Henry David Thoreau would not believe in what Luke was fighting for. Luke was a man in jail for the destruction of municipal property. Yet he doesn’t, in my mind, show any reason why he destroyed parking meters. Is Luke trying just to defy the law or does he have any reason behind what he does?
Thoreau says that any man who chooses to fight should have something to fight for. Now why would he approve of Luke if Luke had no reason, other then he was drunk, to fight the law. Civil disobedience is the rebellion of government to suit the needs of the people. Thoreau had a reason to not pay taxes he didn’t think he should be paying for a war he didn’t agree with.
If Luke had shown why he destroyed property then maybe Thoreau would have approved of the crime he committed. When Luke got to the jail he was to spend 2 years at he showed that he was willing to pay for what he had done. When his mom died and Luke got put in the box Luke got pissed and thought it was unfair to be put in just because his mom died. Now Thoreau may have approved of him running away because he has not done a crime but is getting punished for what he might do.
After the bosses broke him he was willing to do everything he was told. When he stole the truck n his last attempt to get away he had no reason to run. Thoreau would not approve of the grand theft auto because Luke had promised to stay out of trouble but he lied and I don’t think Thoreau would lie in order to break the law again.
The Essay on Emotion Versus Reason – the Fight for Survival
It is up to the protagonist in each chapter to overcome their emotion in order to listen to reason. Through his narratives, Levi’s characters prove that emotions limit logical judgment, where success in survival is stemmed from the ability to ignore emotions and listen to reason. Experts in the field of emotion, logic and cognitive beliefs have debated the topic of emotion versus logic for a very ...
With these arguments I don’t think Luke was falling under the category of civil disobedience. When Luke defies the law he has no rhyme or reason to do so and in fact he doesn’t even want to pay for what he has done. Thoreau would not approve of Luke to do what he did just so he can make no statement yet waste time in a meaningless act.
