"Resistance to Civil Government"
This is my first writing based on the information obtained from the
Cyberspace, to my surprise, most of the people on the net agree with Thoreau on less
government control. After a careful study of all the available information to me, I found
myself on the opposite side.
Nowadays, government is omnipresent; from the time we are born, it will
ask for a birth certificate, to the time we die, it will charge a property tax on our
cemetery, let alone in our daily lives. Thus people normally don't like the government.
Henry D. Thoreau in "Resistance to Civil Government", gave his feeling toward
the government, and his opinions reflected the structure of the American government in his
time. Thoreau's position showed his belief "That government is best which governs not
at all". Even today in the modern American society, there are still a lot of
believers in Thoreau's ideas. But I can NOT agree with Thoreau on his idea of the
government, though I love his idea of naturalism. There are reasons for the existence of
the current government and the way it works. Let's start from the term
"government".
"Government", is a group of people who are responsible for governing a country
or state. No one knows exactly when did government appear in the human history, but the
origin of the government can be summarized as follows. Each individual human-being has his
own moral law according to his own origin, education and perspective, or whatever. When a
crowd of people agrees on a common moral law, it becomes a civil law, which needs a group
of selected people, the "government", from the crowd to enforce. Thus the
"group" is from the "crowd", and the "government" is part of
the "crowd". It is the best if civil law agrees with moral law, otherwise a
revolution probably will be started, and the government will be replaced by a new
government which will represent the moral law of the majority of the people it represents,
either peacefully or by force. Thus a government has to represent the moral law of the
majority in order to survive.
According to Thoreau, "the power is once in the hands of the people, ..., but because
they are physically the strongest", thus "a government in which the majority
rule in all cases cannot be based on justice". This is an idealistic view of the
government. Although the origin of the government determines that it has to serve the
common moral law of the most of the people, as we can see, the current government is not
only composed by the majorities, but also the minorities. For example, there are a lot of
laws and regulations protecting the benefits of the Indians, instead of the majorities.
Even in schools and universities, especially in public schools, there are always some
organizations to protect the educational opportunity of minorities. Sometimes people have
to give up to the government; every man has a conscience, but sometimes he has to resign
his conscience to the legislator, for the benefit of others in the society; although it is
a great pain to do this, it is well worth the loss, and most of the people cannot keep
their consciences all the time, anyway. Government is politics, politics is to compromise,
and no one can live in this world without compromise; he has to compromise to the nature,
he has to compromise to himself, at least.
In his article, Thoreau apparently disliked the State government as a machine, also the
people who serve the government, "not as men mainly, but as machines"; and
Thoreau considered himself "a wise man" and "will only be useful as a man,
and will not submit to be clay". As far as it seems to me, he was saying that army
who protect our country, the police who guard our neighborhood and other diligent people
working in our government are merely "on a level with wood and earth and
stones", and they are "as likely to serve the devil, without intending it, as
God". But who knows if they are serving the devil or the God? No one can tell, it is
impossible to judge the morality of the action of the government in the short run,
although it is possible in the long run, like the Civil War. And Thoreau would not be able
to determine that himself, the final decision came from the collection of the opinion of
all the people at that time.
To most of the people, voting is the way to express their ideas and beliefs, but to
Thoreau, "All voting is a sort of gaming, like chequers or backgammon". What he
suggested people should do is "Action from principle...", "it is
essentially revolutionary and does not consist wholly with anything which was". If
everyone in the society are taking this kind of action, and will not compromise, we will
have a country full of chaos and never able to calm down. Action from principle is a great
idea from the beginning, but it is impractical as the famous communism theory from Karl
Marx.
Thoreau believed that moral law is more important than civil law because he believed in
God. He understood people living in the world should prepare themselves for an everlasting
joy with God, therefore he would rather resist to civil government when civil law
contradicted with moral law, HIS moral law. Thoreau believed in God, but other people in
the same time believed in God, too. While Thoreau believed slavery is immoral according to
his understanding of God, others thought the God would agree with slavery, because they
believed it's moral. Even today in the nineties, the believers in God still have a lot of
discrepancies in their moral laws.
One of the strengths of government, even according to Thoreau's opinion, is its superior
physical strength, so government can enforce civil laws easily. People who do not obey
civil laws, will end up losing their freedoms or properties. Although this enforcement may
not be the best way, it works. In today's America, we need this strength to ensure the
safety and stability of majority of people in the society. There has been always an
argument between "Freedom" and "Government", and unfortunately, people
don't have the conscience to obey the civil laws without enforcement. Say you tell a thief
he can rob a bank without being punished, what will he do next?
Since the majority income of the government is coming from tax, it seems to be the first
priority for citizens to pay their taxes. To enforce the civil law, one should "pay
it, or be locked up in the jail." Thoreau was put into jail until someone paid the
tax for him because he had not paid the poll-tax for six years. Law only represents the
opinions of the majority, or the one who has the power. In the current society, if
everyone follow what Thoreau did, does not pay the tax that he thinks to be immoral or
refuse to take the duty that he thinks to be immoral, we will not have any common interest
in the nation anymore, we will lose our power in this competing world.
As a large country, America will have to "afford to be just to all men, and treat the
individual with respect as a neighbor" according to Thoreau. Is that possible in the
real world? There are millions of crimes in this country every year, can we treat all the
criminals with respect and as a neighbor? It will take us forever to punish a criminal
that way. Will the state be able to "recognize the individual as a higher and
independent power, ..., and treat him accordingly"? The government will have to
consider the opinions of each individual and try to make everybody happy, is that
possible?
All in one word, we need a strong government to ensure the stability and safety of
ourselves. Love America, support it even though it is not perfect.
|