The present paper is intended to analyze the internal conflicts of both works and argues that whereas the essays are quite similar due to the evidence of clash between the idea of social use and asociality in both of them, the incongruence between Thoreau’s ideas is associated with his distrust for the majority, whereas the major logical and conceptual fallacy in Swift’s work consists in his sympathy with the majority, or the livestock. Jonathan Swift, one of the most outstanding adepts and apologists of political, social and scientific Enlightenment and the author of a variety of satirical essays, created his tract entitled “A Modest Proposal” in response to the incongruence between the degree of adoption of humanist values in England and the inhumane social policies in Ireland, which were inhibiting national dignity of Irish people and abuse the true understanding of humanity. In the work entitled “Civil Disobedience”, David Thoreau provides the ideas, which could be categorized as the peaceful and non-violent anarchism and refutes the importance of law and authority and the sources of compulsion.

Although Henry David Thoreau and Jonathan Swift in different historical periods, both of them actually address the ways and methods of social change in their respective essays “Civil Disobedience” and “A Modest Proposal”.

Civil disobedience by hd thoreau