Which parts of this except from henry david thoreau’s essay "on the duty of civil disobedience" emphasize the common romantic theme that the individual has greater value than society or government? after all, the practical reason why, when the power is once in the hands of the people, a majority are permitted, and for a long period continue, to rule, is not because they are most likely to be in the right, nor because this seems fairest to the minority, but because they are physically the strongest. but a government in which the majority rules in all cases cannot be based on justice, even as far as men understand it. can there not be a government in which majorities do not virtually decide right and wrong, but conscience? —in which majorities decide only those questions to which the rule of expediency is applicable? must the citizen ever for a moment, or in the least degree, resign his conscience to the legislator? why has every man a conscience, then? i think that we should be men first, and subjects afterward.