20 February 2020
In Thoreau's passage from 'Civil Disobedience', Thoreau depicts himself as fully separate from the influence of the State, where the State refers to the United States Federal Government. Unlike "statesmen and legislators" (Thoreau, 87), he is isolated from the State. Thoreau refuses to pay taxes or vote as a form of protest against the State, and in one case lived alone at Walden Pond self-sufficiently. By living outside society, Thoreau claims to be able to follow his individual philosophy without bias towards the State. Hence, I argue in this essay that Thoreau presents himself as the ideal moral judge of the State's actions, critiquing the Mexican-American War and State-sanctioned slavery.
Thoreau presents himself as an outside entity fully independent of the State's influence. To portray the extent of his separation from the State, Thoreau draws a comparison between himself and "statesmen and legislators", who exist "so completely within the institution" that they "never distinctly and nakedly behold it" (87). He employs the use of imagery and metaphor, depicting the State as a building where politicians live. Being on the inside, they are naturally unable to view the true form of the State-building "distinctly and nakedly". Thoreau insinuates that they are unable to view the State's actions objectively as they are clouded by personal bias. In contrast, Thoreau, who exists outside the "institution" is able to view the State objectively, along with the injustices it perpetrates.
In the wider text, Thoreau uses his position of impartiality to critique the State's sanction of slavery. This is part of the essay's wider criticisms against the American Government. Thoreau draws the example of American farmers and merchants in Massachusetts who "are more interested in commerce and agriculture than they are in humanity" (78). He alludes to farmers voting in their own self-interest, maintaining the status quo of government-sanctioned slavery to keep their profits. Unlike farmers and the statesmen, Thoreau does not "live under a government" (87). Thoreau's perceived outsider status allows him to speak out against slavery sanctioned by the State.
Finally, Thoreau uses his unique position as an outsider to present himself as the ideal moral judge of the State's actions.
"Seen from a lower point of view, the Constitution, with all its faults, is very good [...] but seen from a point of view a little higher, they are what I have described them" (78)
Thoreau hints at the problem of moral subjectivity, repeating "point of view" in the text. Every individual will judge the State differently by their individual moral standards, hence there cannot be an objective judge of the State. From a "lower" standard, such as the Massachusetts farmers who vote by their own self-interest, the State's injustices go unpunished. However, Thoreau, holds a unique position as an outsider. He is not motivated by profit like the farmers, and follows his personal philosophy. Hence Thoreau claims to be able to view the State's injustices with objectivity.
Thoreau demonstrates this power by criticising the American Government's war on Mexico. The war was declared to expand American territory, seizing states from Mexico such as California and Utah. As an outsider, Thoreau has a unique view of the war. Firstly, Thoreau fears that seizing territories would increase slavery. Secondly,
Thoreau argues that the State abuses its power by forcing American men to be soldiers, becoming "not as men mainly, but as machines" (77). American men are stripped of their conscience and identity, ordered to kill Mexicans for the State. Yet they are unable to protest. According to Thoreau, all of his townsmen who criticised the war "furnished a substitute". They could not protest the war fully while continuing to live under the State. Thoreau, however, presents himself as an outside entity who only judges the State by his own moral standard. He is hence able to criticise the State's military offensive on Mexico.
Thoreau depicts himself as a unique outsider entity, separate from the State. He follows his own moral standards uninfluenced by the State. Hence, Thoreau presents himself as the ideal moral judge of the State's actions using his perceived moral position to criticise the State's sanctioning of slavery and the Mexican-American War.
Thoreau, Henry D. "Civil Disobedience". HL1006 Introduction to American Literature Course Reader AY2019-2020, edited by Christopher Peter Trigg, Nanyang Technological University, pp. 76-89.