Sebastian Faure described anarchism as a ‘negation of the principle of authority’. All anarchists believe that the state is oppressive and removes freedom. Malatesta described its role as ‘always that of oppressing and exploiting the masses’. Anarchists agree that the state is exploitative, seeing tax as ‘legalised theft’. The state is corrupt and corrupting.
It is suggested that only after this had failed and criticism began to stack up against the policies of the CCP that Mao decided to begin his anti-rightist campaigns as some form of damage control to lessen the disastrous impact that the hundred flowers campaign had taken on the CCP by 1957. Mao believed firmly in the concept of a permanent revolution and that in order to remain successful the CCP had to remain connected to the people. The Hundred Flowers campaign can be seen as a method of doing this and it was only after political dissidents ignored the CCP’s advice to send in what amounted to constructive communist advice was Mao’s hand forced to act against growing calls for a more democratic government. In addition to this Mao was worried that the policies of Liu and Deng were leading to a prevalence in experts within the economy which was creating a
TO WHAT EXTENT IS THE STATE A FORM OF OPPRESSION? The idea that the state is a form of oppression is one that is held my marxists and anarchists, who argue that the state is unnatural, and goes against the potential of having freedom and equality. Marxists view the state as a form of oppression, based on the idea that it’s sole purpose is to uphold the bourgeoise ideology of gaining profit through the capitalist society. Anarchists however see the state as a body which undermines the human rationality to live together in society as harmonious beings. The state assumes that it has power over individuals, which a view blights human freedom as was expressed by Proudhon ‘to be governed is to be inspected by creatures who neither have the right nor virtue to do so’.
Non-conformity is an act of rebellion, opposing the expectations set by society. Non-conformity should be admired and admonished, valued and reproved, depending on the various situations it is applied to. I believe that non-conformity may have both positive and negative outcomes, ghastly consequences and excellent results. Those who choose not to conform either do it knowing it will result in an affirmative or negative outcome, or not knowing it what they are doing at all. In all fact, an act of non-conformity cannot be judged by its rebellious nature, but by its effects on the society or things involved.
This essay will explain and analyze two essays by individuals who express entirely different opinions of civil disobedience. In his essay, “Civil Disobedience: Destroyer of Democracy”, Lewis H. Van Dusen strongly discourages the use of civil disobedience as a means for change. He feels that this act of disobedience directly contradicts our democratic system. The other individual being compared in this essay is Henry David Thoreau; who in his essay, “Civil Disobedience”, supports the act of peacefully challenging or protesting unjust laws. He impugns us to do what is morally right, and to not be afraid to take a stand against injustice.
Kevin Kuo Prof. McCormick English 1C 12 May 2014 The Imperfect Society: Justifying Civil Disobedience What exactly justifies civil disobedience? Civil disobedience is the refusal to obey laws perceived as unjust by an individual or a group of individuals. It is considered to be a form of nonviolent resistance in order to force amendments to such unjust laws. If plotted on a spectrum representing criminal levels of protest, from pacifist obedience to violent revolution, civil disobedience would land at the midpoint. Although some say that nothing justifies civil disobedience, nevertheless civil disobedience is always justified because of inalienable rights, free will, conscience, and the general will.
‘ It is one thing to assert that crime can be made to serve some social end or other once it has occurred, for example to heighten solidarity by uniting against the offender. It is another step altogether to explain crime as promoted in advance by society to bring about that end’ (Downes and Rock, 2007, pg 83). There are sub
It would push Russia further onwards in terms of a state free from private trade and ownership. However ideology is often seen as Stalin’s weak point however, since he is often thought of as frequently changing policies to further his political aspirations. The leadership challenge of 1925 – 1928 showed how Stalin changed his policies to decimate both the left and right wing of the party and strengthen his position over the party, by varying his beliefs in order to outmanoeuvre his political opponents. On the other hand, some historians (such as Viola) argue that the NEP was causing extensive discontent within the party, and that rather than being as capricious as is often presumed, he can be seen as a pragmatist in the face of the will of the party. His “Great Turn” can be seen as a realistic and attractive policy, suited to the rank and file of the party, that he did not adopt earlier in the 20’s since it was not a fitting policy at the time.
3.6.2 Political sanctions An author defines political sanctions “as actions that seek to interrupt the target’s relations with the “external world in areas apart from basic trade”. As against economic sanctions which are tangible because they disrupt trade, political sanctions are intangible in the sense that they are made to defeat the moral psyche of a target nation. The following are types of political sanctions: Diplomatic sanctions are political actions that aim at disturbing the official relations between a target nation and the external world. Essentially, such sanctions are by restricting high-government visits to the target state and dismissing ambassadorial assignments from the target state. In some cases, these sanctions may
CIVILIANS! Aren't we the direct impact of the decisions our government makes? If we, the people, find such laws unsatisfactory, whom are we supposed to go to? Dear friends, a revolt is a just a way to make the authorities realize that the common people matter. Take our own struggle for independence as an example.