Subject:
|
Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 29 Jan 2001 13:31:36 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
230 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Frank Filz writes:
> Shiri Dori wrote:
> >
> > Hey guys,
> >
> > I'm enclosing something I wrote for my English class, just a little food for
> > thought.
Ya, Shiri, what Frank said! Thanks for sharing. I don't have the personal
experience with the environs of Thoreau and Emerson that Frank does, but you
can be sure that this "work within the system" vs. "we need active
revolution/active resistance NOW" dichotomy is something almost anyone who
thinks a particular society is seriously off the beam needs to wrestle with.
My own compromise is that I work within the system but state to myself, and
to others that I feel need to know, that doing so does not imply my sanction
(the US government, for example, although better than many, does not have my
"consent").
Is that as effective as revolt? I think it is more so in most cases, and
that's Emerson's point.
There are some systems that are *too* egregious and which the right thing to
do is go down fighting. (The Warsaw Ghetto uprising comes to mind, although
discussing the system they were fighting means I "lose" the debate, which is
OK :-) )
Knowing when that line is crossed is part of being civilised. Timothy
McVeigh did not get that line right, for example. Not anywhere close.
++Lar
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
36 Messages in This Thread:
   
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
