Customer Reviews

Civil Disobedience

5 star:		(16)
4 star:		(7)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Civil Disobedience is one of the most importance works of philosophy ever written. Like all great works of philosophy, it is as relevant today as it has ever been, as it transcends space and time. Don't let the abolitionist nature mislead you: this book is not merely about abolition and slavery. Rather, it is about Man Against the State, individuality, and Thoreau's philosophy of how one man can stand up to government and society, driven by his own convictions of right and wrong, as summarized by the timeless quote "Any man more right than his neighbors constitutes a majority of one already".

Thoreau's main point is that the best - and many times, the only - method for fighting injustice is through passive disobedience. By refusing to cooperate with the machinery of injustice, the individual can become the friction that stops the machine. Active resistance is bound for failure, as the machine (the State, society, etc.) is too formidable for the individual to fight. But, by refusing to cooperate, justice can be achieved and injustice toppled.

If you are looking for a marvelous primer on individuality and the fight for justice, start with this book.

In "Civil Disobedience" Thoreau presents political theories in which he dissects democracy and the interaction between citizens and their government.

Understandably, Thoreau was deeply concerned about injustices he witnessed during his life, such as enslavement of one sixth of the population and the invasion of Mexico by the United States.

Thoreau does not oppose the institution of government; he believes that when a government becomes "abused and perverted", it ceases to represent the will of the people. When a government makes decisions that promulgate harm and injustice, it is the duty of its citizens to rebel and break those chains of injustices.

Arguably, the strongest idea Thoreau presents, is the notion of individualism. Thoreau encourages skepticism of the government and rejects blind loyalty to it. Thoreau perceives citizens, who give blind loyalty to their government's decisions without questioning them, as participants in every injustice committed by that government. Whether this point of view is correct or not, it is worth debating, especially in view of the horrific injustices that are extant in today's world and the way the masses so easily accept them without considering the negative impact on others.

This is a thoroughly American view on political theory given the emphasis on the individual coupled with the call for civil disobedience. Definitely not for the faint hearted, go into this with a grasp of the events of the day and a willingness to read the entire essay at least twice to fully appreciate Thoreau's points.

It seems to be a great truth that the most profound points are made in very short works. This is a very influential work by Thoreau that is the foundation of civil disobedience. Gandhi and Martin Luther King were greatly influenced by this work.

A famous quote from this work is "That government is best which governs least". Today's bloated government would literally drive him mad. I've also read "Walden" and it expresses similar sentiments.

This short pamphlet should be read by everyone. I would personally love to see less government and agree that civil disobedience is a very good way to encourage change. It sounds like politicians back then were similar to what we have today. Some things never change.

These kindle freebies have given me a great and easy way to review several items I have wanted to read for years.

I give it 5 stars because Civil Disobedience is a masterful bit of writing. However, save your money on this. It's my own fault for not reading the item description closer, but this is only the essay. It is 24 pages with no commentary or analysis provided. The essay is available to read freely online at numerous sites. I HIGHLY encourage everyone to read this essay, just don't spend your $$ for a paper copy of it.

This was the first Thoreau's book I read, and it inspired me to read some other of his writings. They are all inspirational, above average, writings. Well, about this book, a strong critic to United States government of his time (why not to extend that to ours, since it seems not much has changed...). He takes a position against slavery, as well as the war with Mexico.
I believe this is one of the most well written works fighting for the liberty of expression and against slavery I ever read.

His ideas about an unexistent State are at least discussible, since it seems very difficult to people live without any organizational structure. But, of course, we SHOULD discuss about State's authority, as well its limits...
Thoreau's own natural life was his inspiration, and (as we can see in his texts) he loved nature, and he spent a lot of time of his life around it. He liked freedom, and in this work he depicts his ideas about freedom, and how it should be applied to him, as well as all mankind.

Though many statements Thoreau has made seem a little flakey around the edges, when it came to free will and individual choice he had the right idea and the courage to see it through. The importance of centralizing power within oneself is perhaps more important today than ever when unrestrained government in partnership with multinational corporations weild enormous destructive power. A book that has not lost its relevance.

Civil Disobedience sits quietly in the national psyche as one of the founding documents of modern American liberalism. It's well known to liberals but not well read. It is worth the reading and would likely surprise liberals and non-liberals alike - as it did me. Sure, it's anti-war and anti-slavery, but it's also a lot more. The confused hodgepodge of modern isms that dominate current political thought could use the purity, consistency, and clarity that were second nature to thinkers nearer the American Revolution.

Consider, for example, Thoreau's political philosophy:

"I heartily accept the motto, - "That government is best which governs least;" and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly and systematically."

Or his take on government aid to societal improvement:

"Yet this government never of itself furthered any enterprise, but by the alacrity with which it got out of the way. It does not keep the country free. It does not settle the West. It does not educate. The character inherent in the American people has done all that has been accomplished; and it would have done somewhat more, if the government had not sometimes got in its way."

Thoreau on economic policy:

"Trade and commerce, if they were not made of India-rubber, would never manage to bounce over the obstacles which legislators are continually putting in their way."

1848 was also the year of another seminal work, the Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx. Where Thoreau looked back to the 18th century, Marx looked forward to the 20th . Where Thoreau recognized that the power of the state will not easily be compartmentalized, that power to do one thing will infect all things, Marx looked to the state to solve every problem. Where Thoreau knew that state power does not peacefully or voluntarily diminish, Marx justified his appeal for total state power - the dictatorship of the proletariat - with the naïve expectation that government would dissolve away into a stateless utopian paradise.

Thoreau, I expect, would have no trouble explaining why Americans who protest wars but advocate government intervention in the economy, get wars; or why Americans who advocate nonintervention in the economy, small taxes, and small government but support a worldwide military presence, get controlled markets, high taxes, and large government.

It has been pointed out that the structural deficits which have finally brought U.S. governmental finances to the point of crisis, got their start in the Vietnam War and Great Society. Us moderns tend to blame/praise conservatives for the wars and liberals for the social programs, but Thoreau knew wars and social programs are joined at the hip. We can have both or neither but not one or the other. Conservatives and liberals share equal responsibility. Civil Disobedience points to the solution.

This is a fantastic essay on standing up for what you believe in -- Thoreau was a true iconoclast and a great life model. The only worry about this essay is that it can be easily cherry-picked to fit an ideological stance all across the spectrum. It is more concise and focused than some of hos other works, but perhaps for that reason, less quotable.

Thoreau holds a strong conviction that we ought not to submit to unjust laws or Government, regardless of the threat to life or property through disobedience. This book is a superb tome on the right to dissent from being governed.

I am sure those with an interest in political philosophy will enjoy this quick and thought provoking read.