“Time to Assert” contains several opinion based facts within the argument when describing how to deal with crime. Within “Time to Assert,” it comments, “A case like Michael Fay’s is important because it provides a chance to challenge an inhumane practice that ought not to exist anywhere” (Time to Assert 179). This quote from the editorial illustrates no true factual evidence and supports more of a biased argument that is heavily based on the editors opinions. The editorial implies no evidence that effectively helps with supporting the argument. According to “Time to Assert,” it explains, “The Fay case provides a legitimate opening for American citizens and companies to bring political and economic pressure to bear in the propagation of freedom and basic rights” (Time to Assert 180).
George compares competition to the dark ages by saying “If I tried to get away with it, then other people'd get away with it—and pretty soon we’d be right back to the dark ages again, with everybody competing against everybody else. You wouldn’t like that, would you?” Hazel responds negatively. This revulsion against competition may be the driving force of the everlasting dormancy in this society. Competition has always been what drives people to improve on themselves, and in turn improve the life of others. Eliminating competition isn't making everybody equal, it is force-feeding false equality at the cost of
Still in order for this to happen, one should be a very generous person or simply being a grown person and having a family to look after would change the way people think about selfish happiness. I doubt that individual with a family can be a fully selfish person which only becomes happy for themselves. Normally and generally a mother or a grandfather would be happy to see their youngsters’ wellbeing and to simply see them happy would make them happy as well. A full supporter of self-sacrifices would be living without being alive. Basically you would have no soul and simply stop being human.
I agree with the idea no one person is the same, if we were to be the same, mentality wise, then everyone would just be like any other person. The argument, in my opinion, stands true, anyone can say they are a "good person" and demand the fair treatment of everyone but no one can truly know who 's a good person or not. The larger issue at hand here is that the fair people are treated unfairly, the unfair people see the fair people as those who can be used with no repercussions because they know well the fair people won 't retaliate or speak up. Granted, everyone is different and that 's what diversifies and separates people, some people may perceive the unfair people as fair and vice versa, which is where we run into the issue of who 's in the right and who has the say in what 's right and wrong. To say that one person 's way of treating someone is right is opinionated and most of the time incorrect.
Only this way the level of education can be considered worth of utopia. Leading a peaceful, simple life is the life worth calling utopian. Nevertheless, not many modern people would consider this kind of lifestyle. People are so absorbed with today’s world materialism and consumerism, that they forget about food and sleep, not mentioning the search for inner light. What everyone should do is to learn to appreciate all the goddesses we already have.
That is true, but nothing can change the bad things that happen, that’s all put in God’s hands; I can assure you that looking at things in the best way possible will greatly help your situations and put you on a better road to peace and happiness. Heartless people may also argue that helping others achieve their happiness does not to help them. I respond to that saying everyone is their own person and its your own opinion, but most people will agree that doing things to help others puts them in a great and gives them a positive
A famous writer named Rockwell saw consumerism not to be working against Americans but for it. Even using it as a way of propaganda by saying it could “equate consumerism with patriotism,” and therefore help to better America (Palmore, Haley M). Rockwell states “To be against commerce is to be against life itself”, In other words, if someone was completely against consumerism then there would be no room for the ideas of improvement in the country (In Defense of Consumerism). While consuming books are also seen as consuming knowledge, this isn’t always the case and can be twisted in many ways simply for a suppliers benefit, rather than the benefits a reader may get. However, books are not about what is being read, it’s about what is being felt, which is simply chosen by the consumer’s wants rather than their
Instead of having a superior race, let us have a superior country, the main themes of these novels is the unity at the end. These novels show how compared to the past we are still not united as a country. The irony of America is a melting pot of different cultures is not true, if one does not fit the norm that was creates the will be back lash, not because of hate, but because of ignorance. Some works not recognized because critics do not think it is good enough, or it was board line racist; people do not want to talk about the truth of we still live in a racist society and writers are trying to educate us of a change instead of oppression. Authors create a fiction of reality to grab reader’s attention and show them the real world in a fantasy one, which causes the theme to be a lesson in disguise.
If there was no diversity it would be boring everyone would look the same, there would be no uniqueness in society. Therefore, racism is very bad and has impacted society poorly, at the end of the the day we all breathe the same air, we are all humans with feelings, and every individual needs an understanding of
In a fair and utopist society no anti-discrimination laws would be needed, because people and organizations would be hiring and dismissing employees based on their best qualification and potential, without prejudice and classification and therefore without discrimination. In such a society there would be no need for differentiating people into classes, because everyone would find the job that fits his or her best abilities and potential. In such a perfect and purely idealistic society anti-discrimination would need no training because people would act naturally and instinctively in a kind and caring way of the fair treatment of everyone. In such a utopist society anti-discrimination laws would not be even considered nor needed, because people