{"collection":"philosophy-ethics","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_71/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_71","id":"gutenberg_71","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/71","summary":null,"tags":["Category: American Literature","Category: Essays, Letters & Speeches","Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Category: Politics","Civil disobedience","Government, Resistance to"],"text":"On the Duty of Civil Disobedience\n\n by Henry David Thoreau\n\n\n 1849, original title: Resistance to Civil Government\n\n\n\nI heartily accept the motto,\u2014\u201cThat government is best which governs\nleast;\u201d and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly and\nsystematically. Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which also I\nbelieve\u2014\u201cThat government is best which governs not at all;\u201d and when\nmen are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they\nwill have. Government is at best but an expedient; but most governments\nare usually, and all governments are sometimes, inexpedient. The\nobjections which have been brought against a standing army, and they\nare many and weighty, and deserve to prevail, may also at last be\nbrought against a standing government. The standing army is only an arm\nof the standing government. The government itself, which is only the\nmode which the people have chosen to execute their will, is equally\nliable to be abused and perverted before the people can act through it.\nWitness the present Mexican war, the work of comparatively a few\nindividuals using the standing government as their tool; for, in the\noutset, the people would not have consented to this measure.\n\nThis American government,\u2014what is it but a tradition, though a recent\none, endeavoring to transmit itself unimpaired to posterity, but each\ninstant losing some of its integrity? It has not the vitality and force\nof a single living man; for a single man can bend it to his will. It is\na sort of wooden gun to the people themselves; and, if ever they should\nuse it in earnest as a real one against each other, it will surely\nsplit. But it is not the less necessary for this; for the people must\nhave some complicated machinery or other, and hear its din, to satisfy\nthat idea of government which they have. Governments show thus how\nsuccessfully men can be imposed on, even impose on themselves, for\ntheir own advantage. It is excellent, we must all allow; yet this\ngovernment never of itself furthered any enterprise, but by the\nalacrity with which it got out of its way. _It_ does not keep the\ncountry free. _It_ does not settle the West. _It_ does not educate. The\ncharacter inherent in the American people has done all that has been\naccomplished; and it would have done somewhat more, if the government\nhad not sometimes got in its way. For government is an expedient, by\nwhich men would fain succeed in letting one another alone; and, as has\nbeen said, when it is most expedient, the governed are most let alone\nby it. Trade and commerce, if they were not made of India rubber, would\nnever manage to bounce over obstacles which legislators are continually\nputting in their way; and, if one were to judge these men wholly by the\neffects of their actions, and not partly by their intentions, they\nwould deserve to be classed and punished with those mischievous persons\nwho put obstructions on the railroads.\n\nBut, to speak practically and as a citizen, unlike those who call\nthemselves no-government men, I ask for, not at once no government, but\n_at once_ a better government. Let every man make known what kind of\ngovernment would command his respect, and that will be one step toward\nobtaining it.\n\nAfter all, the practical reason why, when the power is once in the\nhands of the people, a majority are permitted, and for a long period\ncontinue, to rule, is not because they are most likely to be in the\nright, nor because this seems fairest to the minority, but because they\nare physically the strongest. But a government in which the majority\nrule in all cases can not be based on justice, even as far as men\nunderstand it. Can there not be a government in which the majorities do\nnot virtually decide right and wrong, but conscience?\u2014in which\nmajorities decide only those questions to which the rule of expediency\nis applicable? Must the citizen ever for a moment, or in the least\ndegree, resign his conscience to the legislator? Why has every man a\nconscience, then? I think that we should be men first, and subjects\nafterward. It is not desirable to cultivate a respect for the law, so\nmuch as for the right. The only obligation which I have a right to\nassume, is to do at any time what I think right. It is truly enough\nsaid that a corporation has no conscience; but a corporation of\nconscientious men is a corporation _with_ a conscience. Law never made\nmen a whit more just; and, by means of their respect for it, even the\nwell-disposed are daily made the agents of injustice. A common and\nnatural result of an undue respect for the law is, that you may see a\nfile of soldiers, colonel, captain, corporal, privates, powder-monkeys\nand all, marching in admirable order over hill and dale to the wars,\nagainst their wills, aye, against their common sense and consciences,\nwhich makes it very steep marching indeed, and produces a palpitation\nof the heart. They have no doubt that it is a damnable business in\nwhich they are concerned; they are all peaceably inclined. Now, what\nare they? Men at all? or small movable forts and magazines, at the\nservice of some unscrupulous man in power? Visit the Navy Yard, and\nbehold a marine, such a man as an American government can make, or such\nas it can make a man with its black arts, a mere shadow and\nreminiscence of humanity, a man laid out alive and standing, and\nalready, as one may say, buried under arms with funeral accompaniment,\nthough it may be\n\n  \u201cNot a drum was heard, not a funeral note,\n    As his corpse to the ramparts we hurried;\n  Not a soldier discharged his farewell shot\n    O\u2019er the grave where our hero we buried.\u201d\n\nThe mass of men serve the State thus, not as men mainly, but as\nmachines, with their bodies. They are the standing army, and the\nmilitia, jailers, constables, _posse comitatus_, &c. In most cases\nthere is no free exercise whatever of the judgment or of the moral\nsense; but they put themselves on a level with wood and earth and\nstones; and wooden men can perhaps be manufactured that will serve the\npurpose as well. Such command no more respect than men of straw, or a\nlump of dirt. They have the same sort of worth only as horses and dogs.\nYet such as these even are commonly esteemed good citizens. Others, as\nmost legislators, politicians, lawyers, ministers, and office-holders,\nserve the state chiefly with their heads; and, as they rarely make any\nmoral distinctions, they are as likely to serve the devil, without\n_intending_ it, as God. A very few, as heroes, patriots, martyrs,\nreformers in the great sense, and _men_, serve the State with their\nconsciences also, and so necessarily resist it for the most part; and\nthey are commonly treated by it as enemies. A wise man will only be\nuseful as a man, and will not submit to be \u201cclay,\u201d and \u201cstop a hole to\nkeep the wind away,\u201d but leave that office to his dust at least:\n\n  \u201cI am too high-born to be propertied,\n  To be a secondary at control,\n  Or useful serving-man and instrument\n  To any sovereign state throughout the world.\u201d\n\nHe who gives himself entirely to his fellow-men appears to them useless\nand selfish; but he who gives himself partially to them is pronounced a\nbenefactor and philanthropist.\n\nHow does it become a man to behave toward the American government\ntoday? I answer that he cannot without disgrace be associated with it.\nI cannot for an instant recognize that political organization as _my_\ngovernment which is the _slave\u2019s_ government also.\n\nAll men recognize the right of revolution; that is, the right to refuse\nallegiance to and to resist the government, when its tyranny or its\ninefficiency are great and unendurable. But almost all say that such is\nnot the case now. But such was the case, they think, in the Revolution\nof \u201975. If one were to tell me that this was a bad government because\nit taxed certain foreign commodities brought to its ports, it is most\nprobable that I should not make an ado about it, for I can do without\nthem: all machines have their friction; and possibly this does enough\ngood to counter-balance the evil. At any rate, it is a great evil to\nmake a stir about it. But when the friction comes to have its machine,\nand oppression and robbery are organized, I say, let us not have such a\nmachine any longer. In other words, when a sixth of the population of a\nnation which has undertaken to be the refuge of liberty are slaves, and\na whole country is unjustly overrun and conquered by a foreign army,\nand subjected to military law, I think that it is not too soon for\nhonest men to rebel and revolutionize. What makes this duty the more\nurgent is that fact, that the country so overrun is not our own, but\nours is the invading army.\n\nPaley, a common authority with many on moral questions, in his chapter\non the \u201cDuty of Submission to Civil Government,\u201d resolves all civil\nobligation into expediency; and he proceeds to say, \u201cthat so long as\nthe interest of the whole society requires it, that is, so long as the\nestablished government cannot be resisted or changed without public\ninconveniency, it is the will of God that the established government be\nobeyed, and no longer.\u201d\u2014\u201cThis principle being admitted, the justice of\nevery particular case of resistance is reduced to a computation of the\nquantity of the danger and grievance on the one side, and of the\nprobability and expense of redressing it on the other.\u201d Of this, he\nsays, every man shall judge for himself. But Paley appears never to\nhave contemplated those cases to which the rule of expediency does not\napply, in which a people, as well as an individual, must do justice,\ncost what it may. If I have unjustly wrested a plank from a drowning\nman, I must restore it to him though I drown myself. This, according to\nPaley, would be inconvenient. But he that would save his life, in such\na case, shall lose it. This people must cease to hold slaves, and to\nmake war on Mexico, though it cost them their existence as a people.\n\nIn their practice, nations agree with Paley; but does anyone think that\nMassachusetts does exactly what is right at the present crisis?\n\n  \u201cA drab of state, a cloth-o\u2019-silver slut,\n  To have her train borne up, and her soul trail in the dirt.\u201d\n\nPractically speaking, the opponents to a reform in Massachusetts are\nnot a hundred thousand politicians at the South, but a hundred thousand\nmerchants and farmers here, who are more interested in commerce and\nagriculture than they are in humanity, and are not prepared to do\njustice to the slave and to Mexico, _cost what it may_. I quarrel not\nwith far-off foes, but with those who, near at home, co-operate with,\nand do the bidding of those far away, and without whom the latter would\nbe harmless. We are accustomed to say, that the mass of men are\nunprepared; but improvement is slow, because the few are not materially\nwiser or better than the many. It is not so important that many should\nbe as good as you, as that there be some absolute goodness somewhere;\nfor that will leaven the whole lump. There are thousands who are _in\nopinion_ opposed to slavery and to the war, who yet in effect do\nnothing to put an end to them; who, esteeming themselves children of\nWashington and Franklin, sit down with their hands in their pockets,\nand say that they know not what to do, and do nothing; who even\npostpone the question of freedom to the question of free-trade, and\nquietly read the prices-current along with the latest advices from\nMexico, after dinner, and, it may be, fall asleep over them both. What\nis the price-current of an honest man and patriot today? They hesitate,\nand they regret, and sometimes they petition; but they do nothing in\nearnest and with effect. They will wait, well disposed, for others to\nremedy the evil, that they may no longer have it to regret. At most,\nthey give only a cheap vote, and a feeble countenance and Godspeed, to\nthe right, as it goes by them. There are nine hundred and ninety-nine\npatrons of virtue to one virtuous man; but it is easier to deal with\nthe real possessor of a thing than with the temporary guardian of it.\n\nAll voting is a sort of gaming, like chequers or backgammon, with a\nslight moral tinge to it, a playing with right and wrong, with moral\nquestions; and betting naturally accompanies it. The character of the\nvoters is not staked. I cast my vote, perchance, as I think right; but\nI am not vitally concerned that that right should prevail. I am willing\nto leave it to the majority. Its obligation, therefore, never exceeds\nthat of expediency. Even voting _for the right_ is _doing_ nothing for\nit. It is only expressing to men feebly your desire that it should\nprevail. A wise man will not leave the right to the mercy of chance,\nnor wish it to prevail through the power of the majority. There is but\nlittle virtue in the action of masses of men. When the majority shall\nat length vote for the abolition of slavery, it will be because they\nare indifferent to slavery, or because there is but little slavery left\nto be abolished by their vote. _They_ will then be the only slaves.\nOnly _his_ vote can hasten the abolition of slavery who asserts his own\nfreedom by his vote.\n\nI hear of a convention to be held at Baltimore, or elsewhere, for the\nselection of a candidate for the Presidency, made up chiefly of\neditors, and men who are politicians by profession; but I think, what\nis it to any independent, intelligent, and respectable man what\ndecision they may come to, shall we not have the advantage of his\nwisdom and honesty, nevertheless? Can we not count upon some\nindependent votes? Are there not many individuals in the country who do\nnot attend conventions? But no: I find that the respectable man, so\ncalled, has immediately drifted from his position, and despairs of his\ncountry, when his country has more reasons to despair of him. He\nforthwith adopts one of the candidates thus selected as the only\n_available_ one, thus proving that he is himself _available_ for any\npurposes of the demagogue. His vote is of no more worth than that of\nany unprincipled foreigner or hireling native, who may have been\nbought. Oh for a man who is a _man_, and, as my neighbor says, has a\nbone in his back which you cannot pass your hand through! Our\nstatistics are at fault: the population has been returned too large.\nHow many _men_ are there to a square thousand miles in the country?\nHardly one. Does not America offer any inducement for men to settle\nhere? The American has dwindled into an Odd Fellow,\u2014one who may be\nknown by the development of his organ of gregariousness, and a manifest\nlack of intellect and cheerful self-reliance; whose first and chief\nconcern, on coming into the world, is to see that the alms-houses are\nin good repair; and, before yet he has lawfully donned the virile garb,\nto collect a fund for the support of the widows and orphans that may\nbe; who, in short, ventures to live only by the aid of the Mutual\nInsurance company, which has promised to bury him decently.\n\nIt is not a man\u2019s duty, as a matter of course, to devote himself to the\neradication of any, even the most enormous wrong; he may still properly\nhave other concerns to engage him; but it is his duty, at least, to\nwash his hands of it, and, if he gives it no thought longer, not to\ngive it practically his support. If I devote myself to other pursuits\nand contemplations, I must first see, at least, that I do not pursue\nthem sitting upon another man\u2019s shoulders. I must get off him first,\nthat he may pursue his contemplations too. See what gross inconsistency\nis tolerated. I have heard some of my townsmen say, \u201cI should like to\nhave them order me out to help put down an insurrection of the slaves,\nor to march to Mexico,\u2014see if I would go;\u201d and yet these very men have\neach, directly by their allegiance, and so indirectly, at least, by\ntheir money, furnished a substitute. The soldier is applauded who\nrefuses to serve in an unjust war by those who do not refuse to sustain\nthe unjust government which makes the war; is applauded by those whose\nown act and authority he disregards and sets at naught; as if the State\nwere penitent to that degree that it hired one to scourge it while it\nsinned, but not to that degree that it left off sinning for a moment.\nThus, under the name of Order and Civil Government, we are all made at\nlast to pay homage to and support our own meanness. After the first\nblush of sin, comes its indifference; and from immoral it becomes, as\nit were, _un_moral, and not quite unnecessary to that life which we\nhave made.\n\nThe broadest and most prevalent error requires the most disinterested\nvirtue to sustain it. The slight reproach to which the virtue of\npatriotism is commonly liable, the noble are most likely to incur.\nThose who, while they disapprove of the character and measures of a\ngovernment, yield to it their allegiance and support, are undoubtedly\nits most conscientious supporters, and so frequently the most serious\nobstacles to reform. Some are petitioning the State to dissolve the\nUnion, to disregard the requisitions of the President. Why do they not\ndissolve it themselves,\u2014the union between themselves and the State,\u2014and\nrefuse to pay their quota into its treasury? Do not they stand in same\nrelation to the State, that the State does to the Union? And have not\nthe same reasons prevented the State from resisting the Union, which\nhave prevented them from resisting the State?\n\nHow can a man be satisfied to entertain an opinion merely, and enjoy\n_it?_ Is there any enjoyment in it, if his opinion is that he is\naggrieved? If you are cheated out of a single dollar by your neighbor,\nyou do not rest satisfied with knowing you are cheated, or with saying\nthat you are cheated, or even with petitioning him to pay you your due;\nbut you take effectual steps at once to obtain the full amount, and see\nthat you are never cheated again. Action from principle,\u2014the perception\nand the performance of right,\u2014changes things and relations; it is\nessentially revolutionary, and does not consist wholly with anything\nwhich was. It not only divided states and churches, it divides\nfamilies; aye, it divides the _individual_, separating the diabolical\nin him from the divine.\n\nUnjust laws exist: shall we be content to obey them, or shall we\nendeavor to amend them, and obey them until we have succeeded, or shall\nwe transgress them at once? Men generally, under such a government as\nthis, think that they ought to wait until they have persuaded the\nmajority to alter them. They think that, if they should resist, the\nremedy would be worse than the evil. But it is the fault of the\ngovernment itself that the remedy _is_ worse than the evil. _It_ makes\nit worse. Why is it not more apt to anticipate and provide for reform?\nWhy does it not cherish its wise minority? Why does it cry and resist\nbefore it is hurt? Why does it not encourage its citizens to be on the\nalert to point out its faults, and _do_ better than it would have them?\nWhy does it always crucify Christ, and excommunicate Copernicus and\nLuther, and pronounce Washington and Franklin rebels?\n\nOne would think, that a deliberate and practical denial of its\nauthority was the only offence never contemplated by government; else,\nwhy has it not assigned its definite, its suitable and proportionate\npenalty? If a man who has no property refuses but once to earn nine\nshillings for the State, he is put in prison for a period unlimited by\nany law that I know, and determined only by the discretion of those who\nplaced him there; but if he should steal ninety times nine shillings\nfrom the State, he is soon permitted to go at large again.\n\nIf the injustice is part of the necessary friction of the machine of\ngovernment, let it go, let it go: perchance it will wear\nsmooth,\u2014certainly the machine will wear out. If the injustice has a\nspring, or a pulley, or a rope, or a crank, exclusively for itself,\nthen perhaps you may consider whether the remedy will not be worse than\nthe evil; but if it is of such a nature that it requires you to be the\nagent of injustice to another, then, I say, break the law. Let your\nlife be a counter friction to stop the machine. What I have to do is to\nsee, at any rate, that I do not lend myself to the wrong which I\ncondemn.\n\nAs for adopting the ways which the State has provided for remedying the\nevil, I know not of such ways. They take too much time, and a man\u2019s\nlife will be gone. I have other affairs to attend to. I came into this\nworld, not chiefly to make this a good place to live in, but to live in\nit, be it good or bad. A man has not every thing to do, but something;\nand because he cannot do _every thing_, it is not necessary that he\nshould do _something_ wrong. It is not my business to be petitioning\nthe Governor or the Legislature any more than it is theirs to petition\nme; and, if they should not hear my petition, what should I do then?\nBut in this case the State has provided no way: its very Constitution\nis the evil. This may seem to be harsh and stubborn and\nunconcilliatory; but it is to treat with the utmost kindness and\nconsideration the only spirit that can appreciate or deserves it. So is\nall change for the better, like birth and death which convulse the\nbody.\n\nI do not hesitate to say, that those who call themselves abolitionists\nshould at once effectually withdraw their support, both in person and\nproperty, from the government of Massachusetts, and not wait till they\nconstitute a majority of one, before they suffer the right to prevail\nthrough them. I think that it is enough if they have God on their side,\nwithout waiting for that other one. Moreover, any man more right than\nhis neighbors constitutes a majority of one already.\n\nI meet this American government, or its representative, the State\ngovernment, directly, and face to face, once a year, no more, in the\nperson of its tax-gatherer; this is the only mode in which a man\nsituated as I am necessarily meets it; and it then says distinctly,\nRecognize me; and the simplest, the most effectual, and, in the present\nposture of affairs, the indispensablest mode of treating with it on\nthis head, of expressing your little satisfaction with and love for it,\nis to deny it then. My civil neighbor, the tax-gatherer, is the very\nman I have to deal with,\u2014for it is, after all, with men and not with\nparchment that I quarrel,\u2014and he has voluntarily chosen to be an agent\nof the government. How shall he ever know well what he is and does as\nan officer of the government, or as a man, until he is obliged to\nconsider whether he shall treat me, his neighbor, for whom he has\nrespect, as a neighbor and well-disposed man, or as a maniac and\ndisturber of the peace, and see if he can get over this obstruction to\nhis neighborliness without a ruder and more impetuous thought or speech\ncorresponding with his action? I know this well, that if one thousand,\nif one hundred, if ten men whom I could name,\u2014if ten _honest_ men\nonly,\u2014aye, if _one_ HONEST man, in this State of Massachusetts,\n_ceasing to hold slaves_, were actually to withdraw from this\ncopartnership, and be locked up in the county jail therefor, it would\nbe the abolition of slavery in America. For it matters not how small\nthe beginning may seem to be: what is once well done is done for ever.\nBut we love better to talk about it: that we say is our mission. Reform\nkeeps many scores of newspapers in its service, but not one man. If my\nesteemed neighbor, the State\u2019s ambassador, who will devote his days to\nthe settlement of the question of human rights in the Council Chamber,\ninstead of being threatened with the prisons of Carolina, were to sit\ndown the prisoner of Massachusetts, that State which is so anxious to\nfoist the sin of slavery upon her sister,\u2014though at present she can\ndiscover only an act of inhospitality to be the ground of a quarrel\nwith her,\u2014the Legislature would not wholly waive the subject of the\nfollowing winter.\n\nUnder a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a\njust man is also a prison. The proper place today, the only place which\nMassachusetts has provided for her freer and less desponding spirits,\nis in her prisons, to be put out and locked out of the State by her own\nact, as they have already put themselves out by their principles. It is\nthere that the fugitive slave, and the Mexican prisoner on parole, and\nthe Indian come to plead the wrongs of his race, should find them; on\nthat separate, but more free and honorable ground, where the State\nplaces those who are not _with_ her but _against_ her,\u2014the only house\nin a slave-state in which a free man can abide with honor. If any think\nthat their influence would be lost there, and their voices no longer\nafflict the ear of the State, that they would not be as an enemy within\nits walls, they do not know by how much truth is stronger than error,\nnor how much more eloquently and effectively he can combat injustice\nwho has experienced a little in his own person. Cast your whole vote,\nnot a strip of paper merely, but your whole influence. A minority is\npowerless while it conforms to the majority; it is not even a minority\nthen; but it is irresistible when it clogs by its whole weight. If the\nalternative is to keep all just men in prison, or give up war and\nslavery, the State will not hesitate which to choose. If a thousand men\nwere not to pay their tax-bills this year, that would not be a violent\nand bloody measure, as it would be to pay them, and enable the State to\ncommit violence and shed innocent blood. This is, in fact, the\ndefinition of a peaceable revolution, if any such is possible. If the\ntax-gatherer, or any other public officer, asks me, as one has done,\n\u201cBut what shall I do?\u201d my answer is, \u201cIf you really wish to do any\nthing, resign your office.\u201d When the subject has refused allegiance,\nand the officer has resigned his office, then the revolution is\naccomplished. But even suppose blood should flow. Is there not a sort\nof blood shed when the conscience is wounded? Through this wound a\nman\u2019s real manhood and immortality flow out, and he bleeds to an\neverlasting death. I see this blood flowing now.\n\nI have contemplated the imprisonment of the offender, rather than the\nseizure of his goods,\u2014though both will serve the same purpose,\u2014because\nthey who assert the purest right, and consequently are most dangerous\nto a corrupt State, commonly have not spent much time in accumulating\nproperty. To such the State renders comparatively small service, and a\nslight tax is wont to appear exorbitant, particularly if they are\nobliged to earn it by special labor with their hands. If there were one\nwho lived wholly without the use of money, the State itself would\nhesitate to demand it of him. But the rich man\u2014not to make any\ninvidious comparison\u2014is always sold to the institution which makes him\nrich. Absolutely speaking, the more money, the less virtue; for money\ncomes between a man and his objects, and obtains them for him; it was\ncertainly no great virtue to obtain it. It puts to rest many questions\nwhich he would otherwise be taxed to answer; while the only new\nquestion which it puts is the hard but superfluous one, how to spend\nit. Thus his moral ground is taken from under his feet. The\nopportunities of living are diminished in proportion as what are called\nthe \u201cmeans\u201d are increased. The best thing a man can do for his culture\nwhen he is rich is to endeavor to carry out those schemes which he\nentertained when he was poor. Christ answered the Herodians according\nto their condition. \u201cShow me the tribute-money,\u201d said he;\u2014and one took\na penny out of his pocket;\u2014if you use money which has the image of\nC\u00e6sar on it, and which he has made current and valuable, that is, _if\nyou are men of the State_, and gladly enjoy the advantages of C\u00e6sar\u2019s\ngovernment, then pay him back some of his own when he demands it;\n\u201cRender therefore to C\u00e6sar that which is C\u00e6sar\u2019s and to God those\nthings which are God\u2019s,\u201d\u2014leaving them no wiser than before as to which\nwas which; for they did not wish to know.\n\nWhen I converse with the freest of my neighbors, I perceive that,\nwhatever they may say about the magnitude and seriousness of the\nquestion, and their regard for the public tranquillity, the long and\nthe short of the matter is, that they cannot spare the protection of\nthe existing government, and they dread the consequences of\ndisobedience to it to their property and families. For my own part, I\nshould not like to think that I ever rely on the protection of the\nState. But, if I deny the authority of the State when it presents its\ntax-bill, it will soon take and waste all my property, and so harass me\nand my children without end. This is hard. This makes it impossible for\na man to live honestly and at the same time comfortably in outward\nrespects. It will not be worth the while to accumulate property; that\nwould be sure to go again. You must hire or squat somewhere, and raise\nbut a small crop, and eat that soon. You must live within yourself, and\ndepend upon yourself, always tucked up and ready for a start, and not\nhave many affairs. A man may grow rich in Turkey even, if he will be in\nall respects a good subject of the Turkish government. Confucius\nsaid,\u2014\u201cIf a State is governed by the principles of reason, poverty and\nmisery are subjects of shame; if a State is not governed by the\nprinciples of reason, riches and honors are the subjects of shame.\u201d No:\nuntil I want the protection of Massachusetts to be extended to me in\nsome distant southern port, where my liberty is endangered, or until I\nam bent solely on building up an estate at home by peaceful enterprise,\nI can afford to refuse allegiance to Massachusetts, and her right to my\nproperty and life. It costs me less in every sense to incur the penalty\nof disobedience to the State, than it would to obey. I should feel as\nif I were worth less in that case.\n\nSome years ago, the State met me in behalf of the church, and commanded\nme to pay a certain sum toward the support of a clergyman whose\npreaching my father attended, but never I myself. \u201cPay it,\u201d it said,\n\u201cor be locked up in the jail.\u201d I declined to pay. But, unfortunately,\nanother man saw fit to pay it. I did not see why the schoolmaster\nshould be taxed to support the priest, and not the priest the\nschoolmaster; for I was not the State\u2019s schoolmaster, but I supported\nmyself by voluntary subscription. I did not see why the lyceum should\nnot present its tax-bill, and have the State to back its demand, as\nwell as the church. However, at the request of the selectmen, I\ncondescended to make some such statement as this in writing:\u2014\u201cKnow all\nmen by these presents, that I, Henry Thoreau, do not wish to be\nregarded as a member of any incorporated society which I have not\njoined.\u201d This I gave to the town-clerk; and he has it. The State,\nhaving thus learned that I did not wish to be regarded as a member of\nthat church, has never made a like demand on me since; though it said\nthat it must adhere to its original presumption that time. If I had\nknown how to name them, I should then have signed off in detail from\nall the societies which I never signed on to; but I did not know where\nto find such a complete list.\n\nI have paid no poll-tax for six years. I was put into a jail once on\nthis account, for one night; and, as I stood considering the walls of\nsolid stone, two or three feet thick, the door of wood and iron, a foot\nthick, and the iron grating which strained the light, I could not help\nbeing struck with the foolishness of that institution which treated me\nas if I were mere flesh and blood and bones, to be locked up. I\nwondered that it should have concluded at length that this was the best\nuse it could put me to, and had never thought to avail itself of my\nservices in some way. I saw that, if there was a wall of stone between\nme and my townsmen, there was a still more difficult one to climb or\nbreak through, before they could get to be as free as I was. I did nor\nfor a moment feel confined, and the walls seemed a great waste of stone\nand mortar. I felt as if I alone of all my townsmen had paid my tax.\nThey plainly did not know how to treat me, but behaved like persons who\nare underbred. In every threat and in every compliment there was a\nblunder; for they thought that my chief desire was to stand the other\nside of that stone wall. I could not but smile to see how industriously\nthey locked the door on my meditations, which followed them out again\nwithout let or hindrance, and _they_ were really all that was\ndangerous. As they could not reach me, they had resolved to punish my\nbody; just as boys, if they cannot come at some person against whom\nthey have a spite, will abuse his dog. I saw that the State was\nhalf-witted, that it was timid as a lone woman with her silver spoons,\nand that it did not know its friends from its foes, and I lost all my\nremaining respect for it, and pitied it.\n\nThus the state never intentionally confronts a man\u2019s sense,\nintellectual or moral, but only his body, his senses. It is not armed\nwith superior wit or honesty, but with superior physical strength. I\nwas not born to be forced. I will breathe after my own fashion. Let us\nsee who is the strongest. What force has a multitude? They only can\nforce me who obey a higher law than I. They force me to become like\nthemselves. I do not hear of _men_ being _forced_ to live this way or\nthat by masses of men. What sort of life were that to live? When I meet\na government which says to me, \u201cYour money or your life,\u201d why should I\nbe in haste to give it my money? It may be in a great strait, and not\nknow what to do: I cannot help that. It must help itself; do as I do.\nIt is not worth the while to snivel about it. I am not responsible for\nthe successful working of the machinery of society. I am not the son of\nthe engineer. I perceive that, when an acorn and a chestnut fall side\nby side, the one does not remain inert to make way for the other, but\nboth obey their own laws, and spring and grow and flourish as best they\ncan, till one, perchance, overshadows and destroys the other. If a\nplant cannot live according to its nature, it dies; and so a man.\n\n\n\nThe night in prison was novel and interesting enough. The prisoners in\ntheir shirt-sleeves were enjoying a chat and the evening air in the\ndoor-way, when I entered. But the jailer said, \u201cCome, boys, it is time\nto lock up;\u201d and so they dispersed, and I heard the sound of their\nsteps returning into the hollow apartments. My room-mate was introduced\nto me by the jailer as \u201ca first-rate fellow and a clever man.\u201d When the\ndoor was locked, he showed me where to hang my hat, and how he managed\nmatters there. The rooms were whitewashed once a month; and this one,\nat least, was the whitest, most simply furnished, and probably the\nneatest apartment in town. He naturally wanted to know where I came\nfrom, and what brought me there; and, when I had told him, I asked him\nin my turn how he came there, presuming him to be an honest man, of\ncourse; and, as the world goes, I believe he was. \u201cWhy,\u201d said he, \u201cthey\naccuse me of burning a barn; but I never did it.\u201d As near as I could\ndiscover, he had probably gone to bed in a barn when drunk, and smoked\nhis pipe there; and so a barn was burnt. He had the reputation of being\na clever man, had been there some three months waiting for his trial to\ncome on, and would have to wait as much longer; but he was quite\ndomesticated and contented, since he got his board for nothing, and\nthought that he was well treated.\n\nHe occupied one window, and I the other; and I saw, that, if one stayed\nthere long, his principal business would be to look out the window. I\nhad soon read all the tracts that were left there, and examined where\nformer prisoners had broken out, and where a grate had been sawed off,\nand heard the history of the various occupants of that room; for I\nfound that even here there was a history and a gossip which never\ncirculated beyond the walls of the jail. Probably this is the only\nhouse in the town where verses are composed, which are afterward\nprinted in a circular form, but not published. I was shown quite a long\nlist of verses which were composed by some young men who had been\ndetected in an attempt to escape, who avenged themselves by singing\nthem.\n\nI pumped my fellow-prisoner as dry as I could, for fear I should never\nsee him again; but at length he showed me which was my bed, and left me\nto blow out the lamp.\n\nIt was like travelling into a far country, such as I had never expected\nto behold, to lie there for one night. It seemed to me that I never had\nheard the town-clock strike before, nor the evening sounds of the\nvillage; for we slept with the windows open, which were inside the\ngrating. It was to see my native village in the light of the Middle\nAges, and our Concord was turned into a Rhine stream, and visions of\nknights and castles passed before me. They were the voices of old\nburghers that I heard in the streets. I was an involuntary spectator\nand auditor of whatever was done and said in the kitchen of the\nadjacent village-inn\u2014a wholly new and rare experience to me. It was a\ncloser view of my native town. I was fairly inside of it. I never had\nseen its institutions before. This is one of its peculiar institutions;\nfor it is a shire town. I began to comprehend what its inhabitants were\nabout.\n\nIn the morning, our breakfasts were put through the hole in the door,\nin small oblong-square tin pans, made to fit, and holding a pint of\nchocolate, with brown bread, and an iron spoon. When they called for\nthe vessels again, I was green enough to return what bread I had left;\nbut my comrade seized it, and said that I should lay that up for lunch\nor dinner. Soon after, he was let out to work at haying in a\nneighboring field, whither he went every day, and would not be back\ntill noon; so he bade me good-day, saying that he doubted if he should\nsee me again.\n\nWhen I came out of prison,\u2014for some one interfered, and paid the tax,\u2014I\ndid not perceive that great changes had taken place on the common, such\nas he observed who went in a youth, and emerged a gray-headed man; and\nyet a change had to my eyes come over the scene,\u2014the town, and State,\nand country,\u2014greater than any that mere time could effect. I saw yet\nmore distinctly the State in which I lived. I saw to what extent the\npeople among whom I lived could be trusted as good neighbors and\nfriends; that their friendship was for summer weather only; that they\ndid not greatly purpose to do right; that they were a distinct race\nfrom me by their prejudices and superstitions, as the Chinamen and\nMalays are; that, in their sacrifices to humanity they ran no risks,\nnot even to their property; that, after all, they were not so noble but\nthey treated the thief as he had treated them, and hoped, by a certain\noutward observance and a few prayers, and by walking in a particular\nstraight though useless path from time to time, to save their souls.\nThis may be to judge my neighbors harshly; for I believe that most of\nthem are not aware that they have such an institution as the jail in\ntheir village.\n\nIt was formerly the custom in our village, when a poor debtor came out\nof jail, for his acquaintances to salute him, looking through their\nfingers, which were crossed to represent the grating of a jail window,\n\u201cHow do ye do?\u201d My neighbors did not thus salute me, but first looked\nat me, and then at one another, as if I had returned from a long\njourney. I was put into jail as I was going to the shoemaker\u2019s to get a\nshoe which was mended. When I was let out the next morning, I proceeded\nto finish my errand, and, having put on my mended shoe, joined a\nhuckleberry party, who were impatient to put themselves under my\nconduct; and in half an hour,\u2014for the horse was soon tackled,\u2014was in\nthe midst of a huckleberry field, on one of our highest hills, two\nmiles off; and then the State was nowhere to be seen.\n\nThis is the whole history of \u201cMy Prisons.\u201d\n\n\n\nI have never declined paying the highway tax, because I am as desirous\nof being a good neighbor as I am of being a bad subject; and, as for\nsupporting schools, I am doing my part to educate my fellow-countrymen\nnow. It is for no particular item in the tax-bill that I refuse to pay\nit. I simply wish to refuse allegiance to the State, to withdraw and\nstand aloof from it effectually. I do not care to trace the course of\nmy dollar, if I could, till it buys a man, or a musket to shoot one\nwith,\u2014the dollar is innocent,\u2014but I am concerned to trace the effects\nof my allegiance. In fact, I quietly declare war with the State, after\nmy fashion, though I will still make use and get what advantages of her\nI can, as is usual in such cases.\n\nIf others pay the tax which is demanded of me, from a sympathy with the\nState, they do but what they have already done in their own case, or\nrather they abet injustice to a greater extent than the State requires.\nIf they pay the tax from a mistaken interest in the individual taxed,\nto save his property or prevent his going to jail, it is because they\nhave not considered wisely how far they let their private feelings\ninterfere with the public good.\n\nThis, then, is my position at present. But one cannot be too much on\nhis guard in such a case, lest his actions be biassed by obstinacy, or\nan undue regard for the opinions of men. Let him see that he does only\nwhat belongs to himself and to the hour.\n\nI think sometimes, Why, this people mean well; they are only ignorant;\nthey would do better if they knew how: why give your neighbors this\npain to treat you as they are not inclined to? But I think, again, this\nis no reason why I should do as they do, or permit others to suffer\nmuch greater pain of a different kind. Again, I sometimes say to\nmyself, When many millions of men, without heat, without ill-will,\nwithout personal feeling of any kind, demand of you a few shillings\nonly, without the possibility, such is their constitution, of\nretracting or altering their present demand, and without the\npossibility, on your side, of appeal to any other millions, why expose\nyourself to this overwhelming brute force? You do not resist cold and\nhunger, the winds and the waves, thus obstinately; you quietly submit\nto a thousand similar necessities. You do not put your head into the\nfire. But just in proportion as I regard this as not wholly a brute\nforce, but partly a human force, and consider that I have relations to\nthose millions as to so many millions of men, and not of mere brute or\ninanimate things, I see that appeal is possible, first and\ninstantaneously, from them to the Maker of them, and, secondly, from\nthem to themselves. But, if I put my head deliberately into the fire,\nthere is no appeal to fire or to the Maker of fire, and I have only\nmyself to blame. If I could convince myself that I have any right to be\nsatisfied with men as they are, and to treat them accordingly, and not\naccording, in some respects, to my requisitions and expectations of\nwhat they and I ought to be, then, like a good Mussulman and fatalist,\nI should endeavor to be satisfied with things as they are, and say it\nis the will of God. And, above all, there is this difference between\nresisting this and a purely brute or natural force, that I can resist\nthis with some effect; but I cannot expect, like Orpheus, to change the\nnature of the rocks and trees and beasts.\n\nI do not wish to quarrel with any man or nation. I do not wish to split\nhairs, to make fine distinctions, or set myself up as better than my\nneighbors. I seek rather, I may say, even an excuse for conforming to\nthe laws of the land. I am but too ready to conform to them. Indeed I\nhave reason to suspect myself on this head; and each year, as the\ntax-gatherer comes round, I find myself disposed to review the acts and\nposition of the general and state governments, and the spirit of the\npeople to discover a pretext for conformity.\n\n  \u201cWe must affect our country as our parents,\n  And if at any time we alienate\n  Out love of industry from doing it honor,\n  We must respect effects and teach the soul\n  Matter of conscience and religion,\n  And not desire of rule or benefit.\u201d\n\nI believe that the State will soon be able to take all my work of this\nsort out of my hands, and then I shall be no better patriot than my\nfellow-countrymen. Seen from a lower point of view, the Constitution,\nwith all its faults, is very good; the law and the courts are very\nrespectable; even this State and this American government are, in many\nrespects, very admirable, and rare things, to be thankful for, such as\na great many have described them; seen from a higher still, and the\nhighest, who shall say what they are, or that they are worth looking at\nor thinking of at all?\n\nHowever, the government does not concern me much, and I shall bestow\nthe fewest possible thoughts on it. It is not many moments that I live\nunder a government, even in this world. If a man is thought-free,\nfancy-free, imagination-free, that which _is not_ never for a long time\nappearing _to be_ to him, unwise rulers or reformers cannot fatally\ninterrupt him.\n\nI know that most men think differently from myself; but those whose\nlives are by profession devoted to the study of these or kindred\nsubjects content me as little as any. Statesmen and legislators,\nstanding so completely within the institution, never distinctly and\nnakedly behold it. They speak of moving society, but have no\nresting-place without it. They may be men of a certain experience and\ndiscrimination, and have no doubt invented ingenious and even useful\nsystems, for which we sincerely thank them; but all their wit and\nusefulness lie within certain not very wide limits. They are wont to\nforget that the world is not governed by policy and expediency. Webster\nnever goes behind government, and so cannot speak with authority about\nit. His words are wisdom to those legislators who contemplate no\nessential reform in the existing government; but for thinkers, and\nthose who legislate for all time, he never once glances at the subject.\nI know of those whose serene and wise speculations on this theme would\nsoon reveal the limits of his mind\u2019s range and hospitality. Yet,\ncompared with the cheap professions of most reformers, and the still\ncheaper wisdom and eloquence of politicians in general, his are almost\nthe only sensible and valuable words, and we thank Heaven for him.\nComparatively, he is always strong, original, and, above all,\npractical. Still his quality is not wisdom, but prudence. The lawyer\u2019s\ntruth is not Truth, but consistency or a consistent expediency. Truth\nis always in harmony with herself, and is not concerned chiefly to\nreveal the justice that may consist with wrong-doing. He well deserves\nto be called, as he has been called, the Defender of the Constitution.\nThere are really no blows to be given by him but defensive ones. He is\nnot a leader, but a follower. His leaders are the men of \u201987. \u201cI have\nnever made an effort,\u201d he says, \u201cand never propose to make an effort; I\nhave never countenanced an effort, and never mean to countenance an\neffort, to disturb the arrangement as originally made, by which the\nvarious States came into the Union.\u201d Still thinking of the sanction\nwhich the Constitution gives to slavery, he says, \u201cBecause it was part\nof the original compact,\u2014let it stand.\u201d Notwithstanding his special\nacuteness and ability, he is unable to take a fact out of its merely\npolitical relations, and behold it as it lies absolutely to be disposed\nof by the intellect,\u2014what, for instance, it behoves a man to do here in\nAmerica today with regard to slavery, but ventures, or is driven, to\nmake some such desperate answer as the following, while professing to\nspeak absolutely, and as a private man,\u2014from which what new and\nsingular code of social duties might be inferred?\u2014\u201cThe manner,\u201d says\nhe, \u201cin which the governments of those States where slavery exists are\nto regulate it, is for their own consideration, under the\nresponsibility to their constituents, to the general laws of propriety,\nhumanity, and justice, and to God. Associations formed elsewhere,\nspringing from a feeling of humanity, or any other cause, have nothing\nwhatever to do with it. They have never received any encouragement from\nme and they never will.\u201d [These extracts have been inserted since the\nLecture was read \u2014HDT]\n\nThey who know of no purer sources of truth, who have traced up its\nstream no higher, stand, and wisely stand, by the Bible and the\nConstitution, and drink at it there with reverence and humanity; but\nthey who behold where it comes trickling into this lake or that pool,\ngird up their loins once more, and continue their pilgrimage toward its\nfountain-head.\n\nNo man with a genius for legislation has appeared in America. They are\nrare in the history of the world. There are orators, politicians, and\neloquent men, by the thousand; but the speaker has not yet opened his\nmouth to speak who is capable of settling the much-vexed questions of\nthe day. We love eloquence for its own sake, and not for any truth\nwhich it may utter, or any heroism it may inspire. Our legislators have\nnot yet learned the comparative value of free-trade and of freedom, of\nunion, and of rectitude, to a nation. They have no genius or talent for\ncomparatively humble questions of taxation and finance, commerce and\nmanufactures and agriculture. If we were left solely to the wordy wit\nof legislators in Congress for our guidance, uncorrected by the\nseasonable experience and the effectual complaints of the people,\nAmerica would not long retain her rank among the nations. For eighteen\nhundred years, though perchance I have no right to say it, the New\nTestament has been written; yet where is the legislator who has wisdom\nand practical talent enough to avail himself of the light which it\nsheds on the science of legislation.\n\nThe authority of government, even such as I am willing to submit\nto,\u2014for I will cheerfully obey those who know and can do better than I,\nand in many things even those who neither know nor can do so well,\u2014is\nstill an impure one: to be strictly just, it must have the sanction and\nconsent of the governed. It can have no pure right over my person and\nproperty but what I concede to it. The progress from an absolute to a\nlimited monarchy, from a limited monarchy to a democracy, is a progress\ntoward a true respect for the individual. Even the Chinese philosopher\nwas wise enough to regard the individual as the basis of the empire. Is\na democracy, such as we know it, the last improvement possible in\ngovernment? Is it not possible to take a step further towards\nrecognizing and organizing the rights of man? There will never be a\nreally free and enlightened State, until the State comes to recognize\nthe individual as a higher and independent power, from which all its\nown power and authority are derived, and treats him accordingly. I\nplease myself with imagining a State at last which can afford to be\njust to all men, and to treat the individual with respect as a\nneighbor; which even would not think it inconsistent with its own\nrepose, if a few were to live aloof from it, not meddling with it, nor\nembraced by it, who fulfilled all the duties of neighbors and\nfellow-men. A State which bore this kind of fruit, and suffered it to\ndrop off as fast as it ripened, would prepare the way for a still more\nperfect and glorious State, which also I have imagined, but not yet\nanywhere seen.","title":"On the Duty of Civil Disobedience","tradition":"philosophy-ethics","translated_text":null,"word_count":9354}