Anti-Authority: Governments, Institutions, and the Mainstream

國

立 政 治 大 學

‧

N a tio na

l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y

5.4.4 Anti-Authority: Governments, Institutions, and the Mainstream The third Transcendentalist Principle, Anti-Authority, is characterized by a distrust of external authorities. This attitude permeates “Civil Disobedience.” The three authorities for which Thoreau expresses the greatest distrust are governments, institutions, and the mainstream. He is suspicious of the government because it is mechanized, dim-witted, and violent. He views the authority of political, religious, and legal institutions skeptically, criticizing them as self-centered, coercive, and potentially unjust. Finally, Thoreau distrusts mainstream authorities, claiming that the elites represent intellectual tyranny and the masses exert dominance through physical force. In short, in his misgivings about these putative external authorities, Thoreau embraces an Anti-Authority perspective of the Transcendentalist.

5.5 “It Must Help Itself”: Self-Reliance in “Civil Disobedience”

In this section, I examine how the fourth Transcendentalist Principle, Self-Reliance – the practical belief that people should rely on themselves instead of others – manifests in Thoreauvian civil disobedience. I conduct this examination in two parts. In the first part, I summarize how Thoreau describes individuals who lack Self-Reliance; in his view, they tend to depend on others, on property, and on the

government, and their unwillingness to embrace Self-Reliance constitutes a failure to become full citizens. In the second part, I consider the three levels of Thoreauvian Self-Reliance, which for simplicity’s sake, I have labeled basic, intermediate, and advanced: 1) the basic level demands self-sufficiency, 2) the intermediate level requires self-motivation, and 3) the advanced level calls for civil disobedience. Each level consists of a defining spirit and corresponding actions. Together, these three levels constitute Thoreauvian Self-Reliance.

5.5.1 “They Do Nothing in Earnest”: People without Self-Reliance

‧ 國

立 政 治 大 學

‧

N a tio na

l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y

Self-Reliance is characterized by individual reliance on one’s own abilities and resources rather than outside forces; it is a fundamental requirement for effective citizenship. However, many people think and behave without any sense of Self-Reliance, depending on others, on property, and on governments. In portraying a lack of Self-Reliance, Thoreau describes the features of such individuals in great detail and enumerates the consequences of failing to realize Self-Reliance.

5.5.1.1 “They Wait for Others”: Relying on Others

People who rely on others tend to talk without taking action, leaving problems to others and remaining uninterested in public affairs. First, they pay lip service instead of acting. Thoreau frames this quality in terms of the issues that interested him most.

Thus, he notes how many people profess an enlightened opposition to the horrors of slavery and warfare, but do not incorporate this belief system into their behavior:

“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” (150). Their mentality can be summarized as “we love better to talk about it: that we say is our mission” (157). By merely talking, they avoid facing difficulties but still feel that they are making a real contribution. What is more, they passively wait for others to solve problems:

[They] sit down with their hands in their pockets, and say that they know not what to do, and do nothing; . . . 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. (151)

Such people not only dodge their moral duty but also destroy their own Self-Reliance.

They may initially rely on others because of their laziness and unwillingness, but once they grow accustomed to the situation, their Self-Reliance gradually dissipates,

making them incapable and powerless in public affairs. In addition, some people

‧ 國

立 政 治 大 學

‧

N a tio na

l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y

become aloof to political issues: “The broadest and most prevalent error requires the most disinterested virtue to sustain it” (153). They assume they have nothing to do with wrongdoings and their indifference perpetuates social injustice. In short, people without Self-Reliance talk instead of working, demand others solve problems, and remain indifferent to public issues. Their inaction demonstrates their lack of Self-Reliance. In an age of systematic slavery and warfare, those people’s dependence on others made them complicit in the injustice.

5.5.1.2 “Their Property and Families”: Reliance on Property

In addition to relying on others, many people depend on property. Thoreau mentions that even “the freest of [his] neighbors” (159) fail to free themselves from dependence on their “property and families” (159). They fear that disobedience will lead to the loss of their possessions so they choose to support the state out of

convenience, even though their support may be wrong. Their heavy dependence on property weakens their Self-Reliance, makes them focus on accumulating goods and money, and causes them to ignore social inequities. Thus, for Thoreau, the “opponents to a reform” (150) are not “a hundred thousand politicians” (150) but “a hundred thousand merchants and farmers here, who are more interested in commerce and agriculture than they are in humanity” (150). For Thoreau, such politically disengaged and property-reliant people are the true obstacles to the improvement of societies.

Thoreau famously undertook a two-year experiment living on the shores of Walden Pond where his property was limited to a bed, two desks, and three chairs. By dramatically reducing his possessions, Thoreau attempted to simplify his own life and thereby challenge contemporary ways of living. His experience reveals that people can live decently with minimal material goods and that people should avoid over-dependence on property.

‧ 國

立 政 治 大 學

‧

N a tio na

l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y

5.5.1.3 “Public Tranquility”: Reliance on Governments

In addition to relying on others and property, some people depend on the government. These individuals believe in “public tranquility” (159) and “the

protection of the existing government” (159), assuming that if they remain obedient, the state will offer them civil stability or at least a promise of non-harassment. Such reliance on the government prevents these people from seeing injustice objectively.

For example, even though many opposed slavery and the Mexican war, they still supported the state financially and physically in exchange for their political peace:

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. (153)

Reliance on the government makes these people silent regarding the wrongdoings of the state, rendering them complicit in injustice. By contrast, those who decrease their reliance on the state become more objective regarding public affairs. Thoreau points to himself as an example of someone who seeks to minimize his dependence on the government, claiming: “I should not like to think that I ever rely on the protection of the State” (159). Only with proper distance and freedom from heavy dependence can citizens examine the government impartially. Thoreau thus discourages citizens from over-reliance on the government, urging them to embrace Self-Reliance.

5.5.1.4 Without Self-Reliance: Others, Property, and Governments

People who lack Self-Reliance depend on others, property, and the government.

First, they depend on others to fix problems, tending to talk rather than act. Second, they rely on property and thus cannot see the wrongdoings of the state, which makes them obstacles to true reform. Third, they depend on the government, believing they

‧ 國

立 政 治 大 學

‧

N a tio na

l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y

will be rewarded with political security; however, their tacit support of injustice eventually makes them complicit in injustice. Thoreau describes such people as possessing a “manifest lack of intellect and cheerful self-reliance” (152). Thoreau urges his contemporaries to avoid becoming unqualified citizens, cautioning them that doing so will bolster injustice and weaken their Self-Reliance.