Sunday, October 6, 2013

Marx and Carnegie
Karl Marx and Fredrich Engels published their tract, The Communist Manifesto, in February 1848, just months before much of Europe was to erupt in social and political turmoil, and the Manifesto reflects the politics of the period. In the summer of that year, youthful revolutionary groups, along with the urban dispossessed, set up barricades in many of Europe’s capitals, fighting for an end to political and economic oppression. While dissenters had been waging war against absolutism and aristocratic privilege since the French Revolution, many of the new radicals of 1848 set their sights on a new enemy that they believed to be responsible for social instability and the growth of an impoverished urban underclass. That enemy was capitalism, the system of private ownership of the means of production. 
In The Gospel of Wealth, Andrew Carnegie that describes the responsibility of philanthropy by the new upper class of self-made rich. Carnegie proposed that the best way of dealing with the new types of wealth inequality was for the wealthy to redistribute their surplus means in a responsible and thoughtful manner. This approach was contrasted with the traditional patrimony, where wealth is handed down to heirs. Carnegie argued that surplus wealth is put to best use when it is administered carefully by the wealthy. Carnegie also argues against wasteful use of capital in the form of extravagance, irresponsible spending, or self-indulgence, instead promoting the administration of said capital over the course of one's lifetime toward the cause of reducing the stratification between the rich and poor. As a result, the wealthy should administer their riches responsibly and not in a way that encourages "the slothful, the drunkard, the unworthy."


Monday, September 30, 2013

Aristotle
Aristotle thought that in a good government every class should be represented. he thought that a strong government should have a middle class that is in control and out numbers the other classes. If Aristotle saw Howard Chandler Christy's painting of the signing of the Constitution he probably would have a lot to say about it. He would see that all the men in the painting are not middle or lower class but rich because of the way they are dressed and the wigs they are wearing. Aristotle would be upset about the painting because he thinks it's wrong for only one class to be represented. When looking at Christy's painting, Aristotle would probably think that the government they are forming is oligarchy not democracy. In the painting the Constitution is being decided by a small group of people and all classes are not represented. In Aristotle's opinion, the upper class, middle class, and lower class should be represented to be called democracy.

Sunday, September 22, 2013

Make a comparison between Elizabeth Cady Stanton's declaration and Thomas Jefferson's Declaration of Independence.

Jefferson and Stanton's declarations are very similar. Both declarations are written mostly about the equality and natural rights that man should already possess and should never have taken away. Stanton's declaration was mostly based off of Jefferson's Declaration of Independence and was accepted by the Seneca Falls Convention in July of 1848. Jefferson's declaration was more focused on rights against the British and to keep them from continuing their unjust actions. However, Stanton's Declaration of Sentiments and Resolutions is more focused on women's rights such as women have as equal rights as a citizen, what she wants to say, and any property or wage a woman earns she gets to keep. 

What risks did Elizabeth Cady Stanton take writing her declaration? Why did she take these risks?

In the eighteen hundreds writing something for women's rights was not something that was expected or for that matter accepted especially when written by a woman. Writing Stanton's declaration was a gamble whether it would be recognized as it should or if it would be ignored because it was such a radical idea that a woman should not be thinking much less writing. She risked social and public exile not that she would be executed but she would not be socially excepted. It turns out that her declaration is, in fact, recognized and accepted even though it was against the social expectancy.


Sunday, September 15, 2013

Henry Thoreau: Civil Disobedience

Henry Thoreau: Civil Disobedience
Henry Thoreau views toward the government was to have less government which is a lot like Lao-Tzu. Thoreau's famous quote, "That government is best which governs least." In Thoreau's opinion if there is too much government the people being governed will become no more than slaves. Thoreau believed that going against the government was the best way to get a better government for the future. He also believed that it was mans obligation or duty to be against the unjust laws by the government. Thoreau's view for the best form of patriotism was to resist and stand up against any immoral laws. He also felt, like Lao-Tzu, that the government was not a helping factor but more of a hindrance. Thoreau was more toward the individual than a large group and he thought it disgraceful if everyone didn't feel the same. Machiavelli would've strongly disagreed for he thought the government should control everything and make sure everything that needs to happen in society happened.  


 
 

Sunday, September 8, 2013

Rousseau, Thomas Jefferson, and Machiavelli

Rousseau was very particular in the social contract on how the government should be run. In the social contract which was never finished went against the French monarchy of his age. Rousseau believed that government should always be changing. Government should not control it's people but should make sure the people know that they are not alone. To please Rousseau there is no such government exists. Government has not evolved as needed for any governed place.

Machiavelli unlike Rousseau was all about force, the people would always know that the government was there. Machiavelli wanted to rule not just govern the people and he would do anything he say necessary, no matter how unsociably excepted. In Jefferson's Declaration it says roughly that if there is an injustice you should be able to do what you think is right to correct it for independence. When it comes to war, civil disorder, injustice, and death how the Declaration treats them depends on the circumstances. Jefferson in his mind justified the means but everything was equal and can be changed. Jefferson would've not liked Machiavelli's advice. For Machiavelli was about the government making most decisions but for Jefferson people could chose for themselves.

                                     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJ09XudWg_8

                                         

  

Sunday, September 1, 2013

Machiavelli vs. Lao-Tzu


Machiavelli vs. Lao-Tzu on how a government should be run.

These two philosophers and writers have very different views on how to govern a country. Lao-Tzu had a very non- violent and very passive perspective. Lao-tzu would rather please the public rather than force them to do something even if it would help them. He was all about pleasing the people and having the likable vote even if that meant doing nothing when they needed it. Whereas Machiavelli had a much more forceful view. He would rather push and push to get where he thought was right for the country. Unlike Lao-tzu, Machiavelli was not liked very much some even called him evil. For Machiavelli, force was the only way to run a country and the only way to keep from being overthrown.

In ways both of them had right and wrong points. To sit back is cowardly and being too forceful does nothing but start a mess. For Lao-Tzu letting people help themselves and seeing what will happen is one way to look at it. That’s the problem with being the perfect leader not everyone is going to be happy it’s hard to find the happy medium between helping and forcing when it comes to government. For Machiavelli helping people even when they don’t want help can seem forceful. He could’ve been trying to do what’s best for the people but they did not want help. That can seem controlling but there’s a fine line between them and he might have crossed that line but that’s all up to interpretation. There has been more good leaders that have died with infamy because the people didn’t want to be forced to do something even if it was better for them in the end. Machiavelli always for war and assembling the troops.


Tuesday, December 20, 2011

Holidays

Holidays are never really a surprise. My family is always the same i never realized it until (shockingly) my sister put on her status on facebook after Thanksgiving. She said "things never change my cozins daughter is going through the house almost breaking things, my grandmother insists I have a boy friend, and i don't, and there is always something down at the barn that she bought and or fixed up so that she could show them off" Things never seem to change. people think that my family is so different and unpredictable. but for me they are the norm. happy holidays if you want to watch something funny for anyone over 14 you can watch on netfix for free the very special christmas special by Jeff Dunham.