Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Thoreau and the Legitimacy of Protest. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
This is a 6 page paper that provides an overview of Thoreau's view of protest. Counter-arguments that protest against the government is unjustified are logically dismissed. Bibliography lists 10 sources.
Page Count:
6 pages (~225 words per page)
File: KW60_KFlit051.doc
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
over the last few centuries, to contemporary revolutions, such as the various uprisings that make up the ongoing "Arab Spring" conflicts, individual rebellion against the state seems to be one
of the most significant motive force of history. Of course, a full examination of the phenomenon should include not only these dramatic examples of revolution but also individual forms of
revolution that may not necessarily take the form of a widespread social movement. For instance, one might look to the example of Henry David Thoreau, the American Transcendentalist writer who
famously advocated individual rebellion against oppressive states in his work, "Civil Disobedience". In the text, Thoreau recounts his decision to withhold tax payments from the state in protest for the
governments involvement in what he viewed as the unjust institutions of slavery and war, and offers a complex philosophical justification of that decision. In a sense, this justification might be
extrapolated to act as a meaningful philosophical justification of all forms of individual rebellion against the state, as it addresses several of the most fundamental tenets of the issue. When
questioning whether or not an individual has the right to break the law in protest of a government policy or action, one must carefully consider the possible alternative of a
lawful, democratic form of protest, the overall value and usefulness of the state and whether this value justifies the protested policy or action, and the ultimate consequences of law-breaking as
protest being carried out at the universal level. One fundamental counter-argument to the idea that people have the right to protest their government through breaking the law is that democratic
governments naturally offer a more peaceful and lawful mechanism for social change: casting a vote. Certainly, if positive social change can be affected through voting, then law-breaking would be unjustified.
...