A second irrepressible being held that all the emotions of the soul should be freely expressed, and illustrated his theory by antics that would have sent him to a lunatic asylum, if, as an unregenerate wag said, he had not already been in one.
I rather enjoyed Alcott's story of this Transcendentalist Utopian troupe because it really captures the problems I have with On Civil Disobedience; severing yourself from society is noble or whatever, but society isn't going to change because you decided to leave. Thoreau was bothered by the problems of his country, but I don't know who he thinks he was helping by not paying his taxes. Actually, I do know who he was helping, himself. He unburdened himself of his own guilt, but that didn't free any slaves. The lawmakers who would bring about the end of slavery didn't go live as hermits without paying taxes; they married themselves to the same corrupt system and made it better.
So I think the choice is clear. You can either fool yourself into thinking that your hands aren't covered with the blood of war, climate change, or poverty, or you can come to terms with your own guilt and try to fix the problems that you inherited as a citizen of corrupt (but not wholly evil) society.
I really didn't address Alcott's story here...
. . . but you got your start from it and that is a sort of connection which works just fine in a blog posting. LDL
ReplyDelete