organized
reform
movements
in
particular.
Yet
his
philosophical
views
made
joining
the
abolition
movement
a
moral
imperative.
Although
he
ascribed
to
the
principles
of
19th
Century
Transcendentalism,
he
never
joined
a
particular
group
espousing
this
school
of
thought.
Transcendentalism
can
be
seen
as
the
religious
and
intellectual
expression
of
American
democracy:
all
men
have
an
equal
chance
of
experiencing
and
expressing
divinity
directly,
regardless
of
wealth,
social
status,
or
politics.
(Witherell,
1995)
This
is
a
fairly
accurate
description
of
not
only
Thoreaus
life
but
his
writings,
as
well.
In
his
essay
Civil
Disobedience,
these
transcendentalist
ideals
are
clarified
via
Thoreaus
personal
philosophy
and
become
the
core
point
of
the
speech:
it
is
the
duty
of
the
individual
to
remedy
the
inexpediency
of
government.
A
night
in
jail
is
oft-times
a
powerful
inspiration,
and
Thoreaus
night
of
incarceration
(for
not
paying
a
poll
tax
intended
to
fund
war
with
Mexico)
is
no
different.
His
struggle
to
do
right
and
be
heard
resulted
in
his
penning
Civil
Disobedience,
first
as
a
speech
and
then
later
as
an
essay.
Disobedience
through
the
classical
arrangement
form.
It
will
not
analyze
each
paragraph,
but
focus
on
twovery
importantsections
of
the
essay.
Combined,
sections
2
and
3
make
up
a
complete
oratory
within
the
overall
speech.
It is important to note here that Thoreau does not strictly adhere to classical
Thoreaus
true
point,
yet
pulls
safely
away
at
the
last
moment
to
avoid
damning
confrontation.
The
essays
structure
and
its
argument
against
inexpedient
government
simultaneously
obscure
and
reveal
Thoreaus
implicit
thesis,
his
attack
upon
the
audience
themselves.
About
the
Essay
Concord
Lyceum
in
Concord,
MA
in
1848.
A
year
later,
after
revising
the
speech,
it
was
published
in
Aesthetic
Papers
in
1849
under
the
title
Resistance
to
Civil
Government.
(Mott,
2009)
In
its
time,
the
essay
went
relatively
unnoticed,
despite
being
described
by
the
Boston
press,
when
it
was
first
published,
as
crazy.
(Levin,
2003,
p.
xxix)
It
was
not
until
the
20th
Century
that
Civil
Disobedience
is
said
to
have
been
truly
discovered.
Political
reformers
such
as
Mahatma
Gandhi
and
Martin
Luther
King,
Jr.
have
both
credited
Thoreaus
essay
as
pivotal
inspiration.
(Levin,
2003,
p.
xxix)
Theses
The explicit thesis of Civil Disobedience is simple. It is the duty of the people
to
act
when
government
has
become
inexpedient.
This
is
made
plain
in
the
introductory
paragraph.
Government
is
at
best
but
an
expedient;
but
most
governments
are
usually,
and
all
governments
are
sometimes,
inexpedientWitness
the
present
Mexican
war,
the
work
of
comparatively
a
few
individuals
using
the
standing
government
as
their
tool;
for
in
the
outset,
the
people
would
not
have
consented
to
this
measure.
(Thoreau,
1993/1849,
1)
created
by
the
People.
If
this
is,
in
fact,
true,
if
the
actions
of
Government
are
immoral
and
unethical
then
any
and
all
actions
and
inactions
of
the
People
to
maintain
such
a
Government
make
them
equally
immoral
and
unethical.
Therefore,
the
only
way
to
alter
the
machine
is
for
the
People
to
cease
their
immoral
actions
by
ceasing
to
support
the
machine.
neighbors,
and
friends,
he
most
likely
would
have
been
tossed
out
on
his
ear.
Most
people
do
not
take
kindly
to
being
told
they
are
not
only
unethical,
but
are
also
immoral
cogs
in
a
machine
of
their
own
making.
The
government
itself,
which
is
only
the
mode
which
the
people
have
chosen
to
execute
their
will,
is
equally
liable
to
be
abused
and
perverted
before
the
people
can
act
through
it.
(Thoreau,
1993/1894,
1)
This
idea
explains
why
the
original
title
of
the
speech
is
On
the
Duty
of
Civil
Disobedience
and
not
the
really
good
idea
of
Civil
Disobedience.
Paragraph
18
seems
to
state
this
idea
most
clearly:
If
the
injustice
is
part
of
the
necessary
friction
of
the
machine
of
government,
let
it
go,
let
it
go:
perchance
it
will
wear
smoothcertainly
the
machine
will
wear
out.
If
the
injustice
has
a
spring,
or
a
pulley,
or
a
rope,
or
a
crank,
exclusively
for
itself,
then
perhaps
you
may
consider
whether
the
remedy
will
not
be
worse
than
the
evil;
but
if
it
is
of
such
a
nature
that
it
requires
you
to
be
the
agent
of
injustice
to
another,
then
I
say,
break
the
law.
Let
your
life
be
a
counter-friction
to
stop
the
machine.
What
I
have
to
do
is
to
see,
at
any
rate,
that
I
do
not
lend
myself
to
the
wrong
which
I
condemn.
(Thoreau,
1993/1894,
18)
Essay
Analysis
Thoreau begins the essay by stating, 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.
(Thoreau,
1849/1993,
1)
It
is
a
shout
to
his
audience,
a
request
that
they
sit
up
and
pay
careful
attention
to
what
he
is
about
to
discuss.
using
himself
as
an
example
of
how
the
People
should
act:
when
to
pay
and
when
not
to
pay
their
taxes.
administered
by
government
at
the
will
of
the
people;
this
focus
results
in
Civil
Disobedience
being
an
obvious
example
of
judicial
discourse.
Under
a
government
which
imprisons
unjustly,
the
true
place
for
a
just
man
is
also
a
prison.
The
proper
place
today,
the
only
place
which
Massachusetts
has
provided
for
her
freer
and
less
despondent
spirits,
is
in
her
prisons,
to
be
put
out
and
locked
out
of
the
State
by
her
own
act,
as
they
have
already
put
themselves
out
by
their
principles.
It
is
there
that
the
fugitive
slave,
and
the
Mexican
prisoner
on
parole,
and
the
Indian
come
to
plead
the
wrongs
of
his
race
should
find
them;
on
that
separate
but
more
free
and
honorable
ground,
where
the
State
places
those
who
are
not
with
her,
but
against
herthe
only
house
in
a
slave
State
in
which
a
free
man
can
abide
with
honor.
If
any
think
that
their
influence
would
be
lost
there,
and
their
voices
no
longer
afflict
the
ear
of
the
State,
that
they
would
not
be
as
an
enemy
within
its
walls,
they
do
not
know
by
how
much
truth
is
stronger
than
error,
nor
how
much
more
eloquently
and
effectively
he
can
combat
injustice
who
has
experienced
a
little
in
his
own
person.
Cast
your
whole
vote,
not
a
strip
of
paper
merely,
but
your
whole
influence.
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.
If
the
alternative
is
to
keep
all
just
men
in
prison,
or
give
up
war
and
slavery,
the
State
will
not
hesitate
which
to
choose.
If
a
thousand
men
were
not
to
pay
their
tax
bills
this
year,
that
would
not
be
a
violent
and
bloody
measure,
as
it
would
be
to
pay
them,
and
enable
the
State
to
commit
violence
and
shed
innocent
blood.
This
is,
in
fact,
the
definition
of
a
peaceable
revolution,
if
any
such
is
possible.
If
the
tax-gatherer,
or
any
other
public
officer,
asks
me,
as
one
has
done,
"But
what
shall
I
do?"
my
answer
is,
"If
you
really
wish
to
do
anything,
resign
your
office."
When
the
subject
has
refused
allegiance,
and
the
officer
has
resigned
from
office,
then
the
revolution
is
accomplished.
But
even
suppose
blood
should
flow.
Is
there
not
a
sort
of
blood
shed
when
the
conscience
is
wounded?
Through
this
wound
a
man's
real
manhood
and
immortality
flow
out,
and
he
bleeds
to
an
everlasting
death.
I
see
this
blood
flowing
now.
(Thoreau,
1849/1993,
22)
Yet, just as we will see how he ignores the strict rules of classical oratorical
arrangement,
he
also
disregards
the
strict
rules
of
rhetorical
discourse.
His
speech
is
judicial,
deliberative,
and
ceremonial
by
turns.
One
moment
he
is
exhorting
the
immorality
of
inexpedient
government,
the
next
he
is
epideictic,
discussing
a
pastoral
huckleberry
hunt
and
providing
a
poignant
counterpoint
to
his
night
in
jail.
When
I
was
let
out
the
next
morning,
I
proceeded
to
finish
my
errand,
and,
having
put
on
my
mended
shoe,
joined
a
huckleberry
party,
who
were
impatient
to
put
themselves
under
my
conduct;
and
in
half
an
hourfor
the
horse
was
soon
tackledwas
in
the
midst
of
a
huckleberry
field,
on
one
of
our
highest
hills,
two
miles
off,
and
then
the
State
was
nowhere
to
be
seen.
(Thoreau,
1849/1993,
34)
Section
Analysis
Civil Disobedience, the version we are now most familiar with (Thoreau,
1849/1993),
is
an
essay
consisting
of
45
paragraphs.
For
this
paper,
the
essay
has
been
divided
into
eight
sections,
excluding
Thoreaus
introduction
and
conclusion:
1. 2-7
Government
vs.
the
IndividualGovt
is
a
machine
created
by
the
people,
it
is
only
as
expedient,
moral,
or
ethical
as
the
people
themselves.
2. 8-9
Resistancethe
Individuals
moral
obligation
to
resist.
3. 10-16
Local
government
and
attack
on
the
Peoplewhy
YOU
are
immoral.
4. 17-22
Individual
resolutionindividual
actions,
an
overall
call
to
action.
5. 23-35
Illustration
of
personal
actionThoreaus
jail
experience.
6. 36-38
Explanationof
Thoreaus
actions.
7. 39-41
Resignationat
the
inaction
of
the
People.
8. 42-44
Attack
on
Politicianstheir
inaction
and
immorality.
For
this
rhetorical
structural
analysis,
we
will
focus
on
sections
2
and
3.
current,
and
yet
his
obstinate
personal
sense
of
right
and
wrong
eventually
results
in
the
effective
breaking
of
classical
rules.
Classical
oratorical
arrangement
consists
of
the
following:
arranged
in
the
classical
order.
Combined,
these
two
sections
make
up
a
complete
oratory
within
the
overall
speech
due
to
Thoreaus
micro-arrangement
of
the
classical
oratorical
tools.
Section
2
discusses
Resistancethe
Individuals
moral
obligation
to
resist
an
unjust
government
and
section
3
addresses
Thoreaus
attack
upon
government
and
upon
the
Peoplewhy
they
are
both
immoral.
When sections 2 and 3 are read closely they are found to begin and end in the
Section 2
8 Exordium
narratio
confirmatio
9
Refutatio
Section
3
10
Narratio
11
Confirmatio
12
Partitio
13
Confirmatio
14
Partitio
15
Peroratio
16
Peroratio
This
structure
lends
to
Thoreaus
approach
to
both
of
the
essays
theses,
leading
the
audience
to
one,
then
backing
away
and
diverting
their
attention
to
the
other.
In
this
way
he
is
able
to
overtly
express
the
problem
of
government
and
subtly
express
the
true
cause
of
inexpedient
government:
the
People
or,
more
exactly,
the
actions
and
inactions
of
the
Individual.
men
recognize
the
right
of
revolution;
that
is,
the
right
to
refuse
allegiance
to,
and
to
resist,
the
government,
when
its
tyranny
or
its
inefficiency
are
great
and
unendurable.
(Thoreau,
1993/1849,
8)
But
paragraph
8
also
includes
confirmatio
and
peroratio.
But almost all say that such is not the case now. But such was the case,
they
think,
in
the
Revolution
of
'75.
If
one
were
to
tell
me
that
this
was
a
bad
government
because
it
taxed
certain
foreign
commodities
brought
to
its
ports,
it
is
most
probable
that
I
should
not
make
an
ado
about
it,
for
I
can
do
without
them.
All
machines
have
their
friction;
and
possibly
this
does
enough
good
to
counter-balance
the
evil.
At
any
rate,
it
is
a
great
evil
to
make
a
stir
about
it.
(Thoreau,
1993/1849,
8)
Here
Thoreau
is
offering
up
a
logical
argument,
the
confirmatio,
it
is
a
great
evil
make
a
stir
about
it.
(Thoreau,
1993/1849,
8)
He
is
pointedly
saying
that
the
current
government
is
just
as
inexpedient
as
the
government
Americans
rebelled
against
in
1775.
He
then
states
a
peroratio,
issuing
a
call
to
action
and
an
appeal
through
pathos:
But
when
the
friction
comes
to
have
its
machine,
and
oppression
and
robbery
are
organized,
I
say,
let
us
not
have
such
a
machine
any
longer[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
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.
(Thoreau,
1993/1849,
8)
follows
the
exordium
rather
than,
more
classically,
preceding
the
peroratio.
Thoreau
introduces
William
Paleys
Duty
of
Submission
to
Civil
Government
as
a
counterargument
to
his
own.
(Paley,
a
late
18th
Century
British
Christian
apologist,
10
philosopher,
and
utilitarian,
is
best
known
for
his
God
as
a
Watchmaker
analogy.
(William
Paley))
Paleys
counter
is,
so
long
as
the
interest
of
the
whole
society
requires
it,
that
is,
so
long
as
the
established
government
cannot
be
resisted
or
changed
without
public
inconvenience,
it
is
the
will
of
God
.
.
.
that
the
established
government
be
obeyed...
(Thoreau,
1993/1849,
9)
and
effectively
stating
that
cost
analysis
is
the
proper
measure
for
contemplating
the
value
of
obeying
government.
Thoreau
counters
with
a
demand
for
justice,
Paley
appears
never
to
have
contemplated
those
cases
to
which
the
rule
of
expediency
does
not
apply,
in
which
a
people,
as
well
as
an
individual,
must
do
justice,
cost
what
it
may.
(Thoreau,
1993/1849,
9)
Thoreau
intimates
that
the
Individuals
duty
of
obtaining
justice
cannot
be
ignored
because
of
perceived
public
inconvenience.
partitio
is
placed
between
these
but
Thoreau
places
it
after
them
in
paragraph
12.
This
order
brings
the
audience
into
contact
with
Thoreaus
implicit
thesis:
Practically
speaking,
the
opponents
to
a
reform
in
Massachusetts
are
not
a
hundred
thousand
politicians
at
the
South,
but
a
hundred
thousand
merchants
and
farmers
here,
who
are
more
interested
in
commerce
and
agriculture
than
they
are
in
humanity,
and
are
not
prepared
to
do
justice
to
the
slave
and
to
Mexico,
cost
what
it
may.
I
quarrel
not
with
far-off
foes,
but
with
those
who,
near
at
home,
co-operate
with,
and
do
the
bidding
of,
those
far
away,
and
without
whom
the
latter
would
be
harmlessThey
hesitate,
and
they
regret,
and
sometimes
they
petition;
but
they
do
nothing
in
earnest
and
with
effect.
At
most,
they
give
up
only
a
cheap
vote
(Thoreau,
1993/1849,
10)
A
wise
man
will
not
leave
the
right
to
the
mercy
of
chance,
nor
wish
it
to
prevail
through
the
power
of
the
majority.
There
is
but
little
virtue
in
the
action
of
masses
of
men.
When
the
majority
shall
at
length
vote
for
the
abolition
of
slavery,
it
will
be
because
they
are
indifferent
to
slavery,
or
because
there
is
but
little
slavery
left
to
be
abolished
by
their
vote.
They
will
then
be
the
only
slaves.
(Thoreau,
1993/1849,
11)
11
[The
respectable
man]
forthwith
adopts
one
of
the
candidates
thus
selected
as
the
only
available
one,
thus
proving
that
he
is
himself
available
for
any
purposes
of
the
demagogue.
His
vote
is
of
no
more
worth
than
that
of
any
unprincipled
foreigner
or
hireling
native,
who
may
have
been
bought.
(Thoreau,
1993/1849,
12)
These
paragraphs
are
stating
that
the
individual
makes
himself
submissive
to
government
through
both
inaction
(not
voting)
and
action
(voting).
Yet
Thoreau
provides
the
individual
with
what
he
announces
as
the
only
redemptive
action,
available
and
reminds
him
of
his
moral
duty
to
take
on
this
recommended
action
in
the
confirmatio
of
paragraph
13:
It
is
not
a
man's
duty,
as
a
matter
of
course,
to
devote
himself
to
the
eradication
of
any,
even
to
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...After
the
first
blush
of
sin
comes
its
indifference;
and
from
immoral
it
becomes,
as
it
were,
unmoral,
and
not
quite
unnecessary
to
that
life
which
we
have
made.
(Thoreau,
1993/1849,
13)
Thoreau again uses partitio in paragraph 14, again stating the point at issue,
The
broadest
and
most
prevalent
error
requires
the
most
disinterested
virtue
to
sustain
it.
(Thoreau,
1993/1849,
14)
12
with
anything
which
was.
It
not
only
divided
States
and
churches,
it
divides
families;
ay,
it
divides
the
individual,
separating
the
diabolical
in
him
from
the
divine.
(Thoreau,
1993/1849,
15)
Section
3
ends
with
paragraph
16:
Unjust
laws
exist:
shall
we
be
content
to
obey
them,
or
shall
we
endeavor
to
amend
them,
and
obey
them
until
we
have
succeeded,
or
shall
we
transgress
them
at
once?
Men,
generally,
under
such
a
government
as
this,
think
that
they
ought
to
wait
until
they
have
persuaded
the
majority
to
alter
them.
They
think
that,
if
they
should
resist,
the
remedy
would
be
worse
than
the
evil.
But
it
is
the
fault
of
the
government
itself
that
the
remedy
is
worse
than
the
evil.
It
makes
it
worse.
Why
is
it
not
more
apt
to
anticipate
and
provide
for
reform?
Why
does
it
not
cherish
its
wise
minority?
Why
does
it
cry
and
resist
before
it
is
hurt?
Why
does
it
not
encourage
its
citizens
to
put
out
its
faults,
and
do
better
than
it
would
have
them?
Why
does
it
always
crucify
Christ
and
excommunicate
Copernicus
and
Luther,
and
pronounce
Washington
and
Franklin
rebels?
(Thoreau,
1993/1849,
16)
generally,
under
such
a
government
as
this,
think
that
they
ought
to
wait
until
they
have
persuaded
the
majority
to
alter
them.
They
think
that,
if
they
should
resist,
the
remedy
would
be
worse
than
the
evil.
But
it
is
the
fault
of
the
government
itself
that
the
remedy
is
worse
than
the
evil.
It
makes
it
worse.
(Thoreau,
1993/1849,
16)
When
combined,
the
exordium
and
peroratio
form
a
complete
argument:
All
men
recognize
the
right
of
revolution;
that
is,
the
right
to
refuse
allegiance
to,
and
to
resist,
the
government,
when
its
tyranny
or
its
inefficiency
are
great
and
unendurable[Men],
generally,
under
such
a
government
as
this,
think
that
they
ought
to
wait
until
they
have
persuaded
the
majority
to
alter
them.
They
think
that,
if
they
should
resist,
the
remedy
would
be
worse
than
the
evil.
13
But
it
is
the
fault
of
the
government
itself
that
the
remedy
is
worse
than
the
evil.
It
makes
it
worse.
(Thoreau,
1993/1849,
8, 16)
This, then, establishes the overall argument expressed within sections 2 and
last
century
for
Gandhi
and
MLK.
But
we
should
not
walk
away
from
the
essay
only
appreciating
the
value
of
resisting
that
which
we
find
morally
wrong,
we
should
also
appreciate
Thoreaus
liberal,
yet
effective,
use
of
classical
oratorical
rhetoric.
Rather
than
directly
insult
his
audience,
he
uses
classical
tools
to
carefully
craft
his
speech
around
two
distinct
theses,
one
hinged
upon
the
other.
Thoreau
seems
to
have
had
faith
that
those
who
were
willing
to
truly
listen
would
grasp
his
true
meaning
and
act
from
it.
14
References
Levin,
J.
(2003).
Introduction.
In
G.
Stade
(Ed.),
Walden
and
Civil
Disobedience
(pp.
xii-xxxiv).
New
York:
Barnes
&
Noble
Books.
Mott,
W.
(2009).
Civil
disobedience.
The
Walden
Woods
Project.
Retrieved
October
12,
2010
from
http://www.walden.org/Library/About_Thoreau's_Life_and_Writings:_The_Researc
h_Collections/Civil_Disobedience
Thoreau,
H.
D.
(1993).
Civil
disobedience.
Project
Gutenberg.
Retrieved
October
10,
2010
from
http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/71
(Original
work
published
1849)
The
Thoreau
Reader.
Retrieved
October
13,
2010
from
http://thoreau.eserver.org/default.html
William
Paley.
Retrieved,
October
26,
2010
from
http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/history/paley.html
Witherell,
E.,
Dubrulle,
E.
(1995).
Life
and
times
of
Henry
David
Thoreau.
The
Writings
of
Henry
D.
Thoreau.
Retrieved
October
13,
2010
from
http://www.library.ucsb.edu_thoreau_thoreau_life.html.html?s=9ca9170a0ca10d1c
c52b14861abbe7b5
15