Thoreau's critique of democracy

Abstract

Most recent scholarship on Henry Davicl Thoreau s political thought places him firmly within the liberal-democratic camp.1 There are good reasons for this: Thoreau embodies more famously than any American writer the spirit of freedom and individualism that seems to animate liberal democracy and his act of "civil disobedience" continues to inspire modern-day political activists to conscientious, public-spirited activity in an affirmation of the democratic way of life.2 The problem with this interpretation, however, is that it fails to take seriously how deeply Thoreau s numerous and overt criticisms of democracy, and his exhortations to transcend it, are grounded in a cleontologieal moral philosophy that renders impossible the mediation of justice through democratic institutions. This is overlooked even by those commentators who interpret Thoreaus disgust with government and majority rule a bit more literally. Most deny that his political essays provide anything more than an interesting statement of his own personal commitments, whose criteria for legitimacy cannot be applied realistically to society as a whole.3 In this chapter I instead read Thoreaus political project as an exercise in criticism and make a serious effort to understand Thoreau as he understood himself: as a poet and critic who pointed out with more coherence than is usually acknowledged the incompatibility of representative democracy with his fundamental moral commitments. In so doing, I do not intend to entirely vindicate Thoreaus political views so much as to illuminate his insights about moral and political obligation that remain obscured on a democratic reading; from there, I point to the contribution he can make in accounting for the real but often overlooked costs incurred by democracy4. Copyright © 2009 by The University Press of Kentucky. All rights reserved.