Zin And The American Greed
Throughout the annals of American history, the advocation for freedom, and the absorption of ideals such as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness have been at the forefront of the American belief. These beliefs were implemented in 1776, through the Declaration of Independence. This document was ratified by recalcitrant Americans who would not tolerate subjection to tyrannical rule. The American people hoped this document would seal their fate in relation to Europe, and prove to Europe, and frankly the entire world, that they were a separate, sufficient nation. But as the years unfolded, the realization that America would continue to be considered an inferior nation arose.
“That, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” (Jefferson 120). This man believed the same as hobbes, that there needed to be something to control and regulate what was needed for a population to live
Hobbes believed that people do not have the the right to alter a government. Locke believed that people do have the right to alter a government.
They both act upon to depict their ideas to support democratic government. Status, pride, honor, national glory, excellence, and passivity are all important values in an aristocratic society (Tocqueville, p. 13). Americans are not inherited with a status that will determine their future, instead they are all born equally and are able to rise or decrease in power due to self-interest. Equal responsibilities, respect, status, and opportunity are all important values in an Egalitarian society. However equality is a mere illusion, equality in America is valued and does not reflect reality (Tocqueville, p. 504-505).
Written by Thomas Paine in 1791, the book “Rights of Man” soughts to describe the characteristics of America. Although he did include some accurate descriptions of America in his writing, considering the time the book was written and the fact that he was a revolutionary and a supporter of American independence, there are some descriptions that do not concur with the current-day America and some descriptions that are biased as well. Paine asserts that America is made up “of people from different nations, accustomed to different forms and habit of government, speaking different languages, and more different in their modes of worship,” and this assertion still holds true till this day. America fundamentally was, and still is, a melting pot of different people and culture (Paine).
“I have tried to see not differently but further…”(Tocqueville, 1835) was Alexis de Tocqueville’s conclusion to the introduction of his perennial classic text Democracy in America, and adumbrates to the reader of his modern ideas and observations that were to follow. At the same time, he measures the progress of society through its relationship with equality and liberty. In this paper, I will highlight Tocqueville’s use of equality and liberty to compare the past and the modern, and establish his views on the effects of these concepts with society and each other. Finally, I will put forth that Tocqueville does not favour one concept over the other, but notes the complex relationship between the two and the importance of the co-existence of liberty and equality for a society of people. To begin, let us build the base case to compare with and look the past as defined by Tocqueville, with emphasis on equality and liberty.
Foundations of The Political System There are five foundations of America’s political system. These foundations are Popular Sovereignty, Separation of Powers, Checks and Balances, Federation, and Individual Rights. The first of the foundations is Popular Sovereignty, where,“the people possess the superior power over their political community, and can alter their government or amend the constitution.” (Ahmed Ehab,”Foundations of the American Political System”).
Thomas Hobbes and John Locke are two theorists known for their views regarding the social contract. Both theorists study the origins of government and the level of authority given to the state over individuals, thoroughly constructing their arguments through the social contract. A philosophical approach was used in both Hobbes’s and Locke’s arguments, however supporting different authorities. Thomas Hobbes advocates for absolutism whilst John Locke advocates for a constitutional government. Through the close examination of the state of nature, the relationships between subject and sovereign and views regarding the social contract, one can observe a more sensible basis for constructing a successful political society.
According to Hobbes, a sovereign, whether the sovereign was placed into power by violence or force, is the only way to secure law and order. For him, if a citizen obeys the sovereign for fear of punishment or in the fear of the state of nature, it is the choice of the citizen. According to Hobbes, this is not tyranny; it is his idea of a society that is successful, one that does not have room for democracy. As a realist, Hobbes has a fierce distrust of democracy and viewed all of mankind in a restless desire for power. If the people are given power, law and order would crumble in Hobbes’ eyes.
One his theories, stated in his book called Leviathan said that people are not able rule themselves because of how selfish mankind is and they need to be ruled by an iron fist. His political theory was that was also stated in Leviathan was that we should respect government authority under all circumstances to avoid violence. Hobbes was scared of the outcome of the social contract which meant people could get rid of the government if they were unhappy with what they were getting. In order to make well with the social contract he states in Leviathan that people should be completely obedient to the government. His reasoning was that if there was no government, there would be chaos.
The people of the United States fight and strive for an absolute “equal” society, but is it what’s really wanted? “Harrison Bergeron,” a short story written by Kurt Vonnegut, uses satire to describe the deficiency in our idea of a truly “equal” society. Throughout the story, Vonnegut describes the torture and discomfort the government administers among the people, and though they were “equal,” they were not balanced. Vonnegut uses characterization and word choice to warn his readers of the potential drawbacks of a truly “equal” society. He warns normalcy would become the base of thought, and people would become incapable of emotion.
The age of enlightenment was a philosophical peak in history that set a course for the rest of time. Many different ideas were brought about that shaped the way we live to this day, especially here in the states. Two philosophers in particular affected the United States of America; Thomas Hobbes and Tom Locke. Both of these philosophers pasts formed their philosophy and the ideas they had, which affected the government of their time, and our government today. Hobbes and Locke had very different upbringings and backgrounds, which led them to having very different points of view on life.
Secondly, it will assess some of the opponent views to repressive government being the sure maintenance of political and social order. Furthermore an assessment of whether the theories of Hobbes are still relevant to the current understanding of International Relations considering the events and processes in this particular stage. Thomas Hobbes has commonly been classified as a realist because of his pessimistic perception that the fundamental instinct of all mankind is
Furthermore, famous philosophers found several flaws in his plan. Thomas Hobbes argued that if society were on the basis of natural law, society would develop an “every man for himself” mentality, causing
Thomas Hobbes proposed that the ideal government should be an absolute monarchy as a direct result of experiencing the English Civil War, in which there was internal conflict between the parliamentarians and the royalists. Hobbes made this claim under the assumption that an absolute monarchy would produce consistent policies, reduce conflicts and lower the risk of civil wars due to the singular nature of this ruling system. On another hand, John Locke counters this proposal with the view that absolute monarchies are not legitimate as they are inconsistent with the state of nature. These two diametrically opposed views stem from Hobbes’ and Locke’s different understandings of human nature, namely with regard to power relationships, punishment, and equality in the state of nature. Hobbes’ belief that human beings are selfish and appetitive is antithetical with Locke’s contention that human beings are intrinsically moral even in the state of nature, which results in Locke’s strong disagreement with Hobbes’ proposed absolute monarchy.
More about Zin And The American Greed
Why Is America Justified Dbq
706 Words | 3 PagesHobbes Declaration Of Independence Analysis
806 Words | 4 PagesCompare And Contrast Locke And Hobbes
110 Words | 1 PagesTocqueville Dbq
1683 Words | 7 PagesAnalysis Of The Rights Of Man By Thomas Paine
540 Words | 3 PagesHow Is Tocqueville Relevant Today
1352 Words | 6 PagesFive Foundations Of America's Political System
604 Words | 3 PagesLocke Vs Hobbes Social Contract
1129 Words | 5 PagesHobbes Vs Rawls Analysis
1591 Words | 7 PagesThomas Hobbes Influence On Thomas Jefferson's Declaration Of Enlightenment
493 Words | 2 PagesSatire In Harrison Bergeron
589 Words | 3 PagesHow Did Thomas Hobbes Influence American Government
1212 Words | 5 PagesThomas Hobbes Leviathan Essay
1881 Words | 8 PagesJohn Locke Strengths And Weaknesses
632 Words | 3 PagesThomas Hobbes Absolute Monarchy
1084 Words | 5 Pages