Because of how controversial his essay is. In “Thoreau’s Case for Political Disengagement” Carl L.Bankston III talks about Thoreau not really explaining what he wanted people to do, in case we were in a situation where the government was being unjust and we decided to fight against the injustice. He says, “While Thoreau was opposed to slavery and to the Mexican War, he does not provide us with a blueprint for the peaceful and free society that he wanted to see conscience bring into existence. This lack of vision for the future follows from the inner-directed character of his thinking.” (11). I’m in disagreement of his statement because I believe that Thoreau shows somewhat of a guide to achieving success to fight injustice of the government. He talks about breaking unjust laws and speaking up. He also leads by example, writing the essay clearly shows a way to fight back because it has inspired many …show more content…
And in a way he was successful in his goal because through the years, “Resistance to civil government” has inspired many influential individuals such as Mahatma Ghandi, and Martin Luther King Jr. Szekely says, “Ghandi, who fought for the right to cultural identity and self-determination of the Indian people, for abolition of social injustice and disfavoured social classes and against the authority of the British Empire” (50). Martin Luther King Jr. who also was an inspiring person, fought for equality between all races. Szekely says, “A society in which there is no injustice, no segregation between social classes. Martin Luther King was part of a movement at the time when the United States seemed to become estranged to the principles and ideals of American Revolution” (51). Both these individuals read Thoreau’s writing and took action on what they felt was