Question

It is not a man’s duty, as a matter of course, to devote himself to the eradication of any, even the most enormous, wrong; he may still properly have other concerns to engage him; but it is his duty, at least, to wash his hands of it, and, if he gives it no thought longer, not to give it practically his support. If I devote myself to other pursuits and contemplations, I must first see, at least, that I do not pursue them sitting upon another man’s shoulders. I must get off him first, that he may pursue his contemplations too. See what gross inconsistency is tolerated. I have heard some of my townsmen say, “I should like to have them order me out to help put down an insurrection of the slaves, or to march to Mexico; — see if I would go”; and yet these very men have each, directly by their allegiance, and so indirectly, at least, by their money, furnished1 a substitute.

Answer 1

woah

Step-by-step explanation:

Answer 2

The passage emphasizes the moral obligation of individuals to not only refrain from actively participating in wrongdoing but also to actively disassociate themselves from it. It calls for individuals to critically examine their own actions and contributions to ensure they are not complicit in any form of injustice.

The passage you provided discusses the moral duty of individuals to not only refrain from actively supporting or engaging in wrongdoing but also to dissociate themselves from it. It emphasizes the importance of not turning a blind eye to injustice or benefitting from the suffering of others.

The author argues that while individuals may have their own personal pursuits and concerns, it is their duty to ensure that they are not complicit in any wrongdoing. They should not passively support or contribute to an unjust system or act, even if they are not actively involved in perpetuating it.

The passage mentions the example of individuals who claim they would refuse to participate in activities that involve suppressing slave uprisings or engaging in military actions. However, the author points out that these same individuals indirectly support such actions through their allegiance and financial contributions. The author criticizes this inconsistency and highlights the need for individuals to take responsibility for their indirect support of wrongdoing.