The book and the essay are similar because both of their intentions are to explain to the readers that soldiers and people who fight for their country are not necessarily in agreement with what the physical war is debating, and that armies are an extension of only the government. In the essay he talks about how conformity of the government is creating too much control. He writes. "government is best which governs least," his ideal government would be unachievable for society today, but idealistically he would have the government, govern not at all. Thoureau doesn't limit his argument only to the idea of war and its soldiers, but it is evident that he sees warfare participants as conformists who don't necessarily agree with what they are fighting for. He talks about majority, but points out that majority is still not fair and just because not all actually agree. In Johnny Got His Gun, Joe is struggling with the idea of why he even fought or why any soldiers fight for their country. H is pondering whether war is valuable unless their is something tangible to fight for. It connects because Joe is pointing out that the soldiers are fighting but they are told they are fighting for freedom, but Joe says freedom is undefinable, and how can soldiers fight for something that don't even know what it is and Thoureau is saying that government is based off of conformed people who are actually ignorant to the amount of control and lack of say that each person has, basically in Joe's eyes himself, and other soldiers.