ipl-logo

Rhetorical Analysis Of Civil Disobedience

897 Words4 Pages

Henry David Thoreau’s Civil Disobedience heavily criticizes the government for being too corrupt and also argues that the people have the right to refuse allegiance to the State. Because the government is unjust and corrupt, Thoreau calls for a change in how the government operates rather than abolishing the government entirely. Thoreau’s idea of a better government is a government that governs the least. This claim is elaborated as Thoreau states in his essay that the individuals with consciences should rule instead of the government officials that lack said consciences. For example, in part 1 paragraph 4, he mocks individuals such as soldiers and privates for showing respect to the government through marching admirably because they are going …show more content…

During his time in prison, he mocks the State as he didn’t really feel imprisoned despite being encased in thick walls of solid stone. He also states how the State is as timid “as a lone woman with her silver spoons” (part 2, paragraph 13) since the State is too frightened to actually confront Thoreau, but instead decides to “punish his body” by incarcerating him. This shows Thoreau’s condescending attitude towards the government and how they are just an unintelligent and unjust institution. He continues to taunt the State in paragraph 14 as he states “they only can force me who obey a higher law than I.” In other words, Thoreau will obey the government when their intellect is higher than his intellect. This shows that the State in Thoreau’s eyes is foolish and ignorant. Not only that, it is stated in part 3 paragraph 9 that the reason he was incarcerated is due to his refusal to pay allegiance to the State. By doing so, Thoreau wants to be a role model for the people around him by quietly declaring “war” with the State. The term war used does not refer to an actual war, but an indirect, non-violent conflict with the State in hopes of changing it. This is also evident in paragraph 13 of the same part when he states that he does not “wish to quarrel with any man or nation...I seek rather, I may say, even an excuse for conforming to the laws of the

Open Document