How did Thoreau justify this act of civil disobedience?
Henry David Thoreau justified his act of civil disobedience, which he described in his famous essay "Civil Disobedience," primarily through his belief in individual conscience and the importance of questioning authority.
Thoreau argued that governmental laws and actions should be constantly scrutinized by individuals, and if these laws or actions were found to be unjust or immoral, it was the duty of the individual to resist and disobey them. He believed that individuals had a higher moral obligation to follow their conscience and act according to their own understanding of what is right, even if it meant violating the law.
Thoreau's act of civil disobedience was specifically in response to the United States government's support of slavery and the Mexican-American War. He believed that both of these were unjust and that citizens had a responsibility to actively oppose and disobey any laws or policies that supported these injustices.
Thoreau argued that individuals had the power to bring about change through their resistance. He believed that the government, as an institution, would not always act in the best interest of its citizens and that individuals should not blindly follow its laws. Instead, he advocated for nonviolent resistance and peaceful protest as means of challenging the unjust acts of the government and advocating for a more just society.
Overall, Thoreau justified his act of civil disobedience by asserting the higher authority of individual conscience, the importance of questioning authority, and the need for citizens to actively challenge and resist unjust laws and actions.