The other party is called Absolutist; they are the ones who refuse to do anything that assists of the war. Conscientious Objectors are considered as cowards and selfish in the early 1900’s, all from various and valid reasons. They were willing to let other people die for them while they just stayed at home. They were not willing to faces reality and join the army in order to protect one’s country. They resisted to the system, knowing that the demand for troops and solders are increasing massively and that death and wounds needed replacing.
The theme of ‘’Dulce et decorum est’’. Has been established form the very first line ‘’ Bent double like old beggars under sacks’’, is a metaphor established to convey there’s no nobility and honor in war or fighting for your country. Here the poet has made an illusion to Homers poem ‘’The Iliad’’, which talks about the nobility of dying in war. But instead the author has written the poem to accurately describe the misery and terror soldiers had to live with, he wanted people to see the real truth behind war and stop them from telling future generations the ‘’old lie’’ that it is sweet and honorable to die for ones country. ‘‘Who’s for the game?’’ is attempting to evoke the opposite to the above; the poem refers to dying in battlefields as glorious and impressive.
For Hobbes, ethics is only something that comes with politics, and politics is rooted in selfishness and the desire for self-preservation. Hobbes viewed human nature as shown in the state of nature was that men have a natural tendency to be selfish and will hurt anyone to get what they want. That is why the social contract is formed, because of this continuous fear of death, that at any moment you could be killed. Hobbes and Orwell contrast each other. Orwell said humans will perpetually be at war because of a strong, centralised authority as in 'big brother is watching you'.
Hobbes named this condition as ‘war’ which also meant that every man is enemy to every man. Hobbes exposed that man in the state of nature lived with an authoritarian logic of fear and man has always been on the defensive side to protect himself and his position in the society. Hobbes said that man has always wanted to escape from the state of nature and war by following the path towards safety which allocates man to soften feelings of fear. A social contract is an agreement where people gave up their evil state and entered an organized society, which was controlled by the powerful government to preserve safety. Locke viewed human as innately good.
He explained that people would encourage you to fight yet to fight meant to sentence yourself to an unnecessary death. Owen states war is not worth it and meaningless. He claims to have entered the army with high hopes of serving his country and receiving the glory that was always talked about, but the reality of war was fundamentally different because instead of the celebration and praise he thought he would receive, he only got nightmares and regrets. The title of the poem means “sweet and fitting it is,” and Owen finishes the poem by writing the tile is, in fact, a lie. Owen’s poem is known for its alluring presentation of horrific imagery and
(Orwell 26) War is peace refers to the fact that if the party always frames another enemy to direct all hate towards. As long as the society has an enemy, the people will always work together equally under the guidance of the party to ensure its safety. This makes all people equal, but at the mercy of the all powerful party. Freedom is slavery is the philosophy that freedom is the desire of all human beings under the pressure of an authoritarian society. Too much freedom can make that desire uncontrollable, and the authoritarian regime then falls to the mercy of the people of society.
This universal norm is rooted in Cicero’s belief that there is a humani generis societas, a "society of mankind rather than of states” (Defrost). Due to his beliefs, Cicero hated war which was why he served a very short term in the military (Clayton). Yet he understood that an entirely passive nation or state would eventually fall prey to more powerful and aggressive ones (Holmes). As a result he formulated
Human Nature Thomas Hobbs and John Locke both developed well known theories on human nature and political philosophy. When we refer to these philosophers today Locke is seen as the optimist while Hobbes the pessimistic. Their theories of human nature translated into their views on how a society should be run. Despite their vast differences in views on human nature, they both agree that it is best for a society to have some form of social contract and a government enacted by the people. Hobbes pessimistic view on human nature was most likely a result of how he took in his surroundings.
In more simple terms, if you only go away from the book with only the plot then you are stupid. Right off the bat though he shows that if you are ignorant then you will get shot, aka your stupidity will result in violence. In addition Pap’s diatribe rambles on about how the government is to blame for his crappy life and that the government treats him like an animal (31-32). It’s ironic because he is saying the government treats him like an animal yet he treats Huck the same. Twain argues that the law should intervene to protect those who are oppressed.
Confucianism doesn’t believe in punishments, instead it they believed that the sense of shame will turn any man over to the good side, people are naturally good, and that leaders should lead by example. Well on the other hand Legalism is the exact opposite, believing that only through strict punishments and laws that people can be in order, people are naturally bad, and a ruler should be firm and use punishments and rewards to govern the people. Confucius would evaluate the nature of zero tolerance policies to be bad/disagree/legalist as it believes that humans must be controlled by strict laws and punishments and that people are naturally bad. But Han Fei would evaluate it as good as the strict laws and punishments, are much like to his form of Legalism, but he might want to add rewards into the policy. Confucius would disagree with Zero Tolerance policies as he dislikes punishments, believe that people are naturally good, leaders should lead by example, and instead of actual punishment, make them feel ashamed.