Henry David Thoreau was an American philosopher who lived in the 19th century, when the young and weak American society was not powerful as it is today. His illustrious work entitled “Civil Disobedience” demonstrates his polar point of view towards an unjust government. Opposing the payment of taxes, protesting, following one's conscience are just some of the methods of disobedience. His main point is that every man who considers himself a man of conscience must differentiate between laws in order to determine which law is good or bad, and therefore not obey that unjust law. I generally agree with this statement, and this essay will show how he reaches such a conclusion and provide arguments for and against this statement. The situation in America in the 19th century was very different from the situation today. For example, in the 19th century, slavery and the slave trade were common practice and nearly one in six Americans were slaves. Thoreau was not only a citizen, who lived for his own interests and was indifferent to politics, he was an opposite. He could not ignore unjust affairs, such as slavery, the Mexican War, deceptions and unjust taxes. In the United States, slavery flourished and turned into a profitable means of marketing by catching Africans and shipping them to America. Drawing conclusions here, we can say that no one would disapprove of this. However, Thoreau thought of this with contempt and that was one of the reasons for coming to this conclusion. Another thing he was concerned about was a Mexican War, which was unjust according to Thoreau, because the U.S. government was acting like an aggressor toward its neighbors and had just annexed Texas. Some soldiers seem to have disdain for their own government, but...... middle of paper...... this concerns the Semey range. This sort of thing makes a liberal man reject such a government. Another point Thoreau offers is that we should try to have a better government because there is nothing to lose here. It's because people have nothing with this kind of government. They have no freedom, no respect, nothing at all. Finally, Thoreau's principles of civil disobedience were successful in the movements of Gandhi and King, which brought freedom and hope for a bright future to a certain group of people. In conclusion, even though Thoreau's conclusion has several opposing views such as the possibility of chaos, punishment for disobedience and difference in levels of consciousness, one must disobey unjust laws, because they are unjust to humanity, and people should have better government through civil disobedience and develop politically..