George Washington expressed a good point when he said “This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its roots in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed.” Washington is saying that as a human being in any government or in any argument, there are going to be several different good ideas, however there not all going to work. He believed that the division of the American people and government would cause foreign influence and corruption.
The new right was radical departure from traditional conservatism because the policies on society are completely different. Traditional conservatives see society as organic, a natural state of civilisation, whereas the new right sees society, as no more than a collection of individuals. Thatcher famously stated ‘there is no such thing as society’. This enables us to argue the point that Thatcherism was radical departure from traditional conservatism. Furthermore, traditional conservatives support free markets but take a pragmatic view of economic management, believing that there are sometimes where state intervention is need.
In this paper I will analytically examine Thrasymachus’ stance and use critical thought to support his valid claims while rejecting those which lack validity within Thrasymachus’ own definition of justice. Thrasymachus opens with the fairly pessimistic claim that justice or “what is right” is the advantage of the stronger. (Plato, 18) Governments use their power solely to enact laws that benefit themselves and those whom are under their direct influence – a tyrannical government puts into place authoritarian and brutal laws, a democratic government abides by libertarian and just laws, and et cetera. Failing to follow these rules laid out by the domineering government will label you as a wrongdoer and traitor to the state. This is because the ruling class only want to benefit their own selfish causes.
Natural law is one of the most major philosophical and political influences on the Declaration of Independence. Many people interpret the natural law in extremely different ways. Thomas Hobbes believed man cannot survive in a “natural state” without rule or government. He believed it was the government’s job to tightly enforce the people or the people would turn to chaos. Locke believed the power of the government came from the people and if the people are not happy with government actions then they have every right to overthrow the government.
A direct democracy is form of government in which the citizens have a say in how their government runs. Plato views were very against this form of government for a variety of reasons. After reading Plato’s ideas, I have come to agree that a direct democracy is a foolish and irrational form of government. Government should be run by few intelligent and knowledgeable individuals. Plato’s most outstanding argument of why democracy is flawed is his reasoning that man himself is also flawed.
Niccolò Machiavelli’s ‘The Prince’ is an explanation to rulers on how to take power over other lands and how to control them, often at times advocating a disregard for all moral and ethical rules. It was this work that gave rise to the term ‘Machiavellian’, for in it he describes the sly and sometimes brutal maneuverings necessary for political success . In this essay I will examine whether Machiavelli truly promotes ‘immoral’ means in politics and war, determine if there is actually an amoral or even moral approach present in ‘The Prince’, and contrast Machiavelli’s moral and political understandings against earlier European views. In ‘The Discourses’ when speaking of the clashes between the Roman aristocracy and the plebeians Machiavelli’s sympathies are evidently on the side of the common people. He continually defends the people against the accusations of fickleness and unpredictability; stating that the custodianship of public freedom is safer in the hands of the plebeians than that of the upper class.
Machiavelli's view on Government Machiavelli was a great thinker of his time and almost all of his views can be related to current situations. In his essay, The Moral of the Prince, he writes about the real truth of principles a prince ought to adopt opposed to those that are imagined by the people that a prince or head of state ought to possess. The government is a twisted system and in order to do the right thing, we should try not to do the right thing but to persuade people that it was the right thing to do. There is no perfect leader, what we portray as a perfect leader is nothing but our minds going wild wanting to do good all the time. Immigration is a huge issue in America.
“Harrison Bergeron” by Kurt Vonnegut is a prime example of what happens when government tries to “control man” and make a, in the government’s opinion, utopian society. Throughout the progression of “Harrison Bergeron,” one can see that trying to achieve total equality by any means is not the ideal way to attain a utopian society. Although the members of the public, for the most part, went along with what was happening it was primarily do to the handicaps that they were forced to wear. In the story the handicapper general Diana Moon-Glampers, a representation of a president or authority figure, is the main enforcer behind everyone wearing handicaps. The handicaps include chains for those who are gifted athletically, masks for those who are beautiful, and earpieces for those who are intellectually above average.
That is why the job is to protect against internal threats not decide what is moral. Arrogants is the only word that can describe government morality control. Who are they to tell us what is right and what is wrong. Show me a clean politician and I will show you the most sneaky, cunning, and underhanded politician ( and guess what. It’s the same guy).
Civil Disobedience Analysis Henry David Thoreau in his essay “Civil Disobedience”, brings up many valid points about the government. The essay might be a little ahead of its time but Henry talks about the injustice of the government and how it wrongfully forces people to do its will. The government has gone passed the line and has been abusing its power. Thoreau expresses in his essay “that government is best which governs least”, and then also goes on to say “that a government is best which governs not at all.” What Thoreau is saying is that the people should be making most of the decisions in society, not a group of men in a position of power. In the American government, and many others alike, there are taxes you must pay.