There is an old saying that you should not build a house on sand; instead, one should always build a house on solid ground. Using this phrase as a metaphor for discussing the foundations of government, we can allude to the fact that citizens prefer to trust a government whose foundations are firmly anchored in a strong moral framework. In his work Civil Disobedience, Henry Thoreau presented his arguments to justify his general distrust of the concept of representative government broadly, citing the American government as an example. Reading Thoreau forces us to ask: How should a population respond if its members fulfill their civic obligations, but the government, in turn, fails to respect the rights and privileges of all citizens? Would a nation sink like a house built on quicksand if its politicians did not have the trust of their voters? In 1837, the U.S. government's attitude toward slavery and the Mexican-American War convinced the reclusive Thoreau to stop fulfilling his civic obligations to politicians who had failed to properly represent the people American. Thoreau, with this in mind, followed his conscience and sought to demonstrate to the American people that we should all have a say in political matters, which is a very pleasing manifestation of Thoreau's ideas regarding individualism, which remain relevant today in the political arena of 2016 in which the American people struggle to make their voices heard. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”?Get an original essayAs an individual thinker, Thoreau wanted to follow his own conscience and analyze more deeply his personal ethics, which he believed could be “ seen from a viewpoint a little higher; seen from a place still higher, and the highest” (Thoreau, 194). Thoreau's thoughts on his own personal ethics lead him to think about the reasons behind laws and consider the impacts they create rather than blindly following the laws. It is not uncommon to encounter people who disagree with the effectiveness of the countless laws that exist in society. In some communities, the majority of the population may disagree with existing laws that guide social obligations and individual rights. Like these individuals, Henry Thoreau faced an ethical dilemma in this regard: "Unjust laws exist: shall we be content to obey them, or shall we endeavor to amend and obey them until have we succeeded, or will we transgress them immediately? ?" (184). Thoreau firmly believed that if individuals refused to think for themselves, the government would think for them, which would not necessarily be in the best interest of the general public. Thoreau asks, "Why then does every man does he have a conscience? (178). His belief was that human conscience was designed for each individual to follow his own instincts and that laws often prevent this freedom of moral choice. If a man in need found a briefcase. full of money and his friends tried to convince him to keep the money, but on the contrary, he found himself driven by his conscience to search for the owner in order to return the goods found to their rightful owner, this would be an illustration of man's natural individualism Likewise, Thoreau's opposition to the American government's ethical positions regarding slavery andMexican-American War was an exercise in its own individualism. This can be seen in the phrase: “If injustice is part of the necessary friction of the machine of government, let it go, let it go” (Thoreau, 185). This injustice that Thoreau was referring to was the institution of slavery. Thoreau further discusses the government's lack of moral integrity in his writings: “Witness the present Mexican War, the work of a relatively small number of individuals using permanent government as their tool; because initially the people would not have consented to this measure” (177). To Thoreau, the laws and attitudes within government that supported slavery were the most unjust of all. Additionally, Thoreau asserts that his conscience guided him to exercise his own voice by separating himself from mainstream society and refusing to pay taxes to a corrupt institution: a government built on sand, not stone. In the same way reminiscent of a widow crying After losing his husband to isolation, Henry Thoreau expressed his frustration with the corrupt policies of the American government, which caused him to withdraw from society. Although these realities troubled him, Thoreau wanted his voice to be heard. Thoreau's first step in protesting American moral corruption was to move him and spend his life isolated in a cabin in the wilderness. Thoreau writes: “I saw the barriers between me and my neighbors and especially between me and the state. My view of my city has become that of a stranger…” (25-37). The obstacles Thoreau is referring to in this quote are the differences between his personal views on government and those of contemporary society. Thoreau felt like he lacked roots in this society, which emotionally distanced him from his “home.” When an individual expresses dissatisfaction with their situation, they have the opportunity to put the situation behind them. For example, the recent Brexit referendum results demonstrated typical British dissatisfaction with the EU and called for the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the European Union. According to Thoreau, a physical fight against corruption in a political system whose main characteristics are authoritarianism and oppression is completely unnecessary. Thoreau writes: “Those who fail to oppose wrongdoing by action, but are content to express or vote their convictions, leave justice to chance. A true man refuses allegiance at any level to a government that pursues immoral policies” (7-15). Refusal to vote was therefore Thoreau's second step toward protesting a corrupt government. Thoreau envisioned a society in which all were more participatory, stating that “we should be concerned with living justly and not with reforming government” (16-19). Through the following words, we can infer that Thoreau only wanted a just government that represented the interests of all Americans: “I demand, not no government at once, but a better government at once. Let everyone make it known what kind of government would command respect, and that will be a first step toward obtaining it” (178). Thoreau's third measure of protest was his refusal to pay taxes: "I have paid no poll tax for six years" (189). Thoreau was well aware that his taxes funded the Mexican-American War and defended the practice of slavery, two institutions he fiercely opposed. If he had to contribute to such a corrupt system, Thoreau would have been complicit in the existence of these institutions. Keep in mind: this is not..