839, before
closing it permanently two years later, when his brother fell ill. As a leading Transcendentalist, Thoreau usually stressed the
By this point, Thoreau had already begun to show interest in importance of simple living and the importance of surrounding
different pursuits, primarily nature and writing. Shortly after oneself with nature. His most famous works focused on these
the closure of the school, Ralph Waldo Emerson, one of the ideals and their contrast with the material world and its
foremost thinkers and philosophers of Thoreau’s time (who superficial concerns. Walden
alden, for example, is a book that
also happened to be his neighbor, mentor, and friend) invited Thoreau wrote while living in a small cabin in the woods by
Thoreau to live with him as a handy man. Though Thoreau had Walden Pond. It is one of his most famous works and is now
become an informal mentee of Emerson’s upon his graduation considered by many to be an American classic. Though it is less
from Harvard, it wasn’t until he began living with Emerson over openly political than “Civil Disobedience,” Walden does have
the next two years that he fully immersed himself in Emerson’s some similarities to the essay, especially when it discusses the
teachings. Thoreau began writing seriously under Emerson’s virtues of living independently (and thus not having to depend
guidance and began to publish some poems and essays. At the on the State for certain needs). Life Without Interest, which was
same time, he learned all about the philosophy of published posthumously in 1863, also shares similarities with
Transcendentalism, a mode of living that stressed the “Civil Disobedience.” In it, Thoreau argues against living a life in
importance of putting spiritual concerns over material ones. pursuit of money, because he believes doing so will damage
Later, with Emerson’s help, Thoreau built a small house on land one’s ability to make moral decisions. He argues instead that
that Emerson owned on the shores of Walden Pond. Thoreau one should pursue occupations that bring one joy and
moved into the house on July 4th, 1845. Over the next two happiness. Of course, in any discussion about Thoreau and
years, surrounded by nature, he wrote his first two books and Transcendentalism, one cannot fail to mention Ralph Waldo
tried to live by Transcendentalist doctrines. After leaving the Emerson. As Thoreau’s mentor and the father of
pond, he published his books and found modest success. For Transcendentalism, Emerson and his works had a profound
the rest of his writing career, he journaled extensively about influence on Thoreau. Emerson published “Nature” in 1836 and
nature and continued publishing and revising essays about “Self-Reliance” in 1841, and both works laid the foundations of
issues important to him, such as the abolition of slavery and the Transcendentalist doctrines that underlie many of
the importance of practicing civil disobedience. Thoreau died of Thoreau’s own writings. While “Nature” encourages readers to
tuberculosis in May 1862. reclaim their affinity to nature and sever some of their bonds to
society, “Self-Reliance” encourages readers to trust themselves
and be wary of the powerful influence of institutions and their
HISTORICAL CONTEXT
impact on one’s individual thought.
Thoreau was an ardent abolitionist during a time when slavery
was an increasingly polarizing issue for most of the nation.
KEY FACTS
Therefore, when the American government declared war on
Mexico in 1846, while he was living at Walden Pond, Thoreau • Full Title: Civil Disobedience or Resistance to Civil
saw the war as an American plot to seize land from Mexico and Government.
spread slavery. As a result, Thoreau refused to pay taxes in • When Written: 1848
objection to this power grab. Leading up to the war, Thoreau • Where Written: Concord, Massachusetts

©2020 LitCharts LLC v.007 www.LitCharts.com Page 1

 Get hundreds more LitCharts at www.litcharts.com
• When Published: 1849 government, especially because it also protects the institution
• Literary Period: Early 19th century American Literature, of slavery.
Transcendentalism, Abolitionism Thoreau reminds his audience of their right to revolt against a
• Genre: Essay; Nonfiction tyrannical government, arguing that it is right and just to do
• Setting: The United States of America; Massachusetts away with the “machine” of any government that oppresses,
robs, and practices slavery. Though Thoreau brings up William
• Climax: Thoreau entreats the American people to give up
their rights to property and protection from the state Paley’s writings in “Duty of Submission to Civil Government,” as
a counter opinion to his argument, he ultimately debunks
• Antagonist: The American Government
Paley’s idea that one should not resist a government if it will be
• Point of View: First-person an “inconvenience” to the public. Thoreau’s dissenting response
is short: the people should always pursue justice, as
EXTRA CREDIT inconvenient and risky as it may be. He argues that the people
Friends Forever: Thoreau first met Emerson during a Harvard must reject slavery and halt the war in Mexico, even if doing so
lecture Emerson delivered on “The American Scholar.” The tears the nation apart.
speech was so inspiring that Thoreau approached Emerson From there, Thoreau turns his attention to Massachusetts its
afterwards, which was the beginning of what would go on to be residents, who, in his opinion, are not ready to shoulder the
a lifelong friendship. costs of justice. He critiques his fellow Massachusetts residents
for being more interested in commerce and agriculture and for
Thoreau: Writer and Railroad Conductor. Thoreau was an failing to do anything to stop the Mexican-American war and
ardent abolitionist. For a time he served as a conductor for the end slavery. Thoreau also criticizes them for petitioning the
Underground Railroad, a system that helped fugitive enslaved state or voting as their primary ways of bringing about change.
people make their way to free states and Canada. He notes that none of these official channels is effective for
ending slavery and the war. He emphasizes that voting is simply
a way to express one’s feeble desire for an outcome. That
PL
PLO
OT SUMMARY people find these channels of change worthwhile worries
Thoreau; he wonders about the passive and “odd” character of
Henry David Thoreau begins “Civil Disobedience” by reflecting the American citizen.
on the best form of government. He admits that he believes
that the best government is one that governs “not at all.” From Though Thoreau admits that he does not think people should
there, he asks his readers to reflect on the purpose of a make it their goal in life to abolish all of the world’s wrongs, he
standing government such as the one the United States has continues to argue that people have the duty to at least reject
currently. He argues that like a standing army, a standing an institution that practices immoral acts. This point brings him
government can be perverted and corrupted to serve the to double down on his critiques of petitioning the government.
ambitions of a few powerful people instead of all the American Thoreau wonders why people are petitioning the state to
people. dissolve the union, when they have the power to dissolve it
themselves. He argues that men should not simply have an
Thoreau goes on to critique the American government and its opinion (by petitioning). Rather, they must take practical steps
role in furthering injustice and its limited success in governing to make that opinion a reality.
so far. He argues that all of America’s successes have been the
result of the American people instead of the American Thoreau reminds his audience of the stakes of the situation,
government. Thoreau then makes his first plea to readers, arguing that they must try to amend the unjust laws because,
calling for a “better government,” instead of the faulty contrary to popular opinion, remedying any evil is better than
government he and his fellow citizens currently have. He continuing to perpetuate that evil in the name of patriotism. He
argues that the power of governing is with the people and argues that breaking the law is the only way not to avoid
therefore the American people must take back their ability to enabling the evil that one condemns. Thoreau notes again that
think and act for themselves “as men first and subjects these efforts cannot occur through state-run channels. Instead,
afterwards.” Thoreau implores his audience to think carefully he implores the Massachusetts people to withdraw their
about the law and its capacity to promote injustice, arguing that support in “person” and “property” from the Massachusetts
his fellow citizens must risk breaking the law and becoming government. He argues that if only a few “honest” men
“bad” citizens in the pursuit of justice. Though the state may withdrew from supporting the state (by refusing to pay taxes
treat them as enemies as a result, Thoreau argues that there is and going to jail), slavery would cease to exist. Refusing
no other way forward. That is, the state’s abuse of power is so allegiance to the state as a tax-payer, as a tax-gatherer, and as a
great that one cannot in good conscience recognize this public official are all ways to achieve the revolution that
Thoreau calls for.

©2020 LitCharts LLC v.007 www.LitCharts.com Page 2

 Get hundreds more LitCharts at www.litcharts.com
Thoreau also points out how difficult it is for the rich to practice examples such as the Mexican-American war and the
civil disobedience. He notes that people with a lot of wealth and government’s continued support of slavery. Yet he also
property to lose will always be more allegiant to the institution deliberately shows his hope and faith in the American people
that protects them and their property. This causes Thoreau to throughout the essay, even as his hope in the government
reflect on the difficulties and risks associated with practicing wanes. His message to his audience is this: though the
civil disobedience, such as jail time, the loss of property, and the government may seem indomitable, the American people are
loss of state protection. However, he suggests that one must the ones who hold the true power in the nation because of their
avoid this bind by depending on oneself while shunning wealth. belief in justice. Thoreau thus encourages the American people
Thoreau goes on to give examples of his own efforts to practice to use their power strategically, rebel against the State, and
civil disobedience. He describes how he has refused to pay practice civil disobedience by refusing, for example, to pay
taxes towards a church congregation and refused to pay a poll taxes. He encourages them to do this not only as a way to
tax. He was imprisoned for not paying the poll tax and spent a object to the government’s continued abuse of power, but as a
night in prison with a fellow Prisoner, who had been imprisoned way of wresting back some of their agency, which Thoreau
for allegedly burning a barn. The experience was disorienting to believes the government has taken from the citizens in order to
Thoreau, and he reflects on the new insight the experience make them into docile servants of the state.
brought him. He sees his surroundings with a clearer The American Go Govvernment – The American Government is
perspective and walks away with a deeper understanding of the the chief antagonist of Thoreau and the American people. It is
place he has lived for most of his life. After his imprisonment, he the government’s actions that Thoreau is most concerned with
begins to look at his neighbors skeptically; they seem like weak in the essay—in fact, they’re the reason he pens the essay in the
men and women who are so averse to risk that they don’t care first place. The government’s actions, primarily its participation
about doing what is right. in the Mexican-American war and in slavery, are signs of its
Thoreau turns back to the matter of civil disobedience, saying corruption. To Thoreau, the government is a self-serving body
that refusing to pay one’s taxes is akin to refusing allegiance to that claims to work for the good of the American people, when
the state. As a citizen, he argues that it is his right to review the in reality it works for the benefit of a powerful few. What’s
actions of the state when the tax-gatherers come to him, and, more, it thwarts the law and ethics of Christianity and God,
based on the morality of the state’s actions, refuse or consent upholds immorality, and gives its citizens little to no respect.
to paying what they demand. For these reason, Thoreau entreats his audience to give the
government little to no respect in return. He incites the
Thoreau argues that citizens must look at the state’s actions
American People to practice civil disobedience by refusing to
from a higher point of view, one that allows them to stand a bit
pay taxes as a way of limiiting the government’s power. Because
apart from the state so that they can “nakedly behold it.” He
Thoreau fears that the government has become too powerful,
states, for example, that people must not align themselves with
he relies on the American people to check the state. To
the Constitution simply because it is the original law of the
Thoreau, a government with immoral tendencies cannot be
land. Rather, they should look for “purer sources of truth,” in
deserving of the American people’s trust or taxes. Thus,
order to answer the pressing moral questions of their day.
Thoreau sees the American people and the government as
Thoreau ends by reminding his audience that the locked in a hostile tension.
government—to rule justly—must have the consent of the
The American P People
eople – The American people are Thoreau’s
people it governs and recognize the individual as a “higher and
intended audience in “Civil Disobedience.” They are his fellow
independent power.” According to him, this is the key to a free,
citizens, and Thoreau has big expectations for them. Though he
enlightened, and glorious state, one that treats all men justly
believes in their goodness and their impulse toward justice, he
and with respect.
also notes that some are misguided patriots who serve the
immoral state blindly. Nevertheless, the American people are
the hope that Thoreau sees in the nation. In other words, they
CHARA
CHARACTERS
CTERS are the way out of the moral bind that the American
Henry DaDavid
vid Thoreau – Henry David Thoreau is the narrator government has pulled the nation into. The American people,
of “Civil Disobedience.” He writes the essay as a concerned and so long as they heed Thoreau’s call and practice civil
discontented American citizen, who feels it is his duty and right disobedience, hold the power to change the course of the
to critique the American government’s actions, rebel against nation.
laws that he finds unjust, and galvanize other citizens to follow The Prisoner – The Prisoner is Thoreau’s roommate during the
suit. He spends most of the essay doing just that. Thoreau only night Thoreau spends in prison for refusing to pay the poll
begins by calling attention to the recent injustices that the tax. He is Thoreau’s companion as well as his guide to
government has committed in the name of the people, using navigating a night in prison. According to Thoreau, he is a “first-

©2020 LitCharts LLC v.007 www.LitCharts.com Page 3

 Get hundreds more LitCharts at www.litcharts.com
rate fellow and a clever man” who believes he has been the current government hinders the people’s natural leanings
wrongfully accused of setting fire to a barn, though Thoreau towards moral decisions. What’s more, it is the people’s
believes the man most likely unintentionally set fire to the barn responsibility to reject this status quo and take action to
by falling asleep with a lit pipe. To Thoreau, the night in prison is reestablish the nation’s integrity.
a novel and slightly disorienting experience—“like travelling into For Thoreau, the problem is not that the American government
a far country”—and so he relies on his fellow prisoner to keep exists; his problem is with the form in which it exists. His
him company and show him the ropes, since the prisoner has displeasure stems in large part from how the government has
been there for three months. When morning comes, the abused its power without the consent of the American people.
prisoner is put to work and leaves knowing that he most likely Citing examples of the government’s recent transgressions,
will never see Thoreau again. The prisoner is effectively Thoreau makes a searing case against the government, saying
Thoreau’s guide through an awakening, because when Thoreau that it ignores the people’s wishes in favor of its own
comes out of the prison, he remarks that he is able to see and questionable goals. This claim sets the stage for his later calls
understand the state he lives in more clearly. for a new political order that prioritizes the American people’s
moral leanings over the government’s appetite for war and
slavery. One of Thoreau’s most frequent examples of the
TERMS government’s infidelity to the American people is the Mexican-
Civil Disobedience – Civil disobedience is the strategic refusal American war, which he sees as a hijacking of the people’s will
to obey certain laws and statutes of a country or state. For for the benefit of a few: “Witness the present Mexican war, the
example, one can practice civil disobedience by refusing to pay work of comparatively a few individuals using the government
taxes to a state or government, as a way of objecting to the as their tool; for, in the outset, the people would not have
government’s use of those funds. Civil disobedience is what consented to this measure.” His argument is simple: a
Henry David Thoreau suggests every citizen with a conscience government that pursues a war with the vigor that the
must use to respond to an unfair and unjust government. American government has pursued the Mexican-American War
is failing to represent the people’s (peaceful) will. Thoreau’s
choice to cite the Mexican-American War repeatedly
THEMES throughout his essay is strategic. He refuses to let the still-
fresh war fade from the collective consciousness of the
In LitCharts literature guides, each theme gets its own color- American public, in order to galvanize them to act.
coded icon. These icons make it easy to track where the themes Furthermore, Thoreau argues that the American government
occur most prominently throughout the work. If you don't have isn’t just failing to represent the American people; it’s behaving
a color printer, you can still use the icons to track themes in in a completely immoral fashion. In his opinion, the
black and white. government’s lack of integrity has created a moral vacuum in
the nation. Thoreau reasons that it is the government’s pursuit
AMERICAN PEOPLE VS. THE AMERICAN of greatness that has created this loss of integrity: “This
GOVERNMENT American government, --what is it but a tradition, though a
Henry David Thoreau’s “Civil Disobedience” recent one, endeavoring to transmit itself unimpaired to
critiques the American government’s behavior posterity, but each instant losing some of its integrity?” Here,
Thoreau cheekily asks if the country’s pursuit of greatness and
during the second half of the 19th century. Writing in 1849, a longevity is a good enough reason to erode its own integrity.
year after the end of the Mexican-American war and during a But to Thoreau, no amount of greatness is worth the disgrace of the
time of increasingly bitter political division over slavery,
American government’s actions—particularly the moral
Thoreau poses a simple question to his readers: What, if any, of
abomination of slavery. As he puts it simply, a man “cannot for an
America’s few triumphs can be attributed to the government,
instant recognize [this] political organization as [his] government
given its role in travesties such as slavery and the Mexican-
which is the slave’s government also.” In other words, perpetuating
American war? His answer is simple: none. All of America’s
something as immoral as slavery means that the American
successes, in his opinion, come from the nation’s people, whose
government shouldn’t actually be recognized as a government at all.
singular character is much more deserving of recognition than
Thoreau frames this immorality as so pervasive that the American
the government is. Thoreau not only posits that the American
people should “recognize the right of revolution.” That is, in a choice
people have achieved all of America’s successes, but he even
says that the American people would have accomplished more, between moral action or bowing to the American government’s
“had [the government] not sometimes got in its way.” Thus, authority, Thoreau tells the people to choose morality and reject the
Thoreau establishes an antagonistic relationship between the government.
American government and the American people, arguing that To Thoreau, revolting against the government’s immorality is

©2020 LitCharts LLC v.007 www.LitCharts.com Page 4

 Get hundreds more LitCharts at www.litcharts.com
necessary to return power back to the people, who he believes will immoral path and viewing anyone who stands in its way as a
make better decisions than the government. Thus, the potential of threat. Thoreau, however, believes that the true threat is the
the American people is Thoreau’s silver lining in all of this. The state rather than the American people who challenge it. For
government’s pursuit of greatness over integrity has left a example, he makes the case that the government’s actions even
moral vacuum, but this regrettable situation does, at least, threaten God: “For eighteen hundred years […] the New
force the American people to step up and fill in where the Testament has been written; yet where is the legislator who has
government has failed. For example, Thoreau reminds us that, wisdom and practical talent enough to avail himself of the light
contrary to popular belief, the government “does not keep the which it sheds on the science of legislation.” Here, Thoreau
country free. It does not settle the West. It does not educate.” appeals to Christian ideas of morality, imploring readers to see
Rather, “the character inherent in the American people has the government’s actions as an affront not only to justice but
done all that has been accomplished.” In other words, Thoreau also to God, whose code of morality and justice should come
attributes all of the good things that have come from the nation before any country’s law.
to the people, while attributing all the negative things to the Thoreau argues that because the government’s priorities are
government. However, Thoreau also argues that this so unjust, people should not follow the government’s laws
dichotomy cannot continue to exist. For it to change, the without questioning whether such laws actually serve a just
American people must step up (like he has by writing this purpose. In particular, Thoreau criticizes those who work for
scathing essay) and make it their duty to reject moral the government to wage war: “Soldiers, colonel, captain,
transgressions like Mexican-American war and slavery, so that corporal, privates, powdermonkeys and all.” According to
the country can regain its integrity. Thoreau, these men participate in war “against their wills, aye,
It is no surprise that Thoreau uses the final paragraph of the against their common sense and consciences,” simply because
essay to once again call attention to the fact that “the authority they have “undue respect for law.” In other words, Thoreau sees
of government […] is still an impure one: to be strictly just, it wagers of war as “peaceably inclined” men who simply confuse
must have the sanction and consent of the governed.” the law with genuine justice. To Thoreau, people who
Thoreau’s words function as a final rallying call for the people, participate in wars like this assume that justice and law mean
and a way of reminding them to be wary of the government’s the same thing when, in reality, they are sometimes mutually
current trajectory. Thoreau entreats them to act because only exclusive. Observing such people leads Thoreau to ask why it is
they, the people, can save the republic and keep tragedies like that citizens allow government to think and act for them, when
war and slavery from happening again. the government’s laws have nothing to do with true justice.
Thoreau wants his fellow citizens to reclaim some of their
JUSTICE VS. LAW authority from the government and begin to think for
themselves. Thus, he entreats his readers to be “men first and
In “Civil Disobedience,” Henry David Thoreau subjects afterwards.” Because American law is immoral, it is
addresses the failures of the American government only right that the people use their judgement and decide for
as it existed in 1849, specifically the government’s themselves what is just.
enabling of slavery and its waging of the Mexican-American
War (which Thoreau saw as an immoral land grab). To Thoreau, What’s more, Thoreau argues that it is not enough that people
the fact that such immoral behavior could be legally justified simply decide for themselves what is just. They must also “do
points to a disconnect between what is simply legal and what is justice, cost what it may,” Thoreau wants his audience to read
actually just. Thoreau goes further than simply suggesting that his essay and be moved to put justice first in their actions, even
law and justice are different concepts; rather, he argues that when it means breaking the law. He argues: “It is not desirable
the law often hinders the pursuit of true justice. Faced with a to cultivate a respect for the law, so much as for the right. The
choice between law and justice, he tells readers, one must only obligation which I have a right to assume, is to do at any
choose justice. In other words, it’s the obligation of every moral time what I think right.” Thoreau’s changing use of the word
person to break the law when the law is immoral. “right” is tricky to understand at first, but to put it simply, he is
saying that respecting the law should not come at the price of
To Thoreau, a truly moral government is “just to all men” and ignoring what one knows to be good and ethical. Choosing the
“treat[s] the individual with respect as a neighbor.” Such a ethical course of action should be readers’ first priority—if
government would never participate in the Mexican-American following the law means doing what’s wrong, then people must
war or authorize the owning of slaves. Yet, he points out, the break the law. Thoreau also acknowledges the risks associated
American government willingly promotes such injustices every with pursuing justice in spite of the law, noting that “the true
day. He asserts that “if the alternative is to keep all just men in place for a just man is also prison.” Thoreau is still asking his
prison or give up war and slavery, the State will not hesitate audience to break the law if need be, in the pursuit of justice,
which to choose.” In other words, the state is deeply aware of but he is also reminding them to be prepared to face the
its unethical actions, yet it remains set on continuing on its

©2020 LitCharts LLC v.007 www.LitCharts.com Page 5

 Get hundreds more LitCharts at www.litcharts.com
consequences of this pursuit. While Thoreau’s demands may natural resources—they’re the bricks of nation-building, but
seem harsh, he argues that there is no other solution for a their function is not to act for themselves as individuals or even
system that “requires [one] to be the agent of injustice to to be human at all. Rather, they are mere objects—pawns in
another.” To escape this trap of participating in an unfair legal service of the nation’s (sometimes unjust) aims. In short,
system, Thoreau calls on his audience to accept the high costs Thoreau argues that traditional patriotism depends on blind
of true justice. loyalty, which leads to dehumanization for the patriots and
Ultimately, Thoreau challenges the idea that the laws of the huge payoffs for the state.
land are based on justice. He argues that, since laws can What’s more, Thoreau argues that unthinking patriotism is not
directly create injustice, people should not be blindly loyal to only dehumanizing, but that it also reveals the state’s lack of
the nation’s laws, but rather serve their own internal sense of respect for its citizens. According to Thoreau, patriotic citizens
right and wrong. Thoreau asks his readers to do what is just “have the same sort of worth only as horses and dogs…Yet such
rather than what is legal, no matter the consequences. as these even are commonly esteemed good citizens.” Thoreau
suggests that the state markets submission as patriotism, to
STATE SUBMISSION AS A PRETENSE FOR the point that it bestows the greatest rewards on citizens who
PATRIOTISM are as docile as domesticated animals. This dynamic allows the
state to stop seeing its citizens as human beings, which in turn
When Henry David Thoreau wrote “Civil lets it use the American people for its wars and immoral acts.
Disobedience” in 1849, the United States was in an That is, the state cares for the people only in so far as they are
era of rabid patriotism. Thoreau understood the importance of of use. Thoreau implies that once these so-called patriots are
this patriotism to his young country: not even a hundred years no longer useful, they will meet an unfortunate end—just as a
old, the United States was trying to find a cohesive identity domesticated animal might. To be a patriot is to command so
while its territory and diverse population rapidly expanded. little respect from the state that one is disposable. As the quote
However, Thoreau was also very uncomfortable with how his suggests, the state also distinguishes these so-called patriots as
fellow citizens embodied patriotism. To him, patriotism was not “good citizens,” so that other citizens will envy them and aspire
an attitude to be celebrated, but rather a posture that to be “good” as well. This ensures that the state always has a
diminished his fellow citizens’ moral character and made them ready supply of patriots to use. So, Thoreau argues, even as the
submissive to ideas and values that were not their own. state mistreats its patriots, it manipulates the American people
Patriotism, he argues in this essay, discourages citizens’ rational into aspiring to be patriots, by conflating personal goodness
criticism of their country and thus erodes their ability to think with service to the state.
deeply about important issues and act in a conscientious
manner. Thoreau argues that Americans should continue to be But while blind loyalty to the state is not a virtue, Thoreau
patriotic, but only if they redefine patriotism: to Thoreau, a love suggests that love of country (another aspect of patriotism) can
of country should require citizens to keep their nation be a virtue—as long as this love leads to constructive critique.
accountable for its crimes and injustices, so he advocates for a Accordingly, Thoreau argues for redefining patriotism: to him,
patriotism founded on constructive criticism of the United true patriots are not those who readily submit to the state, but
States. rather those who challenge the state and therefore make it
better. After all, “statesmen and legislators” (men who fit the
Thoreau argues that American patriotism, as practiced at the traditional criteria for patriots) are “so completely within the
time of the essay’s writing, forces citizens to abandon critical institution” that they “never distinctly and nakedly behold it.” In
thinking. According to Thoreau, to become a good patriot other words, people who have dedicated their lives to
according to typical definitions of patriotism, one must cease to submitting to the state are the ones least capable of seeing it
be a person: “The mass of men serve the state thus, not as men for what it is and then correcting its flaws. Thus, it is left to
mainly, but as machines, with their bodies. They are the those who have not formed their identity around blindly
standing army, and the militia, jailers, constables, posse serving the state to become the type of patriots that Thoreau
comitatus, &c.” Here he argues that all the people who work in calls for. They are the ones most poised to do the hard work of
these roles as seemingly good patriots are really cogs in the challenging the state. Thoreau notes that these people already
state machine. They see their blind allegiance to their nation as exist: they “serve the state with their consciousness […though]
an act of love and dedication, but their actions in the name of they are commonly treated by it as enemies.” Thoreau
patriotism can actually be harmful to others and to the society therefore calls for a celebration of the kinds of patriots who are
itself. Thoreau continues by arguing that would-be patriotic truly doing the work of improving the country, alongside a
acts—such as serving in the militia or as jailers—"put people on condemnation of those who blindly serve the state in the name
a level with wood and earth and stones.” In other words, of false patriotism.
Thoreau suggests that, by embracing patriotism and
abandoning critical thinking, people essentially become akin to

©2020 LitCharts LLC v.007 www.LitCharts.com Page 6

 Get hundreds more LitCharts at www.litcharts.com
CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE radical change. Because of this feedback loop, Thoreau argues
that people should agitate for change outside of state-run
As the title of “Civil Disobedience” suggests, Henry
channels by refusing to participate in them, writing: “I do not
David Thoreau advocates for disobeying the
hesitate to say, that those who call themselves abolitionists
government when it promotes immoral actions
should at once effectually withdraw their support, both in
(such as slavery or the Mexican-American war), and he
person and property, from the government.” In other words,
attempts to persuade his fellow Americans to pursue justice
Thoreau argues that the state is only as powerful as the people
through such disobedience. Refusing to pay taxes is one of the
who follow its orders, and that it thrives on the money that
main acts of civil disobedience—a citizen’s non-violent refusal
citizens voluntarily hand over. Without the people and their
to obey a government’s laws or demands—that Thoreau
property, the state is deprived of the power and resources it
encourages. He suggests that people should not enrich the
needs to do evil and promote inequality.
nation by paying taxes when the government is using that
wealth for deplorable actions; that is, withholding funds will Thoreau admits, however, that civil disobedience is difficult not
limit the state’s ability to do harm. While Thoreau admits that just because of the risk of punishment, but also because it
there are other channels for change, such as voting and requires one to give up both protection from the state and
petitioning the state, he believes that those channels can’t rights to property. As he explains, “when I converse with the
fundamentally change how the government operates. He freest of my neighbors, I perceive that […] they cannot spare
argues that this is because working closely with the state as the protection of the existing government and they dread the
one tries to rebuild a more just version of that state can never consequences of disobedience to it to their property and
really succeed; people will be too dependent on the state to families.” Here, Thoreau admits that the state’s involvement in
succeed in dismantling it. Thoreau therefore argues that civil the lives of its citizens makes it especially difficult to disobey
disobedience is the only way to reform America, because it the state, because one is in essence walking away from the
allows citizens to maintain distance from the government while comforts that the state provides, comforts that include
also working to improve that government. protection of one’s property and income. Thus, practicing civil
disobedience means accepting a less secure life. Yet Thoreau
Thoreau believes that participating in civil disobedience to
also argues that there are ways to create one’s own security,
bring about meaningful change is a basic moral requirement for
writing: “You must hire or squat somewhere, and raise but a
anyone with a conscience. Though he concedes that “it is not a
small crop, and eat that soon. You must live within yourself and
man’s duty, as a matter of course, to devote himself to the
depend upon yourself always tucked up and ready for a start,
eradication of any, even the most enormous wrong [because]
and not have many affairs.” Thoreau suggests that for one to
he may still properly have other concerns to engage him,” he
truly be ready to dedicate themselves to meaningful protest
does assert that “it is his duty, at least, to wash his hands of it,
against the state, one must forfeit the right to property, so they
and, if he gives it no thought longer, not to give it practically his
are never lured by it when practicing civil disobedience. That is,
support.” Put simply, Thoreau is not arguing that people must
everybody must subsist without the state’s assistance, so they
dedicate their whole lives to eradicating every injustice.
are not put in a situation where they have to choose between
However, he is saying that one can and should refuse to take
their morals or their survival.
part in any action that would promote the state’s immoral deeds
(such as paying taxes, which gives the state funds to wage war). Thoreau also suggests that, although there are very high costs
This kind of refusal is crucial for bringing about the widespread associated with civil disobedience, it is costlier to obey the
change that Thoreau advocates for, because it encourages his state than to disobey. Thoreau notes, “I can afford to refuse
readers to think of disobedience as power rather than allegiance to Massachusetts, and her right to my property and
weakness. life. It costs me less in every sense to incur the penalty of
disobedience to the State, than it would to obey.” This means
Of course, civil disobedience does involve risk, including fines
that the state’s evil actions are so numerous and do so much
and jail time. To Thoreau, however, any resistance to the state
harm that Thoreau believes that losing his property and the
that does not involve risk—in other words, any state-sponsored
state’s protection of his life is a better price than continuing to
method of reform—is ineffective. He points to people
prop up the injustice that is tearing society apart. To Thoreau,
“petitioning the State to dissolve the Union, to disregard the
the high stakes of the American government’s actions mean
requisitions of the President” and says that these demands are
that the American people have to be willing to give everything
nonsensical: it cannot be the responsibility of the state to
up for the cause—especially their property and their security.
challenge itself, because the state will always preserve itself.
This seeming sacrifice, he argues, is actually the only way that
Moreover, according to Thoreau, voting or petitioning for
he and his fellow citizens can live in America as proud
morally urgent change actually strengthens the authority of the
Americans, without participating in the nation’s crimes.
state, because such action tacitly accepts that the state can
dictate the terms reform. This hurts the possibility of real,

©2020 LitCharts LLC v.007 www.LitCharts.com Page 7

 Get hundreds more LitCharts at www.litcharts.com

SYMBOLS must first establish a connection between the American

government and failure. This allows him to state later that,
Symbols appear in teal text throughout the Summary and unless the American people step in, the American
Analysis sections of this LitChart. government will only be a government in name while it
continues to be a tool for the few people in society powerful
GOD enough to “bend it” to do their bidding.
Thoreau uses God as a symbol in two ways. First, In exposing the American government as a weak institution,
he uses God as a symbol of morality and Thoreau appears to be challenging his readers, the
justice—things that he believes the American government American People, to demand more from their government.
lacks. He questions how government supporters can claim that It is the beginning of his calls for the American people to not
their unjust laws are “the will of God,” when those laws go only demand a better government, but to create one.
against Christian ideas of morality. Second, Thoreau also uses Thoreau will continue to build on these appeals—and make
God as a symbol of an enlightened higher power. It is this them more urgent—as the essay develops.
higher power that he encourages his audience to serve, rather
than the American government. To Thoreau, God’s moral
teachings—that is, morality itself—must come before any But, to speak practically and as a citizen, unlike those who
government’s laws, especially the American government’s call themselves no-government men, I ask for, not at once
unjust ones. He pleads with his audience that it is better “[to] no government, but at once a better government. Let every
have God on their side,” rather than behaving immorally in man make known what kind of government would command his
service to the government. Thus, Thoreau uses God in a respect, and that will be one step toward obtaining it.
symbolic sense as a way of strengthening his call to the
American people to abandon their desire to be dutiful citizens,
Related Characters: Henry David Thoreau (speaker), The
and instead join him in rejecting the American government and
American People, The American Government
its actions by practicing civil disobedience.
Related Themes:
QUO
QUOTES
TES Page Number: 276
Note: all page numbers for the quotes below refer to the Signet Explanation and Analysis
edition of Walden and Civil Disobedience published in 2012.
Thoreau wants his audience to take the time to seriously
consider what it is they want in a government, which is what
Civil Disobedience Quotes he urges them to do here. His wager is that the process of
This American government, —what is it but a tradition, considering where the differences between their
though a recent one, endeavoring to transmit itself unimpaired expectations and the government’s actions lie will inspire
to posterity, but each instant losing some of its integrity? It has them to act to obtain a better government—one worthy of
not the vitality and force of a single living man; for a single man their respect.
can bend it to his will. Moreover, it is important to note that Thoreau refers to
himself as a citizen in this passage to align himself with the
Related Characters: Henry David Thoreau (speaker), The people and against the government and to show his
American People, The American Government unwavering belief in the people’s ability to remake their
country into a more just one. He is in effect saying that he is
Related Themes: part of the people’s struggle against the government and
believes, as a citizen and not just as a writer, it is a fight
Page Number: 275 worth fighting. This is done to make his readers feel like the
fight for a better government is a group struggle and done
Explanation and Analysis
on behalf of every single person in the nation.
Thoreau argues that, in the course of pursuing greatness,
the American government has exposed itself as a seedy and
weak institution. For Thoreau to later argue that the
American People are the key to America’s prosperity, he

©2020 LitCharts LLC v.007 www.LitCharts.com Page 8

 Get hundreds more LitCharts at www.litcharts.com
The mass of men serve the State thus, not as men mainly,
but as machines, with their bodies. They are the standing Submission to Civil Government” for not considering the
army, and the militia, jailers, constables, posse comitatus, &c. In immorality of “submitting” to an unjust government.
most cases there is no free exercise whatever of the judgment Thoreau argues that one cannot blindly submit to the
or of the moral sense; but they put themselves on a level with government with knowledge of its immoral actions. It is the
wood and earth and stones; and wooden men can perhaps be people’s duty to always choose justice over injustice,
manufactured that will serve the purpose as well. Such especially when the government is the cause of the
command no more respect than men of straw, or a lump of dirt. injustice. Therefore, if a consequence of ending slavery and
They have the same sort of worth only as horses and dogs. Yet the war with Mexico is breaking the union, Thoreau argues
such as these even are commonly esteemed good citizens. that the people must boldly choose justice over existing as a
people under a flawed nation. Justice is non-negotiable in
every situation. It is not something that can be put on hold
Related Characters: Henry David Thoreau (speaker), The
or discussed as an inconvenience. Instead the people must
American Government
boldly choose it and ensure it is in practice at all times,
especially within institutions that claim to represent
Related Themes:
them—such as the American government.
Page Number: 277

Explanation and Analysis

There are thousands who are in opinion opposed to
Thoreau criticizes those who work for the state under the slavery and to the war, who yet in effect do nothing to put
guise of being good citizens and patriots. He undermines an end to them; who, esteeming themselves children of
the logic that one should have to give up their right to “free Washington and Franklin, sit down with their hands in their
exercise” and one’s ability to make ethical and moral pockets, and say that they know not what to do, and do nothing
judgments based on the pressures of living up to the State’s […] They hesitate, and they regret, and sometimes they
definition of being a good citizen. Thoreau suggests that this petition; but they do nothing in earnest and with effect. They
is just a way for the state to control its citizens and their will wait, well disposed, for others to remedy the evil, that they
actions and keep them from making their own decisions may no longer have it to regret.
about what is just. Thus, he urges his audience to see the
true price of their submission to the state. He likens the
Related Characters: Henry David Thoreau (speaker)
state’s definition of a good citizen to a person giving up their
status as human beings, to take lower positions as tools,
Related Themes:
animals, and resources as common as dirt. Consequently,
Thoreau hints that the definition of a good citizen must Page Number: 280
change by reminding his readers that, while serving the
state wins one the title, it comes with very little respect. Explanation and Analysis
Thoreau criticizes the population of Massachusetts for
failing to do anything effective to combat the war and the
But Paley appears never to have contemplated those cases institution of slavery, while claiming to oppose both. Again,
to which the rule of expediency does not apply, in which a he suggests that they are invested in being “good” citizens
people, as well as an individual, must do justice, cost what it so their hesitation to do something more to bring about
may […] This people must cease to hold slaves, and to make war change stems from the government’s distortion of what it
on Mexico, though it cost them their existence as a people. means to be a patriot. Thoreau suggests that one cannot
claim to oppose something without taking the necessary
action to stop it, or at the very least, to limit its
Related Characters: Henry David Thoreau (speaker)
practice—regardless of whether this is looked down on by
the government. Moreover, it is especially baffling to
Related Themes:
Thoreau that these people claim to be descendants of
Page Number: 279 revolutionary figures like Washington and Franklin, without
showing any of their initiative or willingness to challenge an
Explanation and Analysis unfair and unjust system.
Thoreau directly criticizes William Paley’s essay “Duty of He hints that these men are not prepared to do what it

©2020 LitCharts LLC v.007 www.LitCharts.com Page 9

 Get hundreds more LitCharts at www.litcharts.com

takes to truly combat the government’s unjust practices Page Number: 281-282
because of the type of reforms they pursue. Thoreau claims
that reforms like petitioning are ways for the public to Explanation and Analysis
simply bide their time and wait for others to fix the problem Thoreau concedes to his audience that there is more to life
so that they do not have to take any risks in fixing it than simply holding the government accountable;
themselves by challenging or disobeying the government. nevertheless, he insists that, while one can pursue other
things with their time, they must at the very least make sure
that their actions are not causing harm in the world. In other
Even voting for the right is doing nothing for it. It is only words, a balanced life full of other interests and pursuits is
expressing to men feebly your desire that it should prevail. not mutually exclusive to fighting for freedom.
A wise man will not leave the right to the mercy of chance, nor This moment also allows Thoreau to subtly argue that the
wish it to prevail through the power of the majority […] Only his American government has made it impossible for the people
vote can hasten the abolition of slavery who asserts his own to serve it without causing harm. The claim is meant to give
freedom by his vote. him leverage so that he can continue to make his case that
the American People must step in and thwart the
Related Characters: Henry David Thoreau (speaker) government’s rampant abuse of power. It is also a moment
for Thoreau to remind his audience that “wash[ing] [one’s]
Related Themes: hands of the problem,” or doing nothing, is the same as
giving the problem one’s support. Again, he argues action
Page Number: 280-281 must always spring from one’s belief in justice and freedom.
The belief alone is not enough.
Explanation and Analysis
Thoreau argues that voting for the abolition of slavery is not
good enough. Again, he emphasizes that direct action must
If the injustice is part of the necessary friction of the
be taken to ensure slavery is abolished. Any action, like
machine of government, let it go, let it go; perchance it will
voting, that leaves justice and freedom to chance (or in
wear smooth, —certainly the machine will wear out […] If it is of
other words, leaves the outcome to what a majority of
such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to
people want) is ineffective. Although the people might want
another, then, I say, break the law. Let your life be a counter
justice, they could just as well vote against it. Hence the
friction to stop the machine.
outcome is always up in the air. Since Thoreau believes
freedom and justice are non-negotiable, he critiques those
who are willing to put their efforts into this extremely Related Characters: Henry David Thoreau (speaker)
flawed way of bringing about change. Consequently, he
hints that there must be risks involved with change. One Related Themes:
must be willing to do everything it takes to make freedom a
reality, even when it is not convenient, practical, or lawful to Page Number: 283-284
do so. Explanation and Analysis
Thoreau argues that it is not enough to let injustice
continue for the sake of simply having a government. He
It is not a man’s duty, as a matter of course, to devote challenges his readers again to think beyond their fear of
himself to the eradication of any, even the most enormous possibly splintering the country by giving them hope that
wrong; he may still properly have other concerns to engage the splintering would be temporary. The country would
him; but it is his duty, at least, to wash his hands of it, and, if he splinter at first, but just as it overcame the hardships of
gives it no thought longer, not to give it practically his support. remedying the injustice it so faithfully condoned in the past,
it would ultimately “wear smooth” in time by remaking itself
Related Characters: Henry David Thoreau (speaker), The into a different type of “machine,” and government—one
American People, The American Government that would treat its citizens better and protect their
freedoms dutifully. Until this happens, Thoreau urges his
Related Themes: readers to take matters into their own hands and resist the

©2020 LitCharts LLC v.007 www.LitCharts.com Page 10

 Get hundreds more LitCharts at www.litcharts.com

government by breaking the law and living their lives to Thoreau undermines his audience’s fear of prison. He
counter the government’s actions until the government characterizes it instead as a noble place. He urges his
responds to their demands and changes its course. readers to be proud of themselves if their stand against the
Thoreau’s later calls for his readers to act will become more government warrants their imprisonment because it means
pronounced as his writing becomes more defiant. they have dedicated their lives to the pursuit of justice and
that they are willing to risk their own freedom for the
greater good.
I know this well, that if one thousand, if one hundred, if ten Their stint in prison is therefore not a sign of their failure to
men whom I could name, —if ten honest men only, —aye, if do what is right. Rather it is a sign of the extent of the
one HONEST man, in this State of Massachusetts, ceasing to government’s corruption. After all, it shows that the
hold slaves, were actually to withdraw from this copartnership, government unfairly imprisons people that hold it
and be locked up in the county jail therefor, it would be the accountable. Again, Thoreau urges his audience to think
abolition of slavery in America. For it matters not how small the deeply about whether they should continue to support a
beginning may seem to be: what is once well done is done for government that refuses to respect them and threatens
ever. them unfairly with punishment instead of addressing their
concerns.
Related Characters: Henry David Thoreau (speaker)

Related Themes: Absolutely speaking, the more money, the less virtue; for
money comes between a man and his objects and obtains
Page Number: 285 them for him; and it was certainly no great virtue to obtain it. It
puts to rest many questions which he would otherwise be taxed
Explanation and Analysis
to answer; while the only new question which it puts is the hard
Thoreau argues that if one person had the courage to take a but superfluous one, how to spend it.
real stand against the government by refusing to support it,
slavery would be abolished. While Thoreau writes to garner
support from the American people at large, he is also Related Characters: Henry David Thoreau (speaker)
interested in the individual and an individual’s efforts to
Related Themes:
reform the country. Because he doesn’t believe any act is
too small for justice, he reminds his audience that the Page Number: 287
smallest of acts by individuals are as critical to the
movement as any wide scale rebellion. As long as they are Explanation and Analysis
well executed, these small actions create the ripples of Thoreau argues that the wealthier a person is, the harder it
change that are necessary for any movement. Thus, is for them to practice civil disobedience because they have
Thoreau subtly makes the case that, even if his words only much more to lose by refusing to support the state. He
resonate with a few of the readers, these readers still have characterizes money as an obstacle keeping wealthy men
the power to bring about the change that they seek—with from truly understanding the threat that the government
or without the support of others. poses to society because it keeps them in a comfortable yet
unaware state. These people no longer entertain the same
questions about freedom and justice that those with less
Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the wealth do because, in a sense, their status and money have
true place for a just man is also a prison. made those things invisible concerns. Keeping and spending
the wealth becomes the purpose of their lives so that
questions of freedom become the concerns of only those
Related Characters: Henry David Thoreau (speaker)
with less wealth and thus less to lose. In short, freedom
becomes an issue for only certain social classes and not
Related Themes:
others.
Page Number: 285 Thoreau hints however that the movement for freedom and
justice would suffer as a result of the wealthy population’s
Explanation and Analysis

©2020 LitCharts LLC v.007 www.LitCharts.com Page 11

 Get hundreds more LitCharts at www.litcharts.com

absence, and later he suggests that wealthy people should Page Number: 296
preoccupy themselves with the issues and questions they
had before they found wealth. Explanation and Analysis
Thoreau criticizes people who are content to follow the
Constitution and the Bible devoutly without looking for
As they could not reach me, they had resolved to punish other sources of truth. To Thoreau, there is a higher power
my body; just as boys, if they cannot come at some person that is bigger than both the Constitution and the Bible: God.
against whom they have a spite, will abuse his dog. I saw that Rather than worship the wisdom of these objects, Thoreau
the State was halfwitted, that it was timid as a lone woman with appeals to his audience to commit themselves to growth
her silver spoons, and that it did not know its friends from its and open themselves to finding truth where they least
foes, and I lost all my remaining respect for it and pitied it. expect it—and perhaps encountering God in the process. He
likens this journey of truth to a long pilgrimage through
nature—no doubt influenced by his interests and time spent
Related Characters: Henry David Thoreau (speaker)
in Walden pond—that one must take. His use of pilgrimage
shows that, while he doesn’t mention God in name, he
Related Themes:
thinks of the search for pure truth as a deeply natural and
Page Number: 289 religious experience. After all, God’s laws are worth more
than any government’s.
Explanation and Analysis Moreover, according to Thoreau, the search for truth is
Thoreau realizes in the course of his night in jail that the never ending. It is an ongoing pursuit. While one strives to
State has imprisoned him because it is incapable of changing reach the “fountain-head” of truth, it remains elusive,
his ideas and remaking him into a model citizen. It is unable ensuring that one is always working towards finding an even
to “reach him” in this way, so it resorts to punishing him, higher truth.
revealing the extent of its fragility in the process. The State
punishes Thoreau because it fears him and fears the ideas
that his behavior might spread in others. This causes
Is a democracy, such as we know it, the last improvement
Thoreau to further distance himself from the state as he
possible in government? Is it not possible to take a step
notes that not only is the state “timid” and unable to tolerate
further towards recognizing and organizing the rights of man?
and address its dissenters’ critiques, it also has no way of
There will never be a really free and enlightened State, until the
distinguishing dissenting acts done out of one’s desire to
State comes to recognize the individual as a higher and
see the country in a better light. Rather than see Thoreau as
independent power, from which all its own power and authority
a good citizen and as a friend, the state prefers to see him as
are derived and treats him accordingly.
an enemy. This causes Thoreau to not only feel sad for the
state, but also to pity it because of the way it is has strayed
so far from truth and justice. Related Characters: Henry David Thoreau (speaker), The
American People, The American Government

Related Themes:
They who know of no purer sources of truth, who have
traced up its stream no higher, stand, and wisely stand, by Page Number: 297
the Bible and the Constitution, and drink at it there with
reverence and humility; but they who behold where it comes Explanation and Analysis
trickling into this lake or that pool, gird up their loins once Thoreau ends his essay by challenging his readers to make
more, and continue their pilgrimage toward its fountain-head. the American government recognize the power of the
American people. Like he does at the beginning, Thoreau
Related Characters: Henry David Thoreau (speaker) urges his readers to imagine a better country for
themselves so that they can take the first step to making
Related Themes: this unrealized version of their country a reality.
A “free and enlightened state” that recognizes that its
Related Symbols: power stems from the people is Thoreau’s definition of a
state that the people deserve. With this type of

©2020 LitCharts LLC v.007 www.LitCharts.com Page 12

 Get hundreds more LitCharts at www.litcharts.com

government, the people would be able to exercise the right understanding of their power as people of the United
to make moral decisions for themselves without the fear of States. With the power back in the people’s hands, Thoreau
its illegality. They would no longer have to suffer the wagers that the country would be a better place for
embarrassment of the government treating them and everyone.
seeing them as tools. It would give them a deep

©2020 LitCharts LLC v.007 www.LitCharts.com Page 13

 Get hundreds more LitCharts at www.litcharts.com

SUMMARY AND ANAL

ANALYSIS
YSIS
The color-coded icons under each analysis entry make it easy to track where the themes occur most prominently throughout the
work. Each icon corresponds to one of the themes explained in the Themes section of this LitChart.

CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE
Thoreau begins his essay by admitting that he believes that the Thoreau begins by reflecting on the role of the government. This
best governments are the ones that “govern least.” He follows reflection is deliberately abstract, not taking any particular
up by arguing that, unfortunately, most governments are government to task yet. Rather, Thoreau simply asks his readers, the
“inexpedient,” and that in many cases a standing government is American people, to consider why a standing government could and
just as objectionable as a standing army because it is “equally should be thought of as impractical or even dangerous. Thoreau is
liable to be abused and perverted before the people can act intent to establish the connection between a standing army and a
through it.” standing government so that his readers can have it at the back of
their minds as he launches into a more specific critique of the
American government.

Thoreau argues that the American government has become so Here Thoreau bluntly sets up a rift between the American People
corrupted that it is now being used to wage an unjust war (the and the American Government. He hints that the government
Mexican-American war), to which the American people did not shouldn’t have been able to declare war—especially an unjust
consent. one—without the People’s consent. Thus, he fuels the idea among
his readers that the American government has done a grave offence
against the very people it claims to represent.

Thoreau maintains that the American government has lost The image of a wooden gun is meant to illuminate Thoreau’s point
much of its integrity, which has made it weak enough “for a about the weakness of the government, as well as its fraudulent
single man [to] bend it to his will.” He compares the government nature. It is a phony government, because it is only a government in
to a wooden gun, saying that it is so fragile that if the people the minds of the people; its actions, on the other hand, don’t
ever used it in “earnest,” it would split. He asserts that the represent a true government. As a result, Thoreau hints to his
government continues to serve its purpose, though it is readers that they should begin to question why they are satisfied
ineffectual, because it simply satisfies the American people’s with a government as fragile and prone to “splitting” as the one they
idea of government. have.

Thoreau states that the American government, in direct Thoreau asks his readers to reconcile the government’s noble ideas
violation of the American people’s will, is not only waging an with its terrible actions, in the process widening the divide further
unjust war but has also failed to achieve the things it boasts of, between the People and the Government. He then twists the knife
such as keeping the country free and settling the west. Thoreau by suggesting that the government takes credit for
maintains that it is the “character” inherent in the American accomplishments that properly belong to the American people. In
people that has accomplished these great feats; in fact, he some sense, Thoreau is stroking the reader’s ego, trying to get
argues that the people would have accomplished more had the readers to see themselves as full of a greatness that government
government not got in their way. doesn’t cultivate, but rather represses.

©2020 LitCharts LLC www.LitCharts.com Page 14

 Get hundreds more LitCharts at www.litcharts.com
Thoreau also argues that if one were to judge the people in Thoreau is interested in actions more than words and intentions.
government on their actions, not their intentions, they would He believes that one should be judged by what one does not what
be “classed and punished.” one intends to do because actions, rather than words, come with
consequences. Therefore, people acting under the government’s
name who continue to practice slavery and wage an unjust war are
committing acts worthy of punishment, despite their “intentions.”
This further adds to Thoreau’s claim that the government is really
just a tool for powerful people to use for their own interests with no
consideration of the ethics of their choices.

This leads Thoreau to call for a better and more responsible Thoreau makes his calls for a better government on behalf of the
American government, one in which the majority “do not American people. His concern for his fellow citizens is palpable here.
virtually decide right and wrong, but conscience [does].” He He attempts to illuminate what the abusive government has done
follows up by calling for a government that does not depend on to them—how it has made them resign their ability to think for
its citizens to resign their consciousness to the legislator, and themselves—and why that must stop. This leads him to make one of
for a government that “decide[s] only those questions to which his most central claims yet in the essay: the government does not
the rule of expediency is applicable.” Thoreau pleads for a have a right to decide on every issue; that right, he suggests, belongs
government that allows the people to be “men first, and to his fellow citizens. As a result, he urges them to be independent of
subjects afterwards,” so that they always have the freedom to the government by questioning whether what is right always means
do what is right instead of what is simply lawful. doing what is lawful.

Developing this distinction between justice and law, Thoreau Thoreau’s distinction between justice and law is meant to further
argues that the law does not make men more just, because in stoke rebellion among his readers by getting them to question the
many cases those who respect the law are “agents of injustice.” basis of some of the laws that they follow. He makes the case that it
is possible to be an “agent of injustice” by following the law. In other
words, there is nothing inherently ethical about the laws of the land.

To Thoreau, an undue respect for the law instead of for what is The topic of the government’s toxic effects on its citizens comes up
right often makes soldiers march into wars and conflicts again, as Thoreau argues that the government actually
against their will, and against their “common sense, and dehumanizes those willing to serve it, such as soldiers. He questions
consciences.” He questions whether these people are men at all if one can serve the state and be a man, which is his way of
because, for them to serve the state, they must give up their suggesting that the state is degrading because it reduces one to a
agency and their ability to think, until they are reduced to little tool or an animal, a thing that is simply useful for labor and not for
more than bare resources or domesticated animals that its intelligence. Thoreau points out the problem of bestowing the
command little to no respect from the state. However, these title of “patriots” to men like this, suggesting it is absurd that one
are the people whom the government often hails as good should be required to give up their freedom of thought and all the
citizens and “patriots.” Meanwhile, the people who dare to respect that comes with being a human being to be a “good citizen.”
rightfully challenge the state are called enemies of the state.

©2020 LitCharts LLC www.LitCharts.com Page 15

 Get hundreds more LitCharts at www.litcharts.com
This situation leads Thoreau to argue that it is impossible for a Thoreau’s decision to refuse to recognize the government as his
person to be associated with the American government because of its connection to slavery is meant to once again fan the
“without disgrace.” In particular, he refuses to recognize the flames of rebellion in his readers. It is also meant as a sign of
government as his because it is also the “slave’s government.” solidarity, a way for Thoreau to say that he also practices what he
preaches and is not proud of the American government’s actions,
which are in some ways committed in his name (as a white man).

Thoreau then reminds his fellow citizens to recognize their Thoreau brings up the American Revolution as a way of connecting
right of revolution. He brings up the American Revolution as an his argument with the larger American narrative of colonists
example of the American people exercising their right to revolt. rebelling against gross injustices of power to gain independence.
Nevertheless, he admits that, while he could do without the Thoreau’s message to his readers is this: just like in 1775, America
taxed foreign goods that caused the uproar that led to the now faces an unjust threat that is just as serious, if not more serious,
“Revolution of ’75,” he cannot continue with a government than the Revolution of ’75. Consequently, Thoreau suggests that
“machine,” in which “oppression and robbery are organized” and stopping the American Government’s practice of slavery and War is
slavery continues to be practiced. He emphasizes again that also a fight for the independence of his fellow citizens to be able to
honest men have the “duty” to rebel and revolutionize. think, act, and decide for themselves what is right. Thoreau urges his
readers not to settle for the “machine” they currently have because
it is simply a means to promote injustices like slavery with little
social benefit to them. He urges his readers to rebel, as a
commitment to the ongoing fight for freedom that began with the
Revolution of ‘75.

Thoreau then addresses an argument that William Paley makes Thoreau once again undermines the argument—this time made by
in “Duty of Submission to Civil Government.” Paley argues that William Paley—that the existence of government is more important
one should not do away with a government if changing it will be than doing justice. Thoreau’s message to the reader is that justice
an inconvenience to the public. Thoreau disagrees, however, must be the first consideration above everything else, whether it’s
and accuses Paley of being more concerned with the cost of an inconvenience to the public or not. Besides, he suggests that the
“redressing” a “grievance” instead of the injustice underlying cost of not doing justice is perpetuating injustice—which he hints
that grievance. This prompts Thoreau to urge his audience to would be costlier in the long run because of the misery it would
“do justice,” regardless of the inconvenience—"cost what it spread.
may.”

Thoreau uses Massachusetts residents as an example of a Thoreau’s engagement with Massachusetts politics shows that he is
population that is unwilling to do justice, “cost what it may.” He both interested in the larger politics of the country and with the
blames this on their interest in commerce and agriculture. local minutiae of state politics that defined the pre-civil war era he is
Although he notes that many think of themselves as opponents writing in. He once against points to the discrepancy between
to slavery and the war, he argues that, in reality, they “do intentions and actions, noting that although some citizens intend to
nothing to put an end to them.” be opponents to slavery, their actions show that their interests in
commerce and agriculture come first, limiting their ability to
actually mobilize, practice civil disobedience, and do something
useful to put an end to slavery.

©2020 LitCharts LLC www.LitCharts.com Page 16

 Get hundreds more LitCharts at www.litcharts.com
Thoreau emphasizes the passiveness of his fellow Thoreau suggests that the people of Massachusetts should not
Massachusetts residents, though they consider themselves to consider themselves related to revolutionary icons like Washington
be the children of revolutionary icons like Washington and and Franklin if they rank issues of commerce over issues of freedom.
Franklin. He accuses them of “[postponing] the question of Once again, he suggests that this is an inacceptable way to be a
freedom” in favor of “questions of free-trade.” He also argues good citizen in a nation as unjust as America. To him, freedom must
that they “hesitate, regret, and sometimes petition” the actions always come first. Thoreau also begins to unravel the logic of using
of the government with little sincerity and impact. Instead of government approved measures to seek large scale changes. To
taking real action, the residents wait for others to “remedy the Thoreau, these actions are useless in the long run, because they are
evil [so…] they may no longer have to regret it.” slow to work, lack sincerity because of the proximity to the
government (the very thing these actions seek to change), and are
done purely for the residents to feel good about themselves.

Thoreau notes that “at most” these residents give a “cheap One particular government-approved measure for bringing about
vote” as their way of objecting to the war and slavery. To him, change is voting. To Thoreau, though, the act of voting is a cheap
however, voting is like betting, because one casts their vote for way for one to claim distant interest in an issue all the while
what is right but leaves it to the majority of voters to determine remaining content to leave the outcome of the issue to the masses.
the outcome. Thus, he argues that voting—even when it is “for Even if the masses share the same sentiment, and the vote works
the right”—is not only ineffective but is actually akin to doing out in the favor of freedom, Thoreau is still bewildered by the people
nothing, because one is only expressing a desire for one’s ideas who would leave the outcome to the chance that the majority will
to succeed. Thoreau argues that a “wise man” would not leave be correct. That is, he is unsure how people can claim to stand for
justice to chance. freedom by only voting, knowing that there was a chance they
would have to live with unjust results. To Thoreau, a “wise man”
must take deliberate action to make freedom uncontestable.

Thoreau claims that the masses would only vote for abolition if Thoreau criticizes voting for being a convenient measure for people
it is convenient or when there is “little slavery left to be who do not want to take risks for freedom. To really do justice,
abolished.” To truly bring about abolition, Thoreau argues, one Thoreau argues, people must be prepared to take effective action
must “assert his own freedom” and act against slavery in a when it isn’t convenient or when it is still a divisive issue among
context in which it isn’t convenient to do so or in which the people. In short, standing for freedom when it is risky, makes one’s
majority of people are not yet indifferent to slavery. actions mean something.

Thoreau then critiques the upcoming Baltimore convention Thoreau points to the unfairness of the political process for
“for the selection of a candidate for presidency” by a group of prioritizing the decisions and votes of powerful people in society.
“editors” and career politicians. He questions the fairness of the This further illuminates his earlier point that the government’s
selection process and the absence of “independent votes,” and actions are the result of a handful of powerful men in society and
asks why a “respectable man [would…] adopt one of the not the people at large. He suggests that no respectable man—no
candidates thus selected as the only available one.” man who exercises his right to think for himself—would be satisfied
with the limited options for president provided by the government.

©2020 LitCharts LLC www.LitCharts.com Page 17

 Get hundreds more LitCharts at www.litcharts.com
Thoreau states that voting in such a system is worthless, and Thoreau makes one of his most important critiques of Americans,
that men who cast their votes for candidates provided by this calling them an “Odd Fellow” that is lacking in important traits and
system are spineless. This leads him to wonder about the skills. Yet it is a constructive critique because he appears to be
character of “the American,” whom he believes has dwindled challenging his readers to prove to him that they are capable of
into an “Odd Fellow,” that lacks “intellect” and “self-reliance.” acting with intellect and self-reliance and do something to bring
about change within the government.

Though Thoreau concedes that it is impossible for a man to Thoreau challenges his audience to make sure their actions do not
strive towards eradicating every evil in the world, he continues at the very least promote injustice. This is the bare minimum
to argue that one must at the very least “wash his hands” of requirement that Thoreau believes people should use to live their
supporting injustice. One is free to live their life pursuing other lives. Although he is still advocating for the people to break from the
things, according to Thoreau, but it is one’s duty not to “pursue government and its actions, he is arguing that this is not a huge or
them sitting upon another man’s shoulders.” ambitious request given that one’s life should be spent avoiding
committing injustice. Thus, if that means disobeying the
government, then one must disobey.

Thoreau then exposes the concepts of “order” and “civil Thoreau argues that the government manipulates the people into
government” as ways for the American government to make following its rules for the sake of maintaining “order” and the
the American people “pay homage to and support [their] own longevity of the government. In other words, it is a way for the
meanness.” He claims that this support for order and civil government to convince the people that its laws must be followed at
government has embedded injustice so thoroughly in society all times, which has effectively made it hard for the people to
that it has caused one to feel indifferent to it. That is, this question the ethics of the laws they follow. As a result, the American
injustice has become necessary “to that life which [one has] people unknowingly build a life within an unjust structure. Even
made” as an American. worse, the continuity of the lives they build depend on them
continuing to follow those unjust laws. Thus, the people are stuck in
a bind: to do justice they must risk everything.

Thoreau criticizes those who disapprove of the American Thoreau is unimpressed by reformists, those who claim to
government’s actions but continue to serve it dutifully. He disapprove of slavery and the war but continue to swear allegiance
argues that these alleged reformers are serious obstacles to to the government. These reformers are dangerous because they
reform. He also notes that these reformers have recently limit the people’s capacity to demand deep rooted change. Instead
petitioned the State to dissolve the Union, even though they they fall victim to superficial calls for change that come through
have the power to dissolve the Union themselves. This leads government-approved measures. Another issue he has with these
him to conclude that the act of petitioning the state is reformers is their inability to act on their inherent power as the
ineffectual. people the government should serve. He argues that petitioning the
government to dissolve the union is ineffectual because it is asking
the government to do something these reformers, as people of the
union, already have the power to do.

©2020 LitCharts LLC www.LitCharts.com Page 18

 Get hundreds more LitCharts at www.litcharts.com
Thoreau again asks his audience about the purpose of simply Thoreau challenges his readers to dare to have more than an
“entertain[ing] an opinion” especially if one is aggrieved by opinion; he challenges them to act when they witness injustice,
having that opinion. He uses the example of a person being whether it is after they have been cheated out of a dollar or when
cheated out of a “single dollar by [one’s] neighbor” to make the they face an abusive government. To Thoreau, as people with
case that anyone in that situation would “take effectual steps at agency, it is their duty to act whenever they witness a violation
once to obtain the full amount,” and “see that [one] is never against themselves or their fellow citizens. Again, Thoreau is
cheated again.” Thoreau then suggests that action and principle interested in building solidary among his readers so that they can
must always go together in this way, whether in money take on the government as one united body of people.
disputes between neighbors or in civil disputes between a
country and its citizens.

Because unjust laws continue to exist, Thoreau rhetorically Again, Thoreau makes the case that there is nothing costlier than
asks his audience if they are content obeying them or should injustice, not even the clashes that may result from making an
“transgress them at once?” He attempts once again to dissuade unjust system fairer. He makes this case to incite the people act, to
his audience from thinking of the remedy to injustice as being convince them that their transgressions against the government are
worse than the injustice. He claims that the American worth it so long as they are for justice. However, he does show that
government is responsible for making radical change so he understands the people’s hesitation to remedy injustice,
difficult and making the American people think that change is admitting that the government makes it hard for people to hold it
bad, because it does not support reform or “encourage its accountable. This leads him to comment on the power imbalance
citizens” to hold the government itself accountable. Thoreau within the nation: the government is allowed to act however it
argues that this is the case because the government sees itself wants while it encourages the people to ignore the consequences of
as infallible. those actions.

Thoreau notes that if injustice is the price for having a Thoreau notes that, if the choice came down to having a
government, it is not a good enough price. He implores his government and doing justice, one must under every circumstance
audience to “let [the government] go” instead, to “break the choose justice, even if it breaks the law. One’s life should be
law” if necessary, and to live one’s life as a “counter friction to dedicated to standing outside of any system or “machine” that is
stop the machine.” built on rampant human rights abuse.

Thoreau also notes that he has no interest in following the Again, Thoreau includes himself in the debates about the best way
state-approved ways of bringing about reform; to him, they are to stop the government’s abuses of power. He reveals that he would
time-consuming and ineffective, especially given a human’s never follow the state-approved ways of bringing about reform
short life span. He reminds his audience that there really is no because, given the short time span of human life, one should do
way to bring about change through the state because “its very something that is effective and hastens change. Besides, he notes
constitution is the evil.” that the very foundation of the country, the constitution, is evil,
making it hard to trust the whole structure. Here Thoreau again
suggests that a full-scale revolution is necessary, not just petty
changes (reforms).

©2020 LitCharts LLC www.LitCharts.com Page 19

 Get hundreds more LitCharts at www.litcharts.com
Instead, he argues that those who call themselves abolitionists He turns his attention again to Massachusetts to advocate for a
in Massachusetts should bring about reform by “withdrawing different type of reform, one that is riskier and more effective.
their support, both in person and property, from the “Withdrawing [one’s] support” for the government by withdrawing
government of Massachusetts.” Thoreau argues that this is the one’s property (in other words, not paying taxes) is a way of taking
right thing to do because, even if they don’t have the action that would minimize the government’s financial resources
government on their side, they will have God on their side, and and thus its ability to continue its rampant abuses of power. Just
that is more important. like people must strive to do justice by any means, Thoreau argues
that they must also strive to align themselves with God first before
anything else. Thus, if the People’s actions are in line with God, it
does not matter if they go against the government.

Thoreau reminds his readers that the moment he decides to Thoreau argues that when one refuses to pay taxes, the moment
refuse to pay the tax-gatherer, he is giving the tax-gatherer a isn’t only important for the person who refuses, but for the tax-
chance to decide who he is as a person. The tax-gatherer then gatherer as well. In other words, the tax-gatherer can use it as an
has the choice to respect his wishes or he can treat Thoreau as opportunity to dissent, too, and join the movement or they can
an “obstruction.” continue to be a “good citizen” and see the dissenter’s actions as an
unfair challenge to the government they serve.

He also makes the claim that if “one HONEST man,” in Thoreau reminds his audience again of the power they hold even in
Massachusetts stopped holding slaves, and were put in jail, “it small numbers. He argues that, if one person were to take a stand,
would be the abolition of slavery in America.” To Thoreau, the their actions would be enough to stop slavery. In other words, no act
smallness of the act matters less than how well it is executed. is too small as long as it is executed well enough and hastens justice.
He maintains, however, that people “love” to only talk about the Anything is better than simply talking or desiring change without
issue of slavery in newspapers and the Council Chamber, the necessary action it takes to make it happen.
instead of acting.

He notes that, if an act of civil disobedience ends in jail time, Again, Thoreau concerns himself with the risk that civil
then all the better, because “the true place of a just man is also disobedience brings, arguing that people’s pursuit for justice in the
a prison.” Just men belong there because their moral principles form of civil disobedience should not be thwarted by the risk of jail
have already made them outsiders to the state, just like Native time. He urges his audience to see prison as not just a price but as a
Americans, Mexicans, and the enslaved population. Thus, it is reward for being a good person, attempting to minimize the
“on that separate, but more free and honorable ground [..] in negative connotations of prison. He brings up other unfairly treated
which a free man can abide with honor.” He adds that the groups in America, urging his readers to align themselves with these
imprisoned person will only be equipped to “more eloquently groups, for the purpose of building solidarity and to get his readers
and effectively […] combat injustice” because of the time spent to understand how much of an honor it is to live one’s life in a way
in jail. Thoreau also reminds the audience that the state would that promotes freedom for oneself and those around him. To
not hesitate to “keep all just men in prison” if that were the Thoreau, prison is like the school one must go through to prepare
price for war and slavery. oneself to see injustice more clearly so that one can stop it. The
state, on the other hand, sees prison as a way of controlling its
dissenters, a way to quarter them off, while it continues to abuse its
power.

©2020 LitCharts LLC www.LitCharts.com Page 20

 Get hundreds more LitCharts at www.litcharts.com
Thoreau states that a peaceable revolution would be possible Thoreau draws a connection between refusing to pay taxes and
“if a thousand men were not to pay their tax-bills this year,” minimizing the government’s resources. Refusing to pay taxes
because it would stop the American government from being directly limits the government’s ability to kill innocent people,
able to “commit violence and shed innocent blood.” He then making it more useful than any petition or vote. If everyone were to
goes even further to advise those in power, particularly the tax- do this, including those who work for the state as public officials,
gatherers and public officials, to resign their allegiance and Thoreau argues, the people would be able to achieve the wide scale
their “office” and join the American people in achieving the revolution they seek without any blood. Nevertheless, Thoreau is
peaceable revolution he is advocating for. However, Thoreau not averse to shedding blood should it be necessary, as he also
states that if some blood is shed in the course of revolution, it is argues that the blood from a “wounded” conscience is no different
no different from the “blood shed when the conscience is than the blood from battle. They are one in the same to Thoreau,
wounded,” when people willingly serve an immoral government. which suggests that he thinks the People are already being wounded
by the government’s actions even if they don’t see the wounds.

Thoreau notes, however, that those with wealth and much to Thoreau argues that those with wealth are more likely averse to
lose may find it difficult to practice civil disobedience. He claims risking their wealth and property to disobey the government, not
that more money equates to less virtue, which leads in turn to because they can’t, but because their wealth makes life more
“superfluous” concerns. Thus Thoreau argues that the best comfortable so that they think less about issues of freedom and
thing for someone to do is “carry out those schemes which he justice. For this reason, he argues that one must look at society as if
entertained when he was poor.” he were poor to see everything more clearly, especially its
contradictions.

Thoreau goes into more detail about why the loss of property Thoreau, however, does not mean to disparage his wealthy
and the government’s protection of one’s life are big enough neighbors; he reveals that he would find it difficult to give up his
risks to deter “the freest of [his] neighbors” from practicing civil wealth if he were in their shoes, as well—especially when, in addition
disobedience. He concedes that if he were in their shoes, he to the loss of wealth, disobeying the state comes with making life
would also find it difficult to “deny the authority of the State more insecure for one’s family. Thoreau’s solution to this, however, is
when it presents its tax-bill,” and force the state to “take and that people must live self-sufficiently outside of the protection of the
waste all [his] property and […] harass [him] and [his] children state so that they are freed from this conflict of interest. Having a
without end.” For this reason, he implores his readers to live life outside of the state gives one the agency to protest and resist the
self-sufficient lives and avoid amassing wealth, by living and state. They become free from the anxiety of worrying about their
depending on themselves and not “having many affairs.” This is family and their survival should they go to jail. Civil disobedience is
the key to practicing civil disobedience because, given his small already a risky endeavor, so Thoreau aims to make it easier for his
wealth, he “can afford to refuse allegiance to Massachusetts,” readers to practice by advocating for this responsible way of
so that it “costs [him] less” to disobey “than it would to obey.” practicing it. Thoreau’s way limits the harm that would fall on one’s
family and dependents.

©2020 LitCharts LLC www.LitCharts.com Page 21

 Get hundreds more LitCharts at www.litcharts.com
Thoreau provides examples of his own acts of civil Again, Thoreau takes a moment to show that he is also involved in
disobedience. First, he recounts how he refused to pay a tax to the fight for freedom—that is, he practices what he preaches. He
the church, though someone else eventually paid on his behalf. uses two examples of himself refusing to pay taxes to the church and
Then he shares that he also did not pay a poll tax for six years, the state, the second of which led to his imprisonment, to show that
for which he was eventually imprisoned. During his time as a he is not just advocating for his readers to take risks that he isn’t
prisoner, Thoreau realizes that the American government prepared to take himself. Thoreau also reflects on the importance
“resolved to punish [his] body” because “they could not reach the state places on punishing one’s body because it doesn’t have the
[him].” This makes him realize that the state is “half-witted” and capacity to challenge dissenting ideas and critiques. Thoreau
“timid,” which prompts him to lose all his respect for it and pity believes it hides behind physical power because it lacks intellectual
it instead. power. Thus, prison time is the state’s way of hiding its fragility.

Thoreau goes into greater detail about his night in jail. He During Thoreau’s time in prison, his fellow prisoner acts as his guide.
discusses his relationship with a fellow prisoner, “a first-rate Thoreau spends time learning about the man and adjusting to the
fellow and a clever man,” who has been jailed for allegedly nuances of life in jail, a life that seems to exist apart from the world
setting a barn on fire. Thoreau examines every aspect of the jail and society they live in. Thoreau’s world in jail is a world that feels
cell and occupies his time by talking to this other prisoner. like he and his fellow prisoner are its only inhabitants at times.
However, he finds the whole experience disorienting and likens Thoreau likens it to being in a different country to show the extent of
his time in the jail to “travelling into a far country.” the alienation he feels from the society he has called home all his
life. It is as if he no longer belongs to America and, for those reasons,
can no longer call its laws, customs, or government his.

When he comes out of jail the next day (after someone pays on Thoreau’s feelings of alienation become only more pronounced once
his behalf), Thoreau looks at his community and surroundings he leaves jail. A change has taken place and his post-jail eyes begin
with new and distrusting eyes. He finds that he now to pick up on the antipathy of his neighbors and friends, their
understands how little he can trust his neighbors and friends: general passiveness and incapacity to make society a better and
“They did not greatly propose to do right [and] that they were a more just place. Not only does Thoreau not feel any form of
distinct race from me by their prejudices and superstitions.” He solidarity with them, he finds it hard to see them as Americans,
claims that they are risk-averse, especially when it comes to fellow citizens, or even part of the human race because of their
their property, and are more concerned with following a ambivalence about the unjust state of the country. He critiques
“particular straight though useless path […] to save their souls.” them for following useless rules to “save their souls” while living
He realizes that he has become disillusioned by his fellow comfortably within an immoral structure as if God won’t notice.
citizens, even though most of them do not realize the change Thoreau notes, however, that while jail was a critical experience for
that has taken place and look at him as if he has just finished him, the rest of the world continues to operate as it had before he
running an errand. was imprisoned.

©2020 LitCharts LLC www.LitCharts.com Page 22

 Get hundreds more LitCharts at www.litcharts.com
Thoreau notes that he does not believe in disobeying all of the Thoreau argues that just like there is nothing inherently good about
nation’s laws, only the unjust ones. As a result, he declares war the government’s laws, there is nothing inherently bad about them
against the State because he refuses to continue the violent either. He provides room for nuance by arguing that not every law is
“effects of [his] allegiance.” Moreover, he criticizes those who unethical. Nevertheless, he notes that this does not make his
continue to pay their taxes because of “a sympathy with the declaration of war against the government any less necessary
State,” or “to save [their] property,” because they have failed to because the good laws do not hinder the violent effects of the bad
realize how they “abet injustice” with their actions or ones. Again, he challenges those sympathetic to the state to put
wrongfully put “their private feelings” over the “public good.” justice and the “public good” over their desire to be good citizens
and patriots.

Thoreau does, however, concede that the American people Thoreau portrays the American people sympathetically, arguing
“mean well” but are just ignorant of the American government’s that because the American government makes it hard for them to
sins. He claims, “they would do better if they knew how.” criticize its actions, they know no better. He shows that he
However, Thoreau argues that ignorance is not a good enough continues to believe in them, however, by insisting that the People
reason to allow others to suffer. He maintains that one must would do better if they knew how. His writing about the
treat their fellow humans how they think they “ought to be” government’s actions, in fact, is meant to expose some of the
treated instead of maintaining how they are currently being government’s abuses so that the People are better informed. Yet
treated, while wrongly claiming that this treatment is the “will Thoreau continues to argue that, while the people may be ignorant,
of God.” they should still act in line with God’s will. Thoreau brings up God to
appeal to his audience’s Christian ethics to get them to put it over
the laws of the government. Consequently, if God wills the People to
disobey the government, they should and must.

Thoreau says that, although he would prefer not to “quarrel Thoreau argues that it is his right and duty to review the
with any man or nation […and] conform to [the State’s laws],” he government’s actions and decide for himself, regardless of any law, if
nevertheless must review the American government’s actions he supports what the government will use his taxes for. Again,
and positions whenever the tax-gatherer demands he pay taxes Thoreau believes that the People hold the power within the nation
each year, in order to see if the State is worth supporting. to make these critical decisions. Therefore, they must reclaim this
right and act on it.

Thoreau argues that while the State, the courts, and even the Again, Thoreau criticizes the constitution for being the root of
Constitution may seem “very respectable” from a “lower point America’s problems. Although it may seem respectable to those who
of view,” he implores his audience to look at the country from a are content to look at the country with uncritical and passive eyes,
“higher” vantage point to better see the American Thoreau argues that, for one to see the government for what it is, it
government’s failures. He also wonders what the government is necessary to look at the document and government institutions
must look like from God’s vantage point, the “highest” vantage from God’s perspective. This perspective, according to Thoreau,
point. allows one to leave their desires to be good citizens behind and see
the country for what it is without earthly conflicts of interest.

©2020 LitCharts LLC www.LitCharts.com Page 23

 Get hundreds more LitCharts at www.litcharts.com
Yet Thoreau then admits that he would rather not waste all of Thoreau here argues that he is not focusing on the government just
his concerns and thoughts on the government, because he is for the sake of studying it alone, like so many other statesmen and
distrustful of those who dedicate all their studies to legislators. To Thoreau, to truly understand the government, one
understanding it. He notes that those who stand too close to it, must have some distance from it and look at it outside of one’s
like statesmen and legislators, will never “distinctly and nakedly political ambitions and one’s role within it. Being too close to the
behold [the government].” Thoreau maintains that these government makes it hard for people to take risks in their calls for
people’s capacity for bringing about change is limited. Likewise, change. In other words, they become reformers rather than radicals.
he critiques defenders of the Constitution as well for failing to According to Thoreau, one cannot be a true abolitionist and defend
note the document’s shortcomings, especially where slavery is the constitution; both things are incompatible.
concerned.

He brings up Daniel Webster as an example of a politician Daniel Webster is Thoreau’s example of a politician who does not
whose words are “wisdom to those legislators who advocate for any useful reforms. Webster is cautious in his calls for
contemplate no essential reform in the existing government.” change: to him, the constitution and the endurance of the
Thoreau critiques Webster for practicing “prudence” in his government must be protected above everything else. Webster is
ideas instead of “wisdom.” He argues that Webster’s words unwilling to distance himself from the very root of America’s
aren’t about truth but are rather about “consistency,” which has problems—its practice of slavery—because of his fears of what this
earned him the title of the “Defender of the Constitution.” After would mean for the country’s longevity. As a result, Webster’s ideas
all, as Thoreau notes, Webster has never done anything “to for the nation are limited by his unbreakable allegiance to the
disturb the arrangement as originally made, by which the Constitution. He is so preoccupied by threats to the still-new
various States came into the Union.” Thoreau reminds his country, that he is willing to look the other way at the country’s
readers that Webster has even advocated for letting slavery abuses of power as long as it means America will remain a nation.
stand as it is because it was part of the “original compact” of the
American government’s founding.

Thoreau states that Webster should think of slavery as a Thoreau undermines Webster’s logic, urging him to look at the issue
separate issue from the Constitution, and not just allow the of slavery from a higher vantage point, separate from the
states in which slavery is practiced to regulate it in whatever constitution, and do what is ethical according to God and not the
way they deem best according to the constitution, “laws of government. Again, Thoreau’s claim is that justice and God’s will
propriety, humanity, justice, and to God.” He critiques those must trump any government’s laws. People must actively look
“who know of no purer sources of truth” and stand stubbornly outside the law for the best ways to act. In other words, God’s laws
“by the Bible and the Constitution,” and he differentiates these on what is right must take precedent over the Constitution and a
people from those who actively continue to search for truth faulty interpretation of the Bible.
beyond the laws.

Thoreau wonders why “no man with a genius for legislation has Thoreau does not believe well-spoken politicians make good
appeared in America,” even though there are plenty of “orators, legislators because, while there is an abundance of eloquent men in
politicians, and eloquent men.” He argues that the eloquence of the nation, American laws currently lack truth and heroism. In other
these men lacks truth and heroism, which forces him to words, the laws fail to adequately make the nation a more just and
conclude that the “wordy wit” of the legislator will not help fair place. This forces Thoreau to conclude that, in the end, eloquent
America to “retain her rank among the nations.” He also words won’t save America. This can only be done by actions that
critiques legislators for not using the New Testament to shed remake America into a more just country. Moreover, Thoreau
light on the “science of legislation.” advocates for using God and the Bible responsibly, particularly the
New Testament, for an ethical compass on how legislators should
lead.

©2020 LitCharts LLC www.LitCharts.com Page 24

 Get hundreds more LitCharts at www.litcharts.com
Thoreau begins his conclusion by reminding his audience that Thoreau begins his conclusion as a call to arms, reminding the
the “authority of [their] government is still an impure one,” American People that they hold the power to change the trajectory
because a just government must have the “consent of the of the nation because the government’s power is derived from
governed” in order to rule. He argues that any transition to a theirs. Although Thoreau promotes solidarity among his readers and
democracy must mean “a true respect for the individual.” He urges them to think of themselves as a nation of freedom fighters, he
urges his audience to think about how they can take the also reminds them that they are acting on behalf of the individual,
country a “step further towards recognizing and organizing the as well. They must act to promote justice so that the nation, as well
rights of man.” as the individual, is worthy of respect.

Thoreau ends by arguing that “a free and enlightened State Thoreau ends by challenging his audience to work towards making
[must…] recognize the individual as a higher and independent their country better than it is by returning power to the individuals
power, from which all its own power and authority are derived.” that make up the nation. Though most of Thoreau’s writing has
He imagines an idealized State in which the government fulfils been critical, he shows at the end that he still has hope for an
this function, while respecting and allowing those who want to idealized version of America. This America would be a state that
stand outside of its authority to do so unbothered. He dreams wouldn’t make conformity a necessity for someone to live within its
of this government as the catalyst to a “still more perfect and borders. Thoreau admits that, while this state would not be perfect,
glorious State, which […] [he has] imagined, but not yet it would be a good and promising beginning of what’s to come. This
anywhere seen.” is Thoreau’s ultimate hope for the nation in advocating for civil
disobedience.

©2020 LitCharts LLC www.LitCharts.com Page 25

 Get hundreds more LitCharts at www.litcharts.com

To cite any of the quotes from Civil Disobedience covered in the

HOW T
TO
O CITE Quotes section of this LitChart:
To cite this LitChart: MLA
MLA Thoreau, Henry David. Civil Disobedience. Signet. 2012.
Moses, Adetobi. "Civil Disobedience." LitCharts. LitCharts LLC, 27 CHICA
CHICAGO
GO MANU
MANUAL
AL
Jun 2019. Web. 21 Apr 2020.
Thoreau, Henry David. Civil Disobedience. New York: Signet.
CHICA
CHICAGO
GO MANU
MANUAL
AL 2012.
Moses, Adetobi. "Civil Disobedience." LitCharts LLC, June 27, 2019.
Retrieved April 21, 2020. https://www.litcharts.com/lit/civil-
disobedience.

©2020 LitCharts LLC www.LitCharts.com Page 26