Thoreau's Civil Disobedience espouses the need to prioritize one's
conscience over the dictates of laws. It criticizes American social
institutions and policies, most prominently slavery and the Mexican-American
War.
Thoreau begins his essay by arguing that government rarely proves itself useful
and that it derives its power from the majority because they are the strongest
group, not because they hold the most legitimate viewpoint. He contends that
people's first obligation is to do what they believe is right and not to follow
the law dictated by the majority. When a government is unjust, people should
refuse to follow the law and distance themselves from the government in
general. A person is not obligated to devote his life to eliminating evils from
the world, but he is obligated not to participate in such
evils. This includes not being a member of an unjust institution (like the
government). Thoreau further argues that the United States fits his criteria
for an unjust government, given its support of slavery and its practice of
aggressive war.
Thoreau doubts the effectiveness of reform within the
government, and he argues that voting and petitioning for change achieves
little. He presents his own experiences as a model for how to relate to an
unjust government: In protest of slavery, Thoreau refused to pay taxes and
spent a night in jail. But, more generally, he ideologically dissociated
himself from the government, "washing his hands" of it and refusing
to participate in his institutions. According to Thoreau, this form of protest
was preferable to advocating for reform from within government; he asserts that
one cannot see government for what it is when one is working within it.
Civil Disobedience covers several topics, and Thoreau intersperses poetry
and social commentary throughout. For purposes of clarity and readability, the
essay has been divided into three sections here, though Thoreau himself made no
such divisions.