Henry David Thoreau world-wide know for his essay was a well recognized transcends from America. In his essay, he argued that individuals should not let governments control their consciences. To the people, the government was like a machine which they controlled and not the other way around. They were to resist the attempts by the government to turn them into injustice agents. He was particularly displeased with slavery and the Mexican American War of 1846-1848.
Thoreau insists that governments are not are harmful and unjustified since its ruled by a majority but being a majority does not guarantee that they are just and wise. He further reiterates that the government is indeed but an agent of corruption and injustice. Thoreau during his famous lecture insisted that those who are governed should be more concerned about humanity. To him, it was like the people could not see how the slavery in Mexico was inhuman. The people had cultivated self-respect for the law at the expense of the right and humane thing to do.
A government was flawed because it was a rule by the majority who are always perceived by their subjects as always right, which is not the case. This is due to the fact the government can be manipulative at the expense of its citizens. The change from the first book to the other shows the definitive structural compound of change.
SEE ALSO: " Reasons to Buy Discussion Board Post"
The government of America has been involved directly or indirectly in slavery through its borders to Mexico. The citizens should not be in favor of the government. This brings to rise the difference in opinions during the second book. Maybe due to clarity on the time, those things are not what we always deem them to be. A government is naturally expected to behave in a particular kind of way.
Governed by policies that make up the law that governs a nation. What happens in cases where the government should be held responsible for flaws and criminality at times? This brings rise to citizens who feel responsible for the state's affair that breed rebellion among people who see the government. The difference between the books is that of standing on different sides. The government is expected not to be unruly and above the law. However, what happens when the government does not function as required. When self-interests come above, the will and betterment of the public or when the state offends its neighbors and violates their rights.
A citizen of a country should, therefore, be vigilant and not influenced blindly by the affairs of the state. This gives rise to opposition parties that are in charge of regulating and acting as a watchdog to different governments. The public, therefore, has a civic duty to retain sanity in management. The example of Mexico shows the various forms of human violation and the ever-changing form of modern day slavery. These are injustices carried out by other foreign nationalists, and the country should not be on the same side as a government thriving on oppression. This shows the difference between the two books.
The first book is based on being diligent and coordinating with the government for prosperity. It further assesses the basic of paying taxes and responsibility of citizens to enable the government grows. This enhances the development of standard amenities that develop a nation and move services to the people. This engages the population in rapid development. This is, however, what is expected of a government. If things dont go as planned, the government should be accountable and ready to comply with consequences of their actions. This lead to the development of the new book that conflicts with civil disobedience. Civil disobedience is a too known for keeping the administration regulated and get the locals involved. The book should once have focused on the importance of making the right choices that affect the day to day working and building of a nation. The other book, in turn, reflects on the possibility of wrong things happening in government and that citizens should be in a position to retaliate and focus on the main things that make a nation.
300 words per page
instead of 280
report (on demand)
By making a state responsibility, a citizen can be able to access services that are vital and would not exist without intervention. A citizen should therefore not find himself on the side of a mass of people with a similar thinking. It gives an individual the ability to think differently and large therefore promoting invention and innovation in a country. This leads to the development of technology. Public disobedience and riots at times make the government more aware of their environment and remind them of the role they should play to its citizens. This, therefore, goes to show that there is a significant difference in the performance of public institutions based on the level of involvement of its people in nation building.
The use of public institutions like law enforcement to generate fear among people is also a use between states to mute its citizens. This might be due to issues of general concern to the public which they do not want to be addressed. Public awareness and disorders based on relevant issues that affect the free lead to the development of a country. This, therefore, goes to show that the blind obedience to a sovereign state can be as distrustful than anticipated by the people. It facilitates the notion by thinking in a way that is slightly different from general ways. It addresses the question of what happens when there are disorder and chaos in a country. It amplifies the law and matters that go against it. This gives citizens a comprehensive view of circumstances and relevant actions by the law.
This shows that there should be a direct involvement of citizens in contributing and managing national issues for prosperity. The first shows the need for concern towards nation building while the other influences that of management to maintain and stabilize prosperity. The two are opposite sides that influence the development of a society and maximizes eventually on the development of both the government and civilians to take up the mantle and strive towards a common objective. This shows that there is a need for dedication and objectiveness when carrying out civic duties and management in a nation. The desire to do good and focus on responsibilities transfixed to the laws always often leads to results. There should be therefore equity in the way people think. Other factors should, however, be looked into to achieve public cohesion in a country.
In summation, resources that a nation owns are usually a birthright of its citizens and a trade tool for its maximization and development. If they are misused and personalized, they will lead to significant disparities between the rich and the poor. The rich almost always appear from the political class while the less fortunate from those who are ruled. This, therefore, means that all citizens should be actively involved in national decisions and distribution of national wealth. This will lead to better distribution of wealth in an economy. Unemployment among other problems will be addressed, proper and safe medical care and access will be possible to all alongside education levels and prosperity. There is theretofore need for people to be involved in national issues and building. It is right to question decisions and ideas as they bring rise to different thinking models that advance different levels of accuracy and action. Therefore, the development and growth of a nation are not only reliant on the government but the will of the people to see through the process of nation-building.