http://xroads.virginia.edu/~hyper2/thoreau/civil.html
Civil Disobedience is an essay by Henry David Thoureau. In it, he discusses the merits of disobeying society's rules. He explains that it is necessary to disobey in some cases, as the community is not always right. He does not believe that the majority is by necessity the wisest, because the simple fact that most people agree on something does not make it correct. He cites slavery as a most excellent example of how the majority is not always correct, and how it is best to disobey when such injustices arise in a society. He believed that there could be something better than democracy.
Rousseau was a major proponent of democracy. It is Rousseau's belief that in a virtuous society that the minority will always be mistaken. Thoureau seems to believe that no society can be so virtuous as to avoid making wrong decisions. Rousseau does, however, say that it is necessary to incite revolutions when there are inequalities in the government. It seems to me that it would be difficult to determine when to incite revolution if one is meant to be coerced into being free. Essentially, obedience is freedom. This is in direct contradiction to Thoureau's thesis that it is necessary to disobey the law sometimes in order to be free.
You do a very good job of going over the information. How ever, do you that that Rousseau is talking about the same kind of freedom that Thoreau is talking about in Civil Disobedience? If not what makes them different?
ReplyDeleteGreat example! I think the topic of Civil Obedience can also be related to Tocquevillel's theory of tyranny of majority. When a society is dominated by the opinions of majority, it can be devastating sometimes because minorities' interests can be easily hurt. Sometimes it's necessary to think outside of the circle, and to strengthen the political systems by not exerting all the rights following the opinions of the majority.
ReplyDeleteHow does the views of the minority play into this? For instance you mention a revolution should be started against the government if there should be inequalities. However, as no society is the same, won't there always be some sort of group that experiences inequalities? How should any nation as a whole deal with this possible dilemma?
ReplyDeleteThis is a bit of a contradiction you say that Thoureau supports the idea of the minority getting their way but then you say he believes that one has to follow the laws to make changes something that African-American's did not do.
ReplyDelete