亨利‧大衛‧梭羅
(HENRY DAVID THOREAU)

論公民的不服從
Civil Disobedience

在一個監禁正義之士的政府統治之下，正義之士的真正棲身之地也就是監獄。

亨利‧大衛‧梭羅(1817－1862)是位雜文家、詩人、自然主義者、改革家和哲學家。他出生在馬薩諸塞州的康科德，畢業於哈佛大學。在擔任了數年小學校長之後，梭羅決定以作詩和論述自然作為他終生的事業。他是拉爾夫‧沃爾多‧愛默生的信徒，是先驗主義運動的一位領袖。與浪漫主義和改革結合在一起的先驗主義推崇感覺和直覺勝過理智，宣揚個人主義和內在的心聲──完整和自然的聲音。

梭羅零打碎敲的以文謀生的努力幾乎從未給他帶來什麼稿酬。他發表的作品銷路不佳，便不時在家中的小鉛筆廠裏工作。1845年，時年二十八歲的他，下決心撇開金錢的羈絆，在徵得愛默生的同意後，在愛默生擁有的離康科德二英里的沃頓塘上建了一座小屋。

1846年7月，梭羅居住在沃頓塘時，當地的警官找他，叫他支付投票稅，儘管他已經數年未行使這個權利了。梭羅拒絕支付稅款。當夜，警官把他關在康科德的監獄裏。第二天，一位未透露身份的人士──可能是梭羅的姨母支付了稅款，他便獲釋了。不過，他表明了他的觀點：他不能向一個容許奴隸制並且對墨西哥發動帝國主義戰爭的政府交稅。他準備了一份解釋自己行動的演說稿，並於1849年發表了這篇演說稿。當時，這篇文章沒有引起什麼反響。但是到了十九世紀末，這篇文章卻成了經典之作，在國際上出現了一批追隨者。列夫‧托爾斯泰在1900年讀到這篇文章，對它崇拜不已。聖雄‧甘地在南非當律師時，宣讀這篇文章為觸犯了種族歧視法規的印度人辯護。甘地深受梭羅的影響，成了一位終生非暴力反抗和消極抵制非正義權勢的典範。通過甘地，梭羅的主張變成了政治活動的工具。後來在二十世紀，年輕的小馬丁‧路德‧金也深受甘地的影響，梭羅的主張便在美國民權運動的思想基礎中得到了新生。

我由衷地同意這個警句──「最好的政府是管得最少的政府」。我希望看到這個警句迅速而且系統地得到實施。我相信，實施後，其最終結果將是──「最好的政府是根本不進行治理的政府」。當人們做好準備之後，這樣的政府就是他們願意接受的政府，政府充其量不過是一種權宜之計，而大部分政府，有時所有的政府卻都是不得計的。對設置常備軍的反對意見很多、很強烈，而且理應佔主導地位，它們最終可能轉變成反對常設政府。常備軍隊不過是常設政府的一支胳臂。政府本身也只不過是人民選擇來行使他們意志的形式，在人民還來不及通過它來運作之前，它同樣也很容易被濫用或誤用，看看當前的墨西哥戰爭，它是少數幾個人將常設政府當作工具的結果，因為，從一開始，人民本來就不同意採取這種作法。

目前這個美國政府──它不過是一種傳統，儘管其歷史還不久，但卻竭力使自己原封不動地屆屆相傳，可是每屆卻都喪失掉一些自身的誠實和正直。它的活力和氣力還頂不上一個活人，因為一個人就能隨心所欲地擺佈它。對於人民來說，政府是支木頭槍。倘若人們真要使用它互相廝殺，它就注定要開裂。不過，儘管如此，它卻仍然是必不可少的，因為人們需要某種複雜機器之類的玩意兒，需要聽它發出的噪音，藉此滿足他們對於政府之理念的要求。於是，政府的存在表明了，為了人民的利益，可以如何成功地利用、欺騙人民，甚至可以使人民利用、欺騙自己。我們大家都必須承認，這真了不起。不過，這種政府從未主動地促進過任何事業，它只是欣然地超脫其外。它未捍衛國家的自由。它未解決西部問題。它未從事教育。迄今，所有的成就全都是由美國人民的傳統性格完成的，而且，假如政府不曾從中作梗的話，本來還會取得更大的成就。因為政府是一種權宜之計，通過它人們可以欣然彼此不來往；而且，如上所述，最便利的政府也就是最不搭理被治理的人民的政府，商業貿易假如不是用印度橡膠製成的話，絕無可能躍過議員們沒完沒了地設置下的路障；倘若完全以議員們行動的效果，而不是以他們行動的意圖來評價的話，那麼他們就理所當然地應當被視作如同在鐵路上設路障搗蛋的人，並受到相應的懲罰。

但是，現實地以一個公民的身份來說，我不像那些自稱是無政府主義的人，我要求的不是立即取消政府，而是立即要有個好一些的政府。讓每一個人都表明能贏得他尊敬的是什麼樣的政府，這樣，也就為贏得這種政府邁出了一步。到頭來，當權力掌握在人民手中的時候，多數派將有權統治，而且繼續長期統治，其實際原因不是因為他們極可能是正義的，也不是因為這在少數派看來是最公正的，而是因為他們在物質上是最強大的。但是，一個由多數派作出所有決定的政府，是不可能建立在正義之上的，即使在人們對其所瞭解的意義上都辦不到。在一個政府中，如果對公正與謬誤真正作出決定的不是多數派而是良知，如果多數派僅僅針對那些可以運用便利法則解決的問題做出決定，難道是不可能的嗎?公民必須，哪怕是暫時地或最低限度地把自己的良知託付給議員嗎？那麼，為什麼每個人還都有良知呢?我認為，我們首先必須做人，其後才是臣民。培養人們像尊重正義一樣尊重法律是不可取的。我有權承擔的唯一義務是不論何時都從事我認為是正義的事。…… 

那麼一個人應當怎樣對待當今的美國政府呢?我的回答是，與其交往有辱人格。我絕對不能承認作為奴隸制政府的一個政治機構是我的政府。 

人人都承認革命的權利，即當政府是暴政或政府過於無能令人無法忍受的時候，有權拒絕為其效忠，並抵制它的權利。但是，幾乎所有人都說，現在的情況並非如此。他們認為，1775年的情況才是如此。如果有人對我說，這個政府很糟糕，它對運抵口岸的某些外國貨課稅。我極有可能會無動於衷，因為沒有這些外國貨，我照樣能過日子。所有的機器都免不了產生摩擦，但是這也許卻具有抵消弊端的好處。不管怎麼說，為此興師動眾是大錯特錯的。可是，如果摩擦控制了整個機器，並進行有組織的欺壓與掠奪，那麼，就讓我們扔掉這部機器吧。換句話說，如果在一個被認為是自由的庇護所的國家裏，人口的六分之一是奴隸，如果整個國家任由一個外國軍隊蹂躪、征服，並被置於軍管之下，那麼，我認為，誠實的人都應立刻奮起反抗、革命。使這個責任變得更加迫切的是，這個被如此蹂躪的國家不是我國，恰恰相反，我們的軍隊卻正是入侵的軍隊……

事實上，反對麻塞諸塞州改革的人不是南方的萬把政客，而是這兒的千千萬萬商人和農場主，他們更感興趣的是他們的商業和農業，而不是他們屬於人類這個事實。不論花費什麼代價，他們都不打算公平對待奴隸和墨西哥。我要與之爭論的敵人，不是遠在天涯，而是那些就在我們周圍的敵人。他們與遠方的敵人合作，按照他們的旨意辦事。要不是這些人的話，遠方的敵人不會為害。我們習慣於說，群眾還未做好準備。可是情況的改善是緩慢的，因為這些少數人實質上並不比多數人高明多少或好多少。在某處樹立某種絕對的善，比起讓許多人都像你這麼好更重要。因為絕對的善將像酵母一樣影響整體。在成千上萬人具有反對奴隸制、反對戰爭的觀點，但實際上卻未做任何事情來結束奴隸制和戰爭。他們自以為是華盛頓和佛蘭克林的子孫，卻是兩手插在褲兜裏，坐在那兒，藉口不知道該做些什麼，而無所事事，他們甚至優先考慮自由貿易問題，而不是事關自由的問題。飯後，他們安然地同時間讀時價表和來自墨西哥的消息，也許，讀者讀著便睡著了……

美國人已經蛻變成奇怪的傢伙──以愛交際的器官發達而著稱，同時又顯示出智力低下的沾沾自喜。在世界上，他最最關心的是確保救濟院情況良好；他還未披上合法的外衣，便四下募捐以扶助孤寡，儘管這些孤寡眼下還不是孤寡。總之，他冒險光靠互助保險公司的資助過日子，而該公司已經答應為他體面地安葬……

不公正的法律仍然存在：我們必須心甘情願地服從這些法律，還是努力去修正它們、服從它們直至我們取得成功，或是立刻粉碎它們呢？在當前這種政府統治下，人們普遍認為應等待，直到說服大多數人去改變它們。人們認為，如果他們抵制的話，這樣修正的結果將比原來的謬誤更糟。不過，如果修正的結果真比原來的謬誤更糟的話；那是政府的過錯，是政府使其變得更糟的。為什麼政府不善於預見改革並為其提供機會呢？為什麼政府不珍惜少數派的智慧呢?為什麼政府不見棺材不落淚呢?為什麼政府不鼓勵老百姓提高警惕，為政府指出錯誤而避免犯錯誤呢?為什麼政府總是把基督釘在十字架上，把哥白尼和路德逐出教會，並指責華盛頓和富蘭克林是叛亂分子呢?」…

如果不公正是政府機器必然產生的磨擦的一部分，那麼就讓它去吧，讓它去吧：也許它會磨合好的。──不過，毫無疑義，機器終將被徹底磨損掉的。如果不公正的那部分有其獨自的彈簧滑輪、繩索，或者曲柄，那麼你可能會考慮修正的結果會不會比原來的謬誤更糟；但是，如果不公正的那部分的本質要求你以其人之道還治其人時，那我說就別管這法規了。以你的生命作為反磨擦的機制來制止這部機器吧。我不得不做的是，無論如何都要確保我不為我所唾棄的謬誤效勞。

至於採納州政府業已提出的修正謬誤的方法，我聽都沒聽過。那些方法太費時日，不等它們奏效，已經命赴黃泉了。我還有別的事要幹。我到這世上來主要不是為了把這世界變成個過日子的好地方。而是到這世上來過日子，不管它是好日子還是壞日子。一個人辦不了每一件事，但是可以做些事。正因為他不必樣樣事情都要做，所以他也不一定非做出什麼錯事來。州長和議員們用不著向我請願，我也犯不著向他們請願。如果他們不聽從我的請願，那麼我該怎麼辦呢？如果事到如此，州政府也就自絕其路了：其憲法本身也就是謬誤的了。這似乎顯得粗暴、頑固和毫無調和之意。但是，最溫和、最體貼的作法，只適用於能夠欣賞它，並能夠配得上它的人；一切能使情況好轉的變遷都是如此，正如振撼整個人體的生與死一樣。

我毫無反顧地認為，凡是自稱廢奴主義者的人都必須立刻撤回對麻塞諸塞州政府的人力和財力的支援，不必等到廢奴主義者在政府中形成多數，不必等到他們讓正義通過他們佔了上風才動手。我認為，如果有上帝站在他們一邊的話，就足夠了，不必再等另一個了。況且，任何人只要比周圍的人更正義一些，也就構成了一人的多數……

在一個監禁正義之士的政府統治之下，正義之士的真正棲身之地也就是監獄。當今麻塞諸塞州為自由和奮發圖強之士提供的唯一妥當的處所，是監獄。在獄中，他們為州政府的行徑而煩惱，被禁鋼在政治生活之外，因為他們的原則已經給他們帶來麻煩了。逃亡的奴隸，被假釋的墨西哥囚犯和申訴白人犯下的罪孽的印第安人可以在監獄裏找到他們，在那個與世隔絕，但卻更自由、更尊嚴的地方找到他們。那是州政府安置不順其道的叛逆者的地方，是蓄奴制州裏一個自由人唯一能夠驕傲地居住的地方。如果有人以為他們的影響會消失在監獄裏，他們的呼聲不再能傳到政府的耳朵裏，他們無法在囹圄四壁之內與政府為敵，那麼他們就弄錯了。真理比謬誤強大得多，一位對非正義有了一點親身體驗的人在與非正義鬥爭時會雄辯有力得多。投下你的一票，那不僅僅是一張紙條，而是你的全部影響。當少數與多數保持一致時，少數是無足輕重的，它甚至算不上是少數；但是當少數以自身的重量凝聚在一起時，便不可抗拒。要麼把所有正直的人都投入監獄，要麼放棄戰爭與奴隸制，如果要在這二者之間做出選擇的話，州政府會毫不猶豫地做出選擇。如果今年有一千人不交稅，那不是暴烈、血腥的舉動，但是若交稅則不然。那是使政府得以施展暴行，讓無辜的人流血。事實上，這正是和平革命的定義，如果和平革命是可能的話。如果稅務官或其他政府官員問我，正如有位官員問我的那樣，「那麼，我怎麼辦呢?」我的回答是，「如果你真希望做什麼的話，那你就辭職。」如果臣民拒絕效忠，官員辭職，那麼革命就成功了。即使假定這會導致流血的話，難道當良心受傷害的時候就不流血嗎，從良心的創傷裏流出的是人的氣概和永生，將使他永世沈淪於死亡之中。此時此刻，我就看到這種流血……

我已經六年未交投票稅了。我還一度為此進過監獄，關了一夜。當我站在牢房裏，打量著牢固的石壁，那石壁足有二、三尺厚，鐵木結構的門有一尺厚，還有那濾光的鐵柵欗。我不由地對當局的愚昧頗有感獨。他們對待我，就好像我不過是可以禁錮起來的血肉之軀。我想，當局最終應當得出這麼個結論：監禁是它處置我的最好辦法，而且我還從未想到我還能對它 有什麼用處。我知道，如果說我與鄉親之間擋著堵石牆的話，那麼他們若想要獲得我這種自由的話，他們還得爬過或打破一堵比這石牆更難對付的牆才行。我一刻也不覺得自己是被囚禁著。這牆看來是浪費了太多的石頭和灰泥了。我覺得，似乎所有公民中，只有我付清了稅款。他們顯然不知道該怎樣對付我，他們的舉止就像些沒教養的人。他們的威脅恭維，樣樣都顯得荒唐可笑。他們以為我惦記的是挪到這堵牆的另一邊。我不禁覺得好笑，我在沈思時，他們卻煞有介事地鎖起牢門，全然不知我的思緒就跟在他們身後出了牢房，絲毫不受任何阻礙，而他們自己才真正是危險的。他們既然奈何不了我，便打定主意懲罰我的身軀，就像群頑童，無法懲罰他們憎恨的人，就衝他的狗撤野。我看，州政府是個傻子，如同一位揣著銀匙的孤女，怯生生的，連自己的朋友和敵人都分不出來。我已經對它失去了所有的敬意，我可憐它。

州政府從未打算正視一個人的智慧或道德觀念，而僅僅著眼於他的軀體和感官。它不是以優越的智慧或坦誠，而是以優越的體力來武裝自己。我不是生來讓人支使的。我要按照我自己的方式來生活。讓我們來看看誰是最強者。什麼力量能產生效果?他們只能強迫卻無法使我順從。因為我只聽命於優越於我的法則。他們要迫使我成為像他們那樣的人。我還不曾聽說過，有人被眾人逼迫著這樣生活或那樣生活。那會是什麼樣的生活呢?當我遇到的政府對我說：「把你的錢給我，不然就要你的命！我為什麼要忙著給它錢呢?那政府可能處境窘迫不堪，而且不知所措。我不能幫它的忙。它必須像我一樣，自己想辦法。不值得為這樣的政府哭哭啼啼。我的職責不是讓社會機器運轉良好。我不是工程師的兒子。我認為，當橡果和栗子並排從樹上掉下來時，它們不是毫無生氣地彼此謙讓，而是彼此遵循各自的法則，發芽、生長，盡可能長得茂盛。也許直到有一天，其中的一棵超過另一棵，並且毀了它。如果植物不能按自己的本性生長，那麼它就將死亡，人也一樣……

我不想同任何人或國家爭吵。我不想鑽牛角尖或自我標榜比旁人強。我倒傾向於認為，我尋求的是遵守我國的法則的理由。我是太容易遵守這些法則了。我完全有理由懷疑我有這毛病。每年，當稅務官造訪時，我總是忙著回顧國家與州政府的法令和主張，回顧人民的態度，以便找到個遵命的理由。我相信州政府很快就能免除我的這類操勞，那麼我簡直就同其他國民一樣愛國了。從較低層次的角度看，憲法儘管有缺點，但還是非常好的。法律和法庭是非常令人尊敬的，甚至這個州政府和這個美國政府在許多方面也是非常令人敬佩、非常難得可貴、令人感激的，對此人們已經大加描述過了。但是，如果從稍高層次的角度看，它們就不過是我所描繪的那個樣子。如果從更高或最高層次的角度看，那麼有誰會說它們是什麼玩意兒，或者會認為它們還配讓人瞧上一眼，或者值得讓人考慮考慮呢?

不過，政府同我沒多大關係，我盡可能不考慮它。我不常生活在政府之下，我甚至不常生活在這個世界上。如果一個人思想自由，幻想自由，想像自由，那麼不自由的東西在他看來就絕不會長期存在。愚蠢的統治或改良者們不可能徹底妨礙他 ....

政府的權威，即使是我願意服從的權威──因為我樂於服從那些比我淵博、比我能幹的人，並且在許多事情上，我甚至樂於服從那些不是那麼淵博，也不是那麼能幹的人──這種權威也還是不純正的權威：從嚴格、正義的意義上講，權威必須獲得被治理者的認可或贊成才行。除非我同意，否則它無權對我的身心和財產行使權力。從極權君主制到限權君主制，從限權君主制到民主制的進步是朝著真正尊重個人的方向的進步。民主，如同我們所知道的民主，就是政府進步的盡頭了嗎?不可能進一步承認和組織人的權利了嗎?除非國家承認個人是更高的、獨立的權力，而且國家的權力和權威是來自於個人的權力，並且在對待個人方面採取相應的措施；否則就絕對不會有真正自由開明的國家。我樂於想像國家的最終形武，它將公正地對待所有的人，尊重個人就像尊重鄰居一樣。如果有人履行了鄰居和同胞的職責，但卻退避三舍，冷眼旁觀，不為其所容納的話，它就寢食不安。如果，一個國家能夠結出這樣的果實，並且聽其儘快果熟蒂落的話，那麼它就為建成更加完美、更加輝煌的國家鋪平了道路。那是我想像到，卻在任何地方都不曾看到的國家。

Civil Disobedience

I heartily accept the motto--"That government is best which governs least;" and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly and systematically. Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which also I believe,--"That government is best which governs not at all;" and when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have. Government is at best but an expedient; but most governments are usually, and all governments are sometimes, inexpedient. The objections which have been brought against a standing army, and they are many and weighty, and deserve to prevail, may also at last be brought against a standing government. The standing army is only an arm of the standing government. The government itself, which is only the mode which the people have chosen to execute their will, is equally liable to be abused and perverted before the people can act through it. Witness the present Mexican war, the work of comparatively a few individuals using the standing government as their tool; for, in the outset, the people would not have consented to this measure.

    This American government,--what is it but a tradition, though a recent one, endeavoring to transmit itself unimpaired to posterity, but each instant losing some of its integrity? It has not the vitality and force of a single living man; for a single man can bend it to his will. It is a sort of wooden gun to the people themselves; and, if ever they should use it in earnest as a real one against each other, it will surely split. But it is not the less necessary for this; for the people must have some complicated machinery or other, and hear its din, to satisfy that idea of government which they have. Governments show thus how successfully men can be imposed on, even impose on themselves, for their own advantage. It is excellent, we must all allow; yet this government never of itself furthered any enterprise, but by the alacrity with which it got out of its way. It does not keep the country free. It does not settle the West. It does not educate. The character inherent in the American people has done all that has been accomplished; and it would have done somewhat more, if the government had not sometimes got in its way. For government is an expedient by which men would fain succeed in letting one another alone; and, as has been said, when it is most expedient, the governed are most let alone by it. Trade and commerce, if they were not made of India rubber, would never manage to bounce over the obstacles which legislators are continually putting in their way; and, if one were to judge these men wholly by the effects of their actions, and not partly by their intentions, they would deserve to be classed and punished with those mischievous persons who put obstructions on the railroads.

    But, to speak practically and as a citizen, unlike those who call themselves no-government men, I ask for, not at once no government, but at once a better government. Let every man make known what kind of government would command his respect, and that will be one step toward obtaining it.

    After all, the practical reason why, when the power is once in the hands of the people, a majority are permitted, and for a long period continue. to rule, is not because they are most likely to be in the night, nor because this seems fairest to the minority, but because they are physically the strongest. But a government in which the majority rule in all cases cannot be based on justice. even as far as men understand it. Can there not be a government in which majorities do not virtually decide right and wrong, but conscience?--in which majorities decide only those questions to which the rule of expediency in applicable? Must the citizen ever for a moment, or in the least degree, resign his conscience to the legislator? Why has every man a conscience, then? I think that we should be men first, and subjects afterward. It is not desirable to cultivate a respect for the law, so much as for the right. The only obligation which I have a right to assume, is to do at any time what I think right....

    How does it become a man to behave toward this American government to-day? I answer that he cannot without disgrace be associated with it. I cannot for an instant recognize that political organization as my government which is the slave's government also.

    All men recognize the right of revolution; that is. the right to refuse allegiance to and to resist the government, when its tyranny or its inefficiency are great and unendurable. But almost all say that such is not the case now. But such was the case, they think, in the Revolution of 『75. If one were to tell me that this was a bad government because it taxed certain foreign commodities brought to its ports, it is most probable that I should not make an ado about it, for I can do without them; all machines have their friction; and possibly this does enough good to counterbalance the evil. At any rate, it is a great evil to make a stir about it. But when the friction comes to have its machine, and oppression and robbery are organized, I say, let us not have such a machine any longer. In other words, when a sixth of the population of a nation which has undertaken to be the refuge of liberty are slaves, and a whole country is unjustly overrun and conquered by a foreign army, and subject to military law, I think that it is not too soon for honest men to rebel and revolutionize. What makes this duty the more urgent is the fact, that the country so overrun is not our own, but ours is the invading army. . . .

    Practically speaking, the opponents to a reform in Massachusetts are not a hundred thousand politicians at the South, but a hundred thousand merchants and farmers here, who are more interested in commerce and agriculture than they are in humanity, and are not prepared to do justice to the slave and to Mexico, cost what it may. I quarrel not with far-off foes, but with those who, near at home, co-operate with, and do the bidding of those far away, and without whom the latter would be harmless. We are accustomed to say, that the mass of men are unprepared; but improvement is slow, because the few are not materially wiser or better than the many. It is not so important that many should be as good as you, as that there be some absolute goodness somewhere; for that will leaven the whole lump. 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; who, esteeming themselves children of Washington and Franklin, sit down with their hands in their pockets, and say that they know not what to do, and do nothing; who even postpone the question of freedom to the question of free-trade, and quietly read the prices current along with the latest advices from Mexico, after dinner, and, it may be, fall asleep over them both. . . .

    The American has dwindled into an Odd Fellow,--one who may be known by the development of his organ of gregariousness, and a manifest lack of intellect and cheerful self-reliance; whose first and chief concern, on coming into the world, is to see that the alms-houses are in good repair; and, before yet he has lawfully donned the virile garb, to collect a fund for the support of the widows and orphans that may be; who, in short, ventures to live only by the aid of the mutual insurance company, which has promised to bury him decently. . . .

    Unjust laws exist: shall we be content to obey them, or shall we endeavor to amend them, and obey them until we have succeeded, or shall we transgress them at once? Men generally, under such a government as this, think that they ought to wait until they have persuaded the majority to alter them. They think that, if they should resist, the remedy would be worse than the evil. But it is the fault of the government itself that the remedy is worse than the evil. It makes it worse. Why is it not more apt to anticipate and provide for reform? Why does it not cherish its wise minority? Why does it cry and resist before it is hurt? Why does it not encourage its citizens to be on the alert to point out its faults, and do better than it would have them? Why does it always crucify Christ, and excommunicate Copernicus and Luther, and pronounce Washington and Franklin rebels? ...

    If the injustice is part of the necessary friction of the machine of government, let it go, let it go: perchance it will wear smooth,--certainly the machine will wear out. If the injustice has a spring, or a pulley, or a rope, or a crank, exclusively for itself, then perhaps you may consider whether the remedy will not be worse than the evil; but if it is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then, I say, break the law. Let your life be a counter friction to stop the machine. What I have to do is to see, at any rate, that I do not lend myself to the wrong which I condemn.

    As for adopting the ways which the State has provided for remedying the evil, I know not of such ways. They take too much time, and a man's life will be gone. I have other affairs to attend to. I came into this world, not chiefly to make this a good place to life, but to live in it, be it good or bad. A man has not everything to do, but something; and because he cannot do every thing, it is not necessary that he should do something wrong. It is not my business to be petitioning the governor or the legislature any more than it is theirs to petition me; and if they should not hear my petition, what should I do then? But in this case the State has provided no way: its very Constitution is the evil. This may seem to be harsh and stubborn and unconciliatory; but it is to treat with the utmost kindness and consideration the only spirit that can appreciate or deserves it. So is all change for the better, like birth and death which convulse the body.

    I do not hesitate to say, that those who call themselves abolitionists should at once effectually withdraw their support, both in person and property, from the government of Massachusetts, and not wait till they constitute a majority of one, before they suffer the right to prevail through them, I think that it is enough if they have God on their side, without waiting for that other one. Moreover, any man more right than his neighbors constitutes a majority of one already....

    Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. The proper place to-day, the only place which Massachusetts has provided for her freer and less desponding spirits, is in her prisons, to be put out and locked out of the State by her own act, as they have already put themselves out by their principles. It is there that the fugitive slave, and the Mexican prisoner on parole, and the Indian come to plead the wrongs of his race, should find them; on that separate, but more free and honorable ground, where the State places those who are not with her, but against her,--the only house in a slave-state in which a free man can abide with honor. If any think that their influence would be lost there, and their voices no longer afflict the ear of the State, that they would not be as an enemy within its walls, they do not know by how much truth is stronger than error, nor how much more eloquently and effectively he can combat injustice who has experienced a little in his own person. Cast your whole vote, not a strip of paper merely, but your whole influence. A minority is powerless while it conforms to the majority; it is not even a minority then; but it is irresistible when it clogs by its whole weight. If the alternative is to keep all just men in prison, or give up -war and slavery, the State will not hesitate which to choose. If a thousand men were not to pay their tax-bills this year, that would not be a violent and bloody measure, as it would be to pay them, and enable the State to commit violence and shed innocent blood. This is, in fact, the definition of a peaceable revolution, if any such is possible. If the tax-gatherer, or any other public officer, asks me, as one has done, "But what shall I do?" my answer is, "If you really wish to do anything, resign our office." When the subject has refused allegiance, and the officer has resigned his office, then the revolution is accomplished. But even suppose blood should flow. Is there not a sort of blood shed when the conscience is wounded? Through this wound a man's real manhood and immortality flow out, and he bleeds to an everlasting death. I see this blood flowing now. . . .

    I have paid no poll-tax for six years. I was put into a jail once on this account, for one night: and, as I stood considering the walls of solid stone, two or three feet thick, the door of wood and iron, a foot thick, and the iron grating which strained the light, I could not help being struck with the foolishness of that institution which treated me as if I were mere flesh and blood and bones, to be locked up. I wondered that it should have concluded at length that this was the best use it could put me to, and had never thought to avail itself of my services in some way. I saw that, if there was a wall of stone between me and my townsmen, there was a still more difficult one to climb or break through, before they could get to be as free as I was. I did not for a moment feel confined, and the walls seemed a great waste of stone and mortar. I felt as if I alone of all my townsmen had paid my lax. They plainly did not know how to treat me, but behaved like persons who are underbred. In every threat and in every compliment there was a blunder; for they thought that my chief desire was to stand the other side of that stone wall. I could not but smile to see how industriously they locked the door on my meditations, which followed them out again without let or hinderance, and they were really all that was dangerous. As they could not reach me, they had resolved to punish my body; just as boys, if they cannot come at some person against whom they have a spite, will abuse his dog. I saw that the State was half-witted, that it was timid as a lone woman with her silver spoons, and that it did not know its friends from its foes, and I lost all my remaining respect for it, and pitied it.

    Thus the State never intentionally confronts a man's sense, intellectual or moral, but only his body, his senses, It is not armed with superior wit or honesty, but with superior physical strength. I was not born to be forced. I will breathe after my own fashion. Let us see who is the strongest. What force has a multitude? They only can force me who obey a higher law than I. They force me to become like themselves. I do not hear of men being forced to live this way or that by masses of men. What sort of life were that to live? When I meet a government which says to me, "Your money or your life," why should I be in haste to give it my money? It may be in a great strait, and not know what to do: I cannot help that. It must help itself; do as I do. It is not worth the while to snivel about it. I am not responsible for the successful working of the machinery of society. I am not the son of the engineer. I perceive that, when an acorn and a chestnut fall side by side, the one does not remain inert to make way for the other, but both obey their own laws, and spring and grow and flourish as best they can, till one, perchance, overshadows and destroys the other. If a plant cannot live according to its nature, it dies; and so a man. . . .

    I do not wish to quarrel with any man or nation. I do not wish to split hairs, to make fine distinctions, or set myself up as better than my neighbors. I seek rather, I may say, even an excuse for conforming to the laws of the land. I am but too ready to conform to them. Indeed I have reason to suspect myself on this head; and each year, as the tax-gatherer comes round, I find myself disposed to review the acts and position of the general and state governments, and the spirit of the people, to discover a pretext for conformity. I believe that the State will soon be able to take all my work of this sort out of my hands, and then I shall be no better a patriot than my fellow-countrymen. Seen from a lower point of view, the Constitution, with all its faults, is very good; the law and the courts are very respectable; even this State and this American government are, in many respects, very admirable and rare things, to be thankful for, such as a great many have described them; but seen from a point of view a little higher, they are what I have described them; seen from a higher still, and the highest, who shall say what they are, or that they are worth looking at or thinking of at all?

    However, the government does not concern me much, and I shall bestow the fewest possible thoughts on it. It is not many moments that I live under a government, even in this world. If a man is thought-free, fancy-free, imagination-free, that which is not never for a long time appearing to be to him, unwise rulers or reformers cannot fatally interrupt him. . . .

    The authority of government, even such as I am willing to submit to,--for I will cheerfully obey those who know and can do better than I, and in many things even those who neither know nor can do so well,--is still an impure one: to be strictly just, it must have the sanction and consent of the governed. It can have no pure right over my person and property but what I concede to it. The progress from an absolute to a limited monarchy, from a limited monarchy to a democracy, is a progress toward a true respect for the individual. Is a democracy, such as we know it, the last improvement possible in government? Is it not possible to take a step further towards recognizing and organizing the rights of man? There will never be a really free and enlightened State, until the State comes to recognize the individual as a higher and independent power, from which all its own power and authority are derived, and treats him accordingly. I please myself with imagining a State  at last which can afford to be just to all men, and to treat the individual with respect as a neighbor, which even would not think it inconsistent with its own repose, if a few were to live aloof from it, not meddling with it, nor embraced by it, who fulfilled all the duties of neighbors and fellowmen. A State which bore this kind of fruit, and suffered it to drop off as fast as it ripened, would prepare the way for a still more perfect and glorious State, which also I have imagined, but not yet anywhere seen.