|
On the
Duty of Civil Disobedience
by Henry David Thoreau
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.
Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which also
I believe -- "That government is best which governs
not at all"; and when men are prepared for it, that
will be the kind of government which the will have.
Government is at best but an expedient; but most
governments are usually, and all governments are
sometimes, inexpedient. The objections which have
been brought against a standing army, and they are
many and weighty, and deserve to prevail, may also
at last be brought against a standing government.
The standing army is only an arm of the standing
government. 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.
Witness 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.
This American government -- what is it but a
tradition, though a recent one, endeavoring to
transmit itself unimpaired to posterity, but each
instant losing some of its integrity? It has not
the vitality and force of a single living man; for
a single man can bend it to his will. It is a sort
of wooden gun to the people themselves. But it is
not the less necessary for this; for the people
must have some complicated machinery or other, and
hear its din, to satisfy that idea of government
which they have. Governments show thus how
successfully men can be imposed upon, even impose
on themselves, for their own advantage. It is
excellent, we must all allow. Yet this government
never of itself furthered any enterprise, but by
the alacrity with which it got out of its 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. For government is an expedient, by
which men would fain succeed in letting one another
alone; and, as has been said, when it is most
expedient, the governed are most let alone by it.
Trade and commerce, if they were not made of
india-rubber, would never manage to bounce over
obstacles which legislators are continually putting
in their way; and if one were to judge these men
wholly by the effects of their actions and not
partly by their intentions, they would deserve to
be classed and punished with those mischievous
persons who put obstructions on the railroads.
But, to speak practically and as a citizen,
unlike those who call themselves no-government men,
I ask for, not at once no government, but at once a
better government. Let every man make known what
kind of government would command his respect, and
that will be one step toward obtaining
it.
After all, the practical reason why, when the
power is once in the hands of the people, a
majority are permitted, and for a long period
continue, to rule is not because they are most
likely to be in the right, nor because this seems
fairest to the minority, but because they are
physically the strongest. But a government in which
the majority rule in all cases can not be based on
justice, even as far as men understand it. Can
there not be a government in which the majorities
do not virtually decide right and wrong, but
conscience? -- in which majorities decide only
those questions to which the rule of expediency is
applicable? Must the citizen ever for a moment, or
in the least degree, resign his conscience to the
legislator? Why has every man a conscience then? I
think that we should be men first, and subjects
afterward. It is not desirable to cultivate a
respect for the law, so much as for the right. The
only obligation which I have a right to assume is
to do at any time what I think right. It is truly
enough said that a corporation has no conscience;
but a corporation of conscientious men is a
corporation with a conscience. Law never made men a
whit more just; and, by means of their respect for
it, even the well-disposed are daily made the
agents of injustice. A common and natural result of
an undue respect for the law is, that you may see a
file of soldiers, colonel, captain, corporal,
privates, powder-monkeys, and all, marching in
admirable order over hill and dale to the wars,
against their wills, ay, against their common sense
and consciences, which makes it very steep marching
indeed, and produces a palpitation of the heart.
They have no doubt that it is a damnable business
in which they are concerned; they are all peaceably
inclined. Now, what are they? Men at all? or small
movable forts and magazines, at the service of some
unscrupulous man in power? Visit the Navy Yard, and
behold a marine, such a man as an American
government can make, or such as it can make a man
with its black arts -- a mere shadow and
reminiscence of humanity, a man laid out alive and
standing, and already, as one may say, buried under
arms with funeral accompaniment, though it may
be,
- Not a drum was heard, not a funeral
note,
- As his corse to the rampart we hurried;
- Not a soldier discharged his farewell
shot
- O'er the grave where out hero was
buried.
The mass of men serve the state thus, not as men
mainly, but as machines, with their bodies. They
are the standing army, and the militia, jailers,
constables, posse comitatus, etc. In most cases
there is no free exercise whatever of the judgement
or of the moral sense; but they put themselves on a
level with wood and earth and stones; and wooden
men can perhaps be manufactured that will serve the
purpose as well. Such command no more respect than
men of straw or a lump of dirt. They have the same
sort of worth only as horses and dogs. Yet such as
these even are commonly esteemed good citizens.
Others -- as most legislators, politicians,
lawyers, ministers, and office-holders -- serve the
state chiefly with their heads; and, as they rarely
make any moral distinctions, they are as likely to
serve the devil, without intending it, as God. A
very few -- as heroes, patriots, martyrs, reformers
in the great sense, and men -- serve the state with
their consciences also, and so necessarily resist
it for the most part; and they are commonly treated
as enemies by it. A wise man will only be useful as
a man, and will not submit to be "clay," and "stop
a hole to keep the wind away," but leave that
office to his dust at least:
- I am too high born to be propertied,
- To be a second at control,
- Or useful serving-man and instrument
- To any sovereign state throughout the
world.
He who gives himself entirely to his fellow men
appears to them useless and selfish; but he who
gives himself partially to them is pronounced a
benefactor and philanthropist.
How does it become a man to behave toward the
American government today? I answer, that he cannot
without disgrace be associated with it. I cannot
for an instant recognize that political
organization as my government which is the slave's
government also.
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. 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. 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. What makes this duty the
more urgent is that fact that the country so
overrun is not our own, but ours is the invading
army.
Paley, a common authority with many on moral
questions, in his chapter on the "Duty of
Submission to Civil Government," resolves all civil
obligation into expediency; and he proceeds to say
that "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 inconveniencey, it is the will of God. .
.that the established government be obeyed -- and
no longer. This principle being admitted, the
justice of every particular case of resistance is
reduced to a computation of the quantity of the
danger and grievance on the one side, and of the
probability and expense of redressing it on the
other." Of this, he says, every man shall judge for
himself. But Paley appears never to have
contemplated those cases to which the rule of
expediency does not apply, in which a people, as
well and an individual, must do justice, cost what
it may. If I have unjustly wrested a plank from a
drowning man, I must restore it to him though I
drown myself. This, according to Paley, would be
inconvenient. But he that would save his life, in
such a case, shall lose it. This people must cease
to hold slaves, and to make war on Mexico, though
it cost them their existence as a people.
In their practice, nations agree with Paley; but
does anyone think that Massachusetts does exactly
what is right at the present crisis?
- A drab of stat,
- a cloth-o'-silver slut,
- To have her train borne up,
- and her soul trail in the dirt.
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
harmless. We are accustomed to say, that the mass
of men are unprepared; but improvement is slow,
because the few are not as materially wiser or
better than the many. It is not so important that
many should be good as you, as that there be some
absolute goodness somewhere; for that will leaven
the whole lump. There are thousands who are in
opinion opposed to slavery and to the war, who yet
in effect do nothing to put an end to them; who,
esteeming themselves children of Washington and
Franklin, sit down with their hands in their
pockets, and say that they know not what to do, and
do nothing; who even postpone the question of
freedom to the question of free trade, and quietly
read the prices-current along with the latest
advices from Mexico, after dinner, and, it may be,
fall asleep over them both. What is the
price-current of an honest man and patriot today?
They hesitate, and they regret, and sometimes they
petition; but they do nothing in earnest and with
effect. They will wait, well disposed, for others
to remedy the evil, that they may no longer have it
to regret. At most, they give up only a cheap vote,
and a feeble countenance and Godspeed, to the
right, as it goes by them. There are nine hundred
and ninety-nine patrons of virtue to one virtuous
man. But it is easier to deal with the real
possessor of a thing than with the temporary
guardian of it.
All voting is a sort of gaming, like checkers or
backgammon, with a slight moral tinge to it, a
playing with right and wrong, with moral questions;
and betting naturally accompanies it. The character
of the voters is not staked. I cast my vote,
perchance, as I think right; but I am not vitally
concerned that that right should prevail. I am
willing to leave it to the majority. Its
obligation, therefore, never exceeds that of
expediency. Even voting for the right is doing
nothing for it. It is only expressing to men feebly
your desire that it should prevail. 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. Only
his vote can hasten the abolition of slavery who
asserts his own freedom by his vote.
I hear of a convention to be held at Baltimore,
or elsewhere, for the selection of a candidate for
the Presidency, made up chiefly of editors, and men
who are politicians by profession; but I think,
what is it to any independent, intelligent, and
respectable man what decision they may come to?
Shall we not have the advantage of this wisdom and
honesty, nevertheless? Can we not count upon some
independent votes? Are there not many individuals
in the country who do not attend conventions? But
no: I find that the respectable man, so called, has
immediately drifted from his position, and despairs
of his country, when his country has more reasons
to despair of him. He 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. O for a
man who is a man, and, my neighbor says, has a bone
in his back which you cannot pass your hand
through! Our statistics are at fault: the
population has been returned too large. How many
men are there to a square thousand miles in the
country? Hardly one. Does not America offer any
inducement for men to settle here? The American has
dwindled into an Odd Fellow -- one who may be known
by the development of his organ of gregariousness,
and a manifest lack of intellect and cheerful
self-reliance; whose first and chief concern, on
coming into the world, is to see that the
almshouses are in good repair; and, before yet he
has lawfully donned the virile garb, to collect a
fund to the support of the widows and orphans that
may be; who, in short, ventures to live only by the
aid of the Mutual Insurance company, which has
promised to bury him decently.
It is not a man's duty, as a matter of course,
to devote himself to the eradication of any, even
the 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. If I devote myself to
other pursuits and contemplations, I must first
see, at least, that I do not pursue them sitting
upon another man's shoulders. I must get off him
first, that he may pursue his contemplations too.
See what gross inconsistency is tolerated. I have
heard some of my townsmen say, "I should like to
have them order me out to help put down an
insurrection of the slaves, or to march to Mexico
-- see if I would go"; and yet these very men have
each, directly by their allegiance, and so
indirectly, at least, by their money, furnished a
substitute. The soldier is applauded who refuses to
serve in an unjust war by those who do not refuse
to sustain the unjust government which makes the
war; is applauded by those whose own act and
authority he disregards and sets at naught; as if
the state were penitent to that degree that it
hired one to scourge it while it sinned, but not to
that degree that it left off sinning for a moment.
Thus, under the name of Order and Civil Government,
we are all made at last to pay homage to and
support our own meanness. 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.
The broadest and most prevalent error requires
the most disinterested virtue to sustain it. The
slight reproach to which the virtue of patriotism
is commonly liable, the noble are most likely to
incur. Those who, while they disapprove of the
character and measures of a government, yield to it
their allegiance and support are undoubtedly its
most conscientious supporters, and so frequently
the most serious obstacles to reform. Some are
petitioning the State to dissolve the Union, to
disregard the requisitions of the President. Why do
they not dissolve it themselves -- the union
between themselves and the State -- and refuse to
pay their quota into its treasury? Do not they
stand in the same relation to the State that the
State does to the Union? And have not the same
reasons prevented the State from resisting the
Union which have prevented them from resisting the
State?
How can a man be satisfied to entertain an
opinion merely, and enjoy it? Is there any
enjoyment in it, if his opinion is that he is
aggrieved? If you are cheated out of a single
dollar by your neighbor, you do not rest satisfied
with knowing you are cheated, or with saying that
you are cheated, or even with petitioning him to
pay you your due; but you take effectual steps at
once to obtain the full amount, and see to it that
you are never cheated again. Action from principle,
the perception and the performance of right,
changes things and relations; it is essentially
revolutionary, and does not consist wholly 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.
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?
One would think, that a deliberate and practical
denial of its authority was the only offense never
contemplated by its government; else, why has it
not assigned its definite, its suitable and
proportionate, penalty? If a man who has no
property refuses but once to earn nine shillings
for the State, he is put in prison for a period
unlimited by any law that I know, and determined
only by the discretion of those who put him there;
but if he should steal ninety times nine shillings
from the State, he is soon permitted to go at large
again.
If the injustice is part of the necessary
friction of the machine of government, let it go,
let it go: perchance it will wear smooth --
certainly 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.
As for adopting the ways the State has provided
for remedying the evil, I know not of such ways.
They take too much time, and a man's life will be
gone. I have other affairs to attend to. I came
into this world, not chiefly to make this a good
place to live in, but to live in it, be it good or
bad. A man has not everything to do, but something;
and because he cannot do everything, it is not
necessary that he should be petitioning the
Governor or the Legislature any more than it is
theirs to petition me; and if they should not hear
my petition, what should I do then? But in this
case the State has provided no way: its very
Constitution is the evil. This may seem to be harsh
and stubborn and unconcilliatory; but it is to
treat with the utmost kindness and consideration
the only spirit that can appreciate or deserves it.
So is all change for the better, like birth and
death, which convulse the body.
I do not hesitate to say, that those who call
themselves Abolitionists should at once effectually
withdraw their support, both in person and
property, from the government of Massachusetts, and
not wait till they constitute a majority of one,
before they suffer the right to prevail through
them. I think that it is enough if they have God on
their side, without waiting for that other one.
Moreover, any man more right than his neighbors
constitutes a majority of one already.
I meet this American government, or its
representative, the State government, directly, and
face to face, once a year -- no more -- in the
person of its tax-gatherer; this is the only mode
in which a man situated as I am necessarily meets
it; and it then says distinctly, Recognize me; and
the simplest, the most effectual, and, in the
present posture of affairs, the indispensablest
mode of treating with it on this head, of
expressing your little satisfaction with and love
for it, is to deny it then. My civil neighbor, the
tax-gatherer, is the very man I have to deal with
-- for it is, after all, with men and not with
parchment that I quarrel -- and he has voluntarily
chosen to be an agent of the government. How shall
he ever know well that he is and does as an officer
of the government, or as a man, until he is obliged
to consider whether he will treat me, his neighbor,
for whom he has respect, as a neighbor and
well-disposed man, or as a maniac and disturber of
the peace, and see if he can get over this
obstruction to his neighborliness without a ruder
and more impetuous thought or speech corresponding
with his action. I know this well, that if one
thousand, if one hundred, if ten men whom I could
name -- if ten honest men only -- ay, if one HONEST
man, in this State of Massachusetts, ceasing to
hold slaves, were actually to withdraw from this
co-partnership, and be locked up in the county jail
therefor, it would be the abolition of slavery in
America. For it matters not how small the beginning
may seem to be: what is once well done is done
forever. But we love better to talk about it: that
we say is our mission. Reform keeps many scores of
newspapers in its service, but not one man. If my
esteemed neighbor, the State's ambassador, who will
devote his days to the settlement of the question
of human rights in the Council Chamber, instead of
being threatened with the prisons of Carolina, were
to sit down the prisoner of Massachusetts, that
State which is so anxious to foist the sin of
slavery upon her sister -- though at present she
can discover only an act of inhospitality to be the
ground of a quarrel with her -- the Legislature
would not wholly waive the subject of the following
winter.
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 her -- the 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 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.
Continued
on Page 2 >>
|
Walden
and Civil Disobedience, by Henry David
Thoreau
|