According to Woodruff, justification makes an action right and an excuse only reduces the blame for an action that is wrong. The important question that is asked in this essay is, “can a soldier at war clear himself of blame for killing civilians on the grounds that he does so to save his own life? (282).” In other words, can a soldier justify himself for killing civilians, or does he just end up with an excuse? As indicated by Woodruff, a soldier with perfectly respectable morals may run in to some tribulations when attempting to justify his actions in war. Self-defense seems to be the key reason for harming, or even killing another person.
In “What is Political Correctness” by Jonathan I. Katz, the notion of politically correct is brought in to perspective, even shown as a way to enforce preexisting stereotypes and limit open and free discourse. Katz would react to the question of whether Tropic Thunder is politically correct by addressing the broader question of what does implying it is not signify. Katz takes a unique stance on the tenant of political correctness by addressing its shortcomings as opposed to the more widely held stance of supporting it for its sensitivity. There are many points in the film that cause heated debate. One of the most controversial lines in Tropic Thunder can be said to be “Never go full retard” (31).
Although the Reign of Terror did not protect the rights of man like the starters of the French Revolution wanted, it helped secure military victories for the French against external enemies, quelled the counterrevolution that was stirring in France due to nobility and clergy, and the speaking prowess of political leaders, such as Robespierre, helped convince the common peoples to join the Reign of Terror in extinguishing external and internal enemies of France. The Reign
Witness shows in a darker and more serious way, the depressing reality that lies behind the facades of society. The violence is integral to the lives we see in the city, it is shown by Weir to be bloody and cruel and in no way noble. People who use violence emerge as tarnished and shabby whilst the city comes to symbolize wickedness and evil. Schaeffer McFee are good examples of this aspect in the film and Mcfee’s casual murder typically of the callous nature that violence creates. Violence is shown to be evil and those that oppose it are portrayed by Weir as basically good.
Influenced by the modern day context, Luhrmann adopts the indiscriminate usage of guns in place of sword fighting to depict violence and lack of social order caused by an “ancient grudge”. His construction of a pastiche that combines the Western film genre through the close up of Tybalt’s cowboy boot, with a series of car chase sequences, makes the film more accessible to his audience. As a result, modern viewers are able to comprehend the societal chaos intended in Shakespeare’s play and can understand the enmity that presides over the two families, ultimately allowing them to value the rare occurrence of untainted love that arises between Romeo and Juliet. Additionally, there is no black-and-white depiction of love in Baz Luhrmann’s film, as the influence
But blaming violent films isn’t the answer, because there is no proof the repeated exposure to cinematic horrors has more impact than, for example, mental illness, long-term unemployment and poverty, alienation, alcohol and drugs, mob behaviour or simply frustration and anger at the state of the world. Humanity is smart enough to understand the difference between the real world and the fiction world, and this talk about violence in films affecting children is another theory that isn’t supported. * * In an article I read called Not Wanted: The ugly side of Hollywood is an article written by Paul Murray about the negative side on violent films, and the writer uses the example of the movie Batman, “ I know there is an argument that the batman comic book character was conceived as an anti-hero. But that is a hopelessly inadequate justification for the sadistic horror that has replaced the Biff! Zap!
Just War theory plays a major role in the regulation of human warfare. Its guidelines give more structure to war and define what is just and what is unjust. Saint Thomas Aquinas, a theologian and philosopher, was the first to articulate these ideas and make abstract concepts more concrete. Also, Francisco de Vitoria produced a work entitled, ‘De Indis et de ivre belli’, questioning and criticizing the right of the Spanish to conquer the lands of native Americans, which also ties in with just war theory as it considers whether or not the colonization in this case was fair or just. The application of this concept to historical and contemporary situations often leads to a deeper understanding of what and why things happen in battle.
He greatly fears that “the people// [will] choose Caesar for their king” (I.ii.78-79). However, within Brutus’s wrong decisions lie his honorable thoughts and purposes. He presumes to “make// [their] purpose necessary and not envious” (II.i.177-178). Brutus implies that only murderers act out of jealousy, but honorable ones act out of honesty and justice. Influenced by the belief of Brutus disliking Caesar, some may think that the idea of assassinating Caesar is for selfish reasons, or that Brutus has a personal enmity against Caesar.
Dead Poet’s Society In the movie Dead Poet’s Society, the concept of individualism is explored in great detail. The characters encounter numerous conflicts that demonstrate the fundamental principles of having freedom of individual control. For example, the suicide of Neil Perry illustrates the disturbing consequences that can transpire when an individual’s authority is allowed to prevail against authority and tradition. However, the conquest of the individual can have a positive outcome. This result can be seen in the case of Knox Overstreet.
Terrorism is commonly defined as “an act of violence against civilians by non-stators to attain political goals.” (Andrew Kydd and Barbara Walters.) Any act of violence against non-combative civilians in order to insight fear or strengthen a grip on power, may also be described and defined as terrorism. As terrorism becomes more entwined with the day-to-day to life, the level of effectiveness of its methods in achieving its conceptualised goals have been called into critical question. For instance, does suicide terrorism help in creating the fear and unwilling respect that it is designed to achieve? Or does it simply dwindle the terrorist ranks while creating building resent and resistant resolve against them from the civilian and international community?