Beliefs

Henry David Thoreau, Resistance to Civil Government

Resistance to Civil Government contrasts the requirements of ethical individualism with the behavior of the citizen as subject. Obedience to government, Thoreau says, is based on ""the rule of expediency,"" by which he means, first of all, that the individual should submit to its will as long as government acts in the ""interest of the whole society."" But this, for Thoreau, is no standard of justice, for what if the people themselves, or at any rate a majority of them, are bent on doing ill?

Thoreau at 39

Nor is this an abstract question, for Thoreau regarded the federal government as guilty of the gravest injustices:

I cannot for an instant recognize that political organization as my government which is the slave’’s government also. . . . In other words, when a sixth of the population of a nation which has undertaken to be the refuge of liberty are slaves, and a whole country [Mexico]

Thoreau at 44 after contracting TB

is unjustly overrun and conquered by a foreign army, and subjected to military law, I think that it is not too soon for honest men to rebel and revolutionize (229).

It is illicit for the individual to pretend that the will of the state overrides the claims of her conscience. ""Why has every man a conscience, then? I think we should be men first, and subjects afterwards. It is not desirable to cultivate a respect for the law, so much as for the right"" (227).

Majority rule does not change this. The majority rules ""not because they are most likely to be right, nor because this seems fairest to the minority, but because they are physically the strongest"" (227). While it is true that ""progress from an absolute to a limited monarchy, from a limited monarchy to a democracy, is a progress toward a true respect for the individual. . . . Is a democracy, as we know it, the last improvement possible in government?"" Thoreau answers this question by declaring that ""there will never be a free and enlightened State until the State comes to recognize the individual as a higher and independent power, from which all its own power and authority are derived, and treats him accordingly"" (245).

Thoreau sees government of his time tending rather to corrupt and subdue people than to respect them, though he holds citizens themselves responsible for this as well. Most men ""serve the state . . . not as men mainly, but as machines, with their bodies, . . .[with] no free exercise whatever of the judgment or the moral sense."" Others, though they serve the state with their heads, ""rarely make any moral distinctions, . . .[thus] are as likely to serve the Devil, without intending it, as God."" Those few who do strive to serve the state with their consciences ""necessarily resist it for the most part"" and are liable to be regarded by others as ""useless and selfish"" (228).

Most citizens are unwilling to bear the costs of moral responsibility. ""There are thousands,"" Thoreau writes, "" who are in opinion opposed to slavery and to the war, who yet in effect do nothing to put an end to them . . . They will wait, well disposed, for others to remedy the evil, that they may no longer have it to regret."" ""[M]ore interested in commerce and agriculture than they are in humanity,"" they ""are not prepared to do justice to the slave and to Mexico, cost what it may"" (230).

Merely voting for what is right is not enough. If this is all I do, I show that I am not vitally concerned. I accept the choices offered to me, leave the outcome to the majority, and excuse myself from further exertions in order to return to the private pursuits that are my real concern (230-231).

Moreover, Thoreau argues, doing what is expedient--what is convenient, what is in my narrow self-interest, what best protects my personal security--is itself a form of enslavement. In Walden, Thoreau wrote that ""men have become the tools of their tools."" They are enmeshed in the technologies and economic demands of modern society, seduced by its overblown and degraded conception of the good life. Their lives are full of stress and anxiety. Their wants are coarse, yet they are forced to devote the better part of the adult lives to endless, wearying, dulling labor to satisfy these wants. As a result, no higher intellectual or spiritual abilities can emerge, nor any finer sense of beauty or pleasure.

The government colludes with this devotion to expediency by relying on threats and punishments to get its way. It ""never intentionally confronts a man’’s sense, intellectual or moral, but only his body, his senses. It is not armed with superior wit or honesty, but with superior physical strength"" (238). People ""dread the consequences of disobedience to it to their property and families."" ""This,"" Thoreau admits, ""is hard. This makes it impossible for a man to live honestly, and at the same time comfortably, in outward respects. It will not be worth the while to accumulate property; that would be sure to go again."" Yet Thoreau unhesitatingly counsels voluntary poverty in order to retain freedom of conscience and of conscientious action. ""You must live within yourself, and depend upon yourself always tucked up and ready for a start, and not have many affairs"" (236-237).

Nor is it enough to limit oneself to ""the ways the State [itself] has provided for remedying the evil [that it does or countenances]"" (233). ""They take too much time, and a man’’s life will be gone."" Besides, ""in this case [slavery] the State has provided no way: its very Constitution is the evil."" And if the remedy should, as a result, be worse than the evil--in other words, if the consequences of defying the state are socially disruptive or lead to violence--this is the state’’s fault. ""Why is it not more apt to anticipate and provide for reform? Why does it not cherish its wise minority?"" (233).

What is needed, what brings real change, is ""Action from principle, the perception and the performance of right . . ."" Such action ""is essentially revolutionary, and does not consist whole with anything which was. It not only divides state and churches, it divides families; ay, it divides the individual, separating the diabolical in him from the divine"" (232-233). This is, pre-eminently, the individual’’s responsibility: ""it matters not how small the beginning may seem to be: what is once done well is done for ever"" (234-235). ""A minority is powerless while it conforms to the majority; it is not even a minority then; but it is irresistible when it clogs by its whole weight"" (235).

For all this, Thoreau places a remarkable limit on the individual’’s ethical obligations. ""It is not a man’’s duty, as a matter of course, to devote himself to the eradication of any, even the most enormous wrong; he may still properly have other concerns to engage him; but it is his duty, at least, to wash his hands of it, and, if he gives it no thought longer, not to give it practically his support"" (231-232). Consistent with this, Thoreau refused to pay his taxes since, as he put it, ""I do not care to trace the course of my dollar, if I could, till it buys a man, or a musket to shoot one with,--the dollar is innocent,--but I am concerned to trace the effects of my allegiance"" (241).

Thoreau compressed his view of government into a famous epigram: ""That government is best which governs not at all"" (226). But this in only possible ""when men are prepared for it,"" which they manifestly are not yet. They must, each individually, abandon the rule of expediency for that of conscience. The ""wise minority"" who have already done so show ethical leadership by their actions; they are, in effect, the genuinely ""outstanding"" men of a democratic society.

By Joseph Boland

Resistance to Civil Government contrasts the requirements of ethical individualism with the behavior of the citizen as subject. Obedience to government, Thoreau says, is based on ""the rule of expediency,"" by which he means, first of all, that the individual should submit to its will as long as government acts in the ""interest of the whole society."" But this, for Thoreau, is no standard of justice, for what if the people themselves, or at any rate a majority of them, are bent on doing ill?	Thoreau at 39
Nor is this an abstract question, for Thoreau regarded the federal government as guilty of the gravest injustices: I cannot for an instant recognize that political organization as my government which is the slave’’s government also. . . . In other words, when a sixth of the population of a nation which has undertaken to be the refuge of liberty are slaves, and a whole country [Mexico]	Thoreau at 44 after contracting TB
is unjustly overrun and conquered by a foreign army, and subjected to military law, I think that it is not too soon for honest men to rebel and revolutionize (229). It is illicit for the individual to pretend that the will of the state overrides the claims of her conscience. ""Why has every man a conscience, then? I think we should be men first, and subjects afterwards. It is not desirable to cultivate a respect for the law, so much as for the right"" (227). Majority rule does not change this. The majority rules ""not because they are most likely to be right, nor because this seems fairest to the minority, but because they are physically the strongest"" (227). While it is true that ""progress from an absolute to a limited monarchy, from a limited monarchy to a democracy, is a progress toward a true respect for the individual. . . . Is a democracy, as we know it, the last improvement possible in government?"" Thoreau answers this question by declaring that ""there will never be a free and enlightened State until the State comes to recognize the individual as a higher and independent power, from which all its own power and authority are derived, and treats him accordingly"" (245). Thoreau sees government of his time tending rather to corrupt and subdue people than to respect them, though he holds citizens themselves responsible for this as well. Most men ""serve the state . . . not as men mainly, but as machines, with their bodies, . . .[with] no free exercise whatever of the judgment or the moral sense."" Others, though they serve the state with their heads, ""rarely make any moral distinctions, . . .[thus] are as likely to serve the Devil, without intending it, as God."" Those few who do strive to serve the state with their consciences ""necessarily resist it for the most part"" and are liable to be regarded by others as ""useless and selfish"" (228). Most citizens are unwilling to bear the costs of moral responsibility. ""There are thousands,"" Thoreau writes, "" who are in opinion opposed to slavery and to the war, who yet in effect do nothing to put an end to them . . . They will wait, well disposed, for others to remedy the evil, that they may no longer have it to regret."" ""[M]ore interested in commerce and agriculture than they are in humanity,"" they ""are not prepared to do justice to the slave and to Mexico, cost what it may"" (230). Merely voting for what is right is not enough. If this is all I do, I show that I am not vitally concerned. I accept the choices offered to me, leave the outcome to the majority, and excuse myself from further exertions in order to return to the private pursuits that are my real concern (230-231). Moreover, Thoreau argues, doing what is expedient--what is convenient, what is in my narrow self-interest, what best protects my personal security--is itself a form of enslavement. In Walden, Thoreau wrote that ""men have become the tools of their tools."" They are enmeshed in the technologies and economic demands of modern society, seduced by its overblown and degraded conception of the good life. Their lives are full of stress and anxiety. Their wants are coarse, yet they are forced to devote the better part of the adult lives to endless, wearying, dulling labor to satisfy these wants. As a result, no higher intellectual or spiritual abilities can emerge, nor any finer sense of beauty or pleasure. The government colludes with this devotion to expediency by relying on threats and punishments to get its way. It ""never intentionally confronts a man’’s sense, intellectual or moral, but only his body, his senses. It is not armed with superior wit or honesty, but with superior physical strength"" (238). People ""dread the consequences of disobedience to it to their property and families."" ""This,"" Thoreau admits, ""is hard. This makes it impossible for a man to live honestly, and at the same time comfortably, in outward respects. It will not be worth the while to accumulate property; that would be sure to go again."" Yet Thoreau unhesitatingly counsels voluntary poverty in order to retain freedom of conscience and of conscientious action. ""You must live within yourself, and depend upon yourself always tucked up and ready for a start, and not have many affairs"" (236-237). Nor is it enough to limit oneself to ""the ways the State [itself] has provided for remedying the evil [that it does or countenances]"" (233). ""They take too much time, and a man’’s life will be gone."" Besides, ""in this case [slavery] the State has provided no way: its very Constitution is the evil."" And if the remedy should, as a result, be worse than the evil--in other words, if the consequences of defying the state are socially disruptive or lead to violence--this is the state’’s fault. ""Why is it not more apt to anticipate and provide for reform? Why does it not cherish its wise minority?"" (233). What is needed, what brings real change, is ""Action from principle, the perception and the performance of right . . ."" Such action ""is essentially revolutionary, and does not consist whole with anything which was. It not only divides state and churches, it divides families; ay, it divides the individual, separating the diabolical in him from the divine"" (232-233). This is, pre-eminently, the individual’’s responsibility: ""it matters not how small the beginning may seem to be: what is once done well is done for ever"" (234-235). ""A minority is powerless while it conforms to the majority; it is not even a minority then; but it is irresistible when it clogs by its whole weight"" (235). For all this, Thoreau places a remarkable limit on the individual’’s ethical obligations. ""It is not a man’’s duty, as a matter of course, to devote himself to the eradication of any, even the most enormous wrong; he may still properly have other concerns to engage him; but it is his duty, at least, to wash his hands of it, and, if he gives it no thought longer, not to give it practically his support"" (231-232). Consistent with this, Thoreau refused to pay his taxes since, as he put it, ""I do not care to trace the course of my dollar, if I could, till it buys a man, or a musket to shoot one with,--the dollar is innocent,--but I am concerned to trace the effects of my allegiance"" (241). Thoreau compressed his view of government into a famous epigram: ""That government is best which governs not at all"" (226). But this in only possible ""when men are prepared for it,"" which they manifestly are not yet. They must, each individually, abandon the rule of expediency for that of conscience. The ""wise minority"" who have already done so show ethical leadership by their actions; they are, in effect, the genuinely ""outstanding"" men of a democratic society.
By Joseph Boland