Civil Disobedience Theme Analysis

As the title of “Civil Disobedience” suggests, Henry David Thoreau advocates for disobeying the government when it promotes immoral actions (such as slavery or the Mexican-American war), and he attempts to persuade his fellow Americans to pursue justice through such disobedience. Refusing to pay taxes is one of the main acts of civil disobedience—a citizen’s non-violent refusal to obey a government’s laws or demands—that Thoreau encourages. He suggests that people should not enrich the nation by paying taxes when the government is using that wealth for deplorable actions; that is, withholding funds will limit the state’s ability to do harm. While Thoreau admits that there are other channels for change, such as voting and petitioning the state, he believes that those channels can’t fundamentally change how the government operates. He argues that this is because working closely with the state as one tries to rebuild a more just version of that state can never really succeed; people will be too dependent on the state to succeed in dismantling it. Thoreau therefore argues that civil disobedience is the only way to reform America, because it allows citizens to maintain distance from the government while also working to improve that government.

Thoreau believes that participating in civil disobedience to bring about meaningful change is a basic moral requirement for anyone with a conscience. Though he concedes that “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 [because] he may still properly have other concerns to engage him,” he does assert that “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.” Put simply, Thoreau is not arguing that people must dedicate their whole lives to eradicating every injustice. However, he is saying that one can and should refuse to take part in any action that would promote the state’s immoral deeds (such as paying taxes, which gives the state funds to wage war). This kind of refusal is crucial for bringing about the widespread change that Thoreau advocates for, because it encourages his readers to think of disobedience as power rather than weakness.

Of course, civil disobedience does involve risk, including fines and jail time. To Thoreau, however, any resistance to the state that does not involve risk—in other words, any state-sponsored method of reform—is ineffective. He points to people “petitioning the State to dissolve the Union, to disregard the requisitions of the President” and says that these demands are nonsensical: it cannot be the responsibility of the state to challenge itself, because the state will always preserve itself.  Moreover, according to Thoreau, voting or petitioning for morally urgent change actually strengthens the authority of the state, because such action tacitly accepts that the state can dictate the terms reform. This hurts the possibility of real, radical change. Because of this feedback loop, Thoreau argues that people should agitate for change outside of state-run channels by refusing to participate in them, writing: “I do not hesitate to say, that those who call themselves abolitionists should at once effectually withdraw their support, both in person and property, from the government.” In other words, Thoreau argues that the state is only as powerful as the people who follow its orders, and that it thrives on the money that citizens voluntarily hand over. Without the people and their property, the state is deprived of the power and resources it needs to do evil and promote inequality.

Thoreau admits, however, that civil disobedience is difficult not just because of the risk of punishment, but also because it requires one to give up both protection from the state and rights to property. As he explains, “when I converse with the freest of my neighbors, I perceive that […] they cannot spare the protection of the existing government and they dread the consequences of disobedience to it to their property and families.” Here, Thoreau admits that the state’s involvement in the lives of its citizens makes it especially difficult to disobey the state, because one is in essence walking away from the comforts that the state provides, comforts that include protection of one’s property and income. Thus, practicing civil disobedience means accepting a less secure life. Yet Thoreau also argues that there are ways to create one’s own security, writing: “You must hire or squat somewhere, and raise but a small crop, and eat that soon. You must live within yourself and depend upon yourself always tucked up and ready for a start, and not have many affairs.” Thoreau suggests that for one to truly be ready to dedicate themselves to meaningful protest against the state, one must forfeit the right to property, so they are never lured by it when practicing civil disobedience. That is, everybody must subsist without the state’s assistance, so they are not put in a situation where they have to choose between their morals or their survival.

Thoreau also suggests that, although there are very high costs associated with civil disobedience, it is costlier to obey the state than to disobey. Thoreau notes, “I can afford to refuse allegiance to Massachusetts, and her right to my property and life. It costs me less in every sense to incur the penalty of disobedience to the State, than it would to obey.” This means that the state’s evil actions are so numerous and do so much harm that Thoreau believes that losing his property and the state’s protection of his life is a better price than continuing to prop up the injustice that is tearing society apart. To Thoreau, the high stakes of the American government’s actions mean that the American people have to be willing to give everything up for the cause—especially their property and their security. This seeming sacrifice, he argues, is actually the only way that he and his fellow citizens can live in America as proud Americans, without participating in the nation’s crimes.