Whereas Hobbes states that based on his idea of human nature, which is humans are born evil, that one ruler should be given absolute power. While Hobbes makes various points he does conclude that people should surrender their freedom to this power because the ruler keeps them safe. This including the right to complain about the ruler’s policies. Locke’s ideal government is one that doesn’t give absolute power to one person but rather power to a group of power. This making it less likely for a ruler to abuse their power or corrupt the government.
Thomas Paine opposes the ideology of government, stating that, “Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil,” (Paine 3). Essentially, the purpose of government is to protect people from preforming vices, and defend their natural right to Locke’s ideology of life, liberty and property. Without government, coercion would occur, and destroy one’s ability to express their natural rights. For America, Paine believes that the establishment of a strong fundamental government could allow for the cohesion of citizens to form a society respected by other nations
King states that “an unjust law is no law at all” because he believed that laws were put in place in order to benefit and aid the citizens of the state. If a law was unjust, however, it then was contradictory and should not be considered a law” (MLK). Martin Luther King Jr. stated, in his letter, “A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law, or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law.” King also says an unjust law is one that is forced upon a minority by a
John Rawls develops civil disobedience as a way to fight against acts of injustice that occur in a nearly just society (Rawls, p. 363). Civil disobedience must be enacted to establish legitimate democratic authority, so it does not apply to other methods of protest such as military resistance (Rawls, p. 363). Rawls focuses on the conflict of duties between a person’s obligation to follow the laws put in place by the democratic majority, in contrast with their right to oppose unjust laws and fight for their personal liberties (Rawls, p. 363). Rawls defines civil disobedience as a “public, nonviolent, conscientious yet political act contrary to law usually done with the aim of bringing about a change in the law or policies of the government”
Unlike the perspective of Zinn, the Pageant argued that both these acts helped start the transformation from private greed to public need, while Zinn strongly believed that the government legislation was not effective at curbing the corruption, highlighting a difference in perspective. Even though it is true that these acts did set examples for more effective legislation, these acts were still not helpful and did not actually tackle the
The Unknown Ignorance is bliss. What you don't know can't hurt you. Not understanding the difference between what is bad or good, means that nothing really can be considered bad. But ignorance comes with a lot of complications. Ignorance is an important element in dystopian societies because an ignorant society won't question their government, ignorant people are easier for the government to manipulate, and ignorance also allows societies to be happy without knowing.
Therefore, despite them being somewhat alarming for a government to deal with, there is no way to rid of factions within a fair and free government. Madison would certainly not advocate for a government that strips liberty from its citizens, and he is not naïve enough to think that all the citizens of a country would be able to agree on all ideas one hundred percent of the time. Thus, Madison concedes that factions are inevitable in a free government. Despite his concession, he still defends the newly formed United States Constitution by showing that it can control the damage of factions better than any other government system man has seen to this
His gist is that privacy should be respected which makes him moderate moralism, law should only intervene when society won’t tolerate certain behaviour, law should be a minimum standard not a maximum standard and act as general guideline. Is the act of polyandry tolerable by the society? In some society it is tolerable but in some they will not. However, to abolish the act of polyandry will also intervene with the privacy on the individuals. Devlin would have thought the act of polyandry to be immoral and disintegrates the society however, being a moderate moralism he would not have wanted to intervene with the privacy of other unless the act has become very widely practiced and start causing harm to the society.
Some of the people felt, The Articles of Confederation, made the national government too weak because of democracy. The Articles of Confederation maintained the principle that the national government would not hold more power than the states, which they saw as sovereign. This did satisfy the fears and questions
Ensuring the vote by drawing the district 's lines, entails that normal constituents of a party will have their right to vote violated. The Voting Right Act while allowing this dilution, does not consider the fact that the votes become so diluted that they are meaningless. Making a vote meaningless does not only throw the concept of voting out, but also the basis of this country, democracy. Democracy is the decision making process exercising the authority to solve public problem, according to the three principles of: Popular Sovereignty, Political Equality, Majority Rule. The principle of political equality is being ignored by making a group’s vote diluted to the point where it means nothing, makes their vote unequal to others.