Comparing Thoreau And Martin Luther King Jr.

No matter how much the nation progresses, there will always be times where civil disobedience is desirable. When there is good, there will be evil; and we must recognize when to act against it. The idea of civil disobedience is still applied today through the influence of Thoreau and Martin Luther King Jr., as society will be constantly going against government ideals. Thoreau’s position on civil disobedience is that he believes breaking laws is necessary towards a government with unjust laws. He believes in having a better government that does not control and abuse the people; being “at best but an expedient” (Thoreau 240). Additionally, Thoreau believes that one should break the law “if it is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another”, meaning that if the government uses you as a tool to bring inequality towards others and yourself, that is when a law should be broken (Thoreau 946). Furthermore, he states that, “Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also a prison”, this states that if the government

He believes that, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere”, and this belief led him to travel to Birmingham to go against the unfair laws of the government (King 87). Thus, expressing Thoreau’s idea of going against the friction of the government when there is injustice towards others. King also uses nonviolent direct action because it will “create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue” (King 89). This idea that King utilizes relates to Thoreau’s belief that, “it is easier to deal with the real possessor of a thing than with the temporary guardian of it”, as King applies this thought towards his actions of directly bringing the problem to the government to address the issue (Thoreau