Contrasting Edmund Burke And Jean Jacque Rousseau Politics Essay

Contrasting Edmund Burke And Jean Jacque Rousseau Politics Essay Two of the most influential political philosophers of the 18th century were Edmund Burke and Jean-Jacque Rousseau. That is not to say that the two men shared the same philosophical views, however; in fact, it could be argued that they were on the opposite sides of the political spectrum, with Burke on the right and Rousseau to the left. A classic example that showed the differing opinions among the two was the French Revolution. Burke was not in favor of the revolution because he maintained that it would disrupt the traditions of France that hold the country together. Rousseau, on the other hand, was a hero of the revolution because he championed liberty and the idea that the people should be in control on how they should be governed. It is amazing to think that two philosophers, having very different perspectives on politics, can both be influential during the same time period. One of the core aspects of Jean-Jacque Rousseaus philosophy was what man was like in the state of nature. In the Second Discourse, Rousseau explained that people were equal and free going back tens of thousands of years because there was no real societal organization to speak of. Since life was centralized on hunting and gathering food, people were, for the most part, equal in terms of societal stature. People were relatively free because no one had to answer to a higher authority, with the family structure being the only exception. Since people were free and equal, they were innocent and individualistic in nature. There were no outside forces that had a corruptive effect on people and there was no reason for groups of people to band together to form a society. According to Rousseau, the development of reason and private property rights ruined equality and freedom because they lead to the few dominating the many. As populations started to grow, there was a greater need for more socie tal hierarchy due to the complex nature of communities, thus less freedom and more inequality. Even though society today believes that reason is a positive thing, Rousseau insisted that progress brought the worst out in people. Rousseau was not necessarily arguing in favor of going back to the time of early humans per se. He knew that society was a point of no return, so he had to be somewhat practical. What he was arguing was to return to the roots of equality and freedom as much as practically possible. The way to achieve that goal politically, Rousseau argued in the Social Contract for a political system that put most of the power in the hands of the people and not the elites. Rousseau was a contract theorist, which meant that he believed that government should only operate with the consent of the people that it is governing. What set him apart from the other contract theorists was that he coined the term general will. What Rousseau meant was that all men should sacrifice their own individual power in order to give way to what he called the general will. In other words, all men give up some of their freedom in order to what is best for the society as a whole. The thing that is not so clear is the mechanism in finding out what the general will is. For example, is it the compilation of the opinions of individuals or is it something that is even greater than public opinion, such as having to understand human nature? Being that there were conflicting issues that faced Rousseaus politic al philosophy, he kept on falling back on the idea of radical democracy. Since Rousseau was so distrustful of political institutions in general, he felt that people should always have a seat at the table when it came to determining policy. With that being said, it would seem that Rousseau was not in favor of having a republican form of government. Instead, as noted before, he was more in favor of a radical democracy. For this reason, he was a hero of the French Revolution. The revolutionaries read Rousseaus work and were inspired to take action against the monarchy, even though Rousseau was not even alive when the revolution started. Abiding by the slogan of Liberty, equality, and fraternity! during the duration of the revolution, the revolutionaries took the cue from Rousseaus political philosophy. The practicality question enters the conversation again, however, when talking about Rousseaus radical democracy. Is it even possible for a country to function properly with every citizen participating? At what point would moving towards a representative government be too far for Rousseau? It would be interesting to find out the answers of these questions from Rousseau himself because he was more of a practical thinker than some people give him credit for. Rousseaus political philosophy would seem to be paradoxical when you think about it, which is why the interpretation of his work is still being debating to this day. Edmund Burke is widely regarded as the founder of the modern conservative ideology. Although he did not believe in adhering to abstract principles when governing, his body of work clearly showed that he valued tradition and stability above all else. Similar to Jean-Jacques Rousseau, nature played a significant role for Burke when developing his political philosophy. Burke wrote that there are two natures. The first nature refers to: the idea that people love their families and that family provides a certain amount of stability and continuity, and that people are more comfortable with what is familiar to them. Burkes second nature refers to the acquired opinions that people accumulate throughout their lives, such as habits and customs. According to Burke, the second nature is what cements society because it provides the traditions that are passed down from generation to generation. As societies and times change, people should always hold on to the traditions that are passed down becau se they form the foundation of stability. Another plank in Burkes political philosophy is practicality. He did not believe that you can run a society based on abstract philosophy because it is not grounded in reality of the current situation. Rather, he was a pragmatist who looked at issues on their face value and tried to come up with solutions that fitted the time. That is not so say that he did not have any values, however. As noted before, he was a big believer in tradition and stability. Burke just argued that overarching philosophies cannot be applied the same in every circumstance because each circumstance has its own unique qualities. Burke is famous for his criticism of the French Revolution in Reflections on the Revolution in France. He was against the revolution because he believed that it would have destroyed Frances great traditions and that the theory and practicality behind the revolution were not sustainable. Burke did not agree with the revolutionists belief that government is created to protect the natural rights of individuals. Instead, he insisted that government was there as a stabilizing force so that people could live comfortably. Also, Burke believed that culture and tradition are more worthy in being protected than natural rights of individuals because they are much more long-lasting. Another problem that Burke had with the French Revolution was the idea that society can be formed from scratch. Burke asserted that societies cannot simply start over from scratch because he believed that leaders make prudent decisions based on the conditions that are in front of them. Installing a new political regime, in Burkes point of view, is not all that practical. With that being said, Burke was not a contract theorist because contract theory provides that a new society can be created by man. Rather, he saw society as an invisible link that connected generations to each other, carrying with it the established customs and institutions. These lasting institutions should be protected and respected due to the fact that they survived, thus showing their adaptability to changing times. It can certainly be argued that Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Edmund Burke had very different views when it came to their political philosophies. Rousseau was in favor of radical democracy and did not trust societal institutions, while Burke valued tradition and stability above everything else. However, there are commonalities that the two did share. One is that both of them believed that times change, so adhering to rigid ideologies was not the wisest thing to do. Rousseau admitted that early man practices were outdated, so he was not so stubborn to strictly stick to that belief system. He did believe that the themes of equality and freedom that was present during the days of early man were everlasting enough to still be applied to his present day. Burke also acknowledged that the world does not sit still. Even though he strongly believed that tradition and stability had to be protected, he knew that life moves on. The reason why he argued for the respect for traditions and institutions that have endured several generations is due to the fact that they showed their adaptability during changing times. Related to the two mens shared view of not sticking to a rigid ideology, Rousseau and Burke both had nuanced political philosophies; neither of their philosophies were black and white. Rousseaus philosophy was so nuanced that it could be considered contradicting, as noted before. In the Social Contract, he famously said, Man was born free and everywhere he is in chains. But later on in the same work he argued for the general will and that sometimes men must be forced to be free. One could make the case that he was a libertarian, while another could equally claim that he was a totalitarian. Burke was nuanced to a lesser extent than Rousseau, but nuanced nonetheless. He knew that holding on to the past can only go so far, which is why he asserted that while times does go on, it is still important to carry on the traditions and culture that were passed on by previous generations. An interesting thing to note about Burke is that he was in favor of the American Revolution. This goes to show that he was not against all revolutions, again showing his nuanced approach to politics. The reason why he supported the American Revolution is because the colonists were not creating a society from scratch. The colonists, descendants of England, were committed to English ideas and principles. The only difference was that they wanted to a free and independent nation. The French revolutionaries, on the other hand, were hell-bent on creating a whole new political paradigm. As far as my opinion is concerned, I think that both Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Edmund Burke contributed significantly to the field of political philosophy. Even though they had different thoughts on how government should operate, both of them had valid points. I agree with Rousseau that people should have a say in the way that they should be governed because history has shown that democracies have been the most peaceful form of government and it seems to be the most fair system (at least so far). But I agree with Burke as far as remembering your societys history and culture because you would not be where you are in life if it wasnt for previous generations. I also concur with Burke that society should not change too quickly, as it might cause instability that might do more harm than good. It turns out that I am quite nuanced with my approach to political philosophy, just as Rousseau and Burke were.

The Career Cycle of Teachers: A Review of Mr. Holland’s Opus

In the 1995 film Mr. Holland’s Opus, we watch as the protagonist Glen Holland goes from a near novice to a distinguished teacher. Although the film ends at his (forced) retirement, judging by his past involvement I would imagine he will continue, in the teacher emeritus tradition, to mentor students and teachers and possibly as an advocate for arts education (Steffy & Wolfe, 16). There are two specific incidents I wish to compare to illustrate the career development of Glen Holland. One is in the development of a senior revue that he devotes much of his time to during the later part of his career, and the other is his decision to incorporate methods into his teaching and conducting that offer ways for the deaf community to ‘hear’ music. These two incidents follow directly on the heels of each other, proving that the process of â€Å"reflection, renewal, and growth† (17) which Steffy and Wolfe discuss in their article on the career cycle of teachers is a constant, and constantly changing, process. During the years previous, we are able to see many career-altering moments for Glen Holland, from learning his wife is pregnant to teaching a young man to â€Å"find the rhythm† (Herek). It is during his final decade of teaching when he helps to create and produce a senior revue in place of the senior play. His involvement in the school revue shows he has a broad influence across departments within the school. Compared to his initial lack of involvement, to the extent that he would literally run to his car as soon as the bell rang at the end of the day, the amount of time and energy he puts into a non-academic activity shows his progression as a well-rounded teacher. At the same time, he has chosen to put energy into teaching that should perhaps be going into his family life, and particularly his deaf son, who he has never learned to communicate with properly. Following this production, in which he encourages a young woman to follow her talent to New York instead of working at her family’s restaurant, he has a revelation about his family and son. His son, Coltrane, confronts him about his thinking that Cole, as a deaf person, can’t appreciate music. This spurred Glen to learn ways he could incorporate new methods (specifically using lights to ‘play’ movements during a concert) into his teaching and performing. In an interview with Frank McCourt on PBS, he said that his turning point in teaching led him to discover that he â€Å"was the big learner out of this teaching experience† (Only). This experience seemed to light a new love of teaching in him, perhaps because, like Frank McCourt talks about, he has rediscovered his own love of learning. These two points in Glen’s career demonstrate the unique career development process of teachers. As Pam Grossman points out in her article about the profession of teaching and the challenges facing it, there has been a flood of under-qualified teachers into schools (par. 2). However, as Mr. Holland proves, it is not just knowledge of methods that makes one a great teacher, but an intimate and profound knowledge of the subject matter. Early in the movie, he tells a young woman who can’t seem to learn the clarinet that â€Å"Playing music is supposed to be fun. It's about heart, it's about feelings, moving people, and something beautiful, and it's not about notes on a page. I can teach you notes on a page, I can't teach you that other stuff† (Herek). On the contrary, his skill appears to be in teaching exactly that – how to love music instead of merely playing notes on a page. Throughout his career development, he shows that it is this love of his subject matter combined with his love of teaching itself that has touched so many young lives. Teaching may not always lead to monetary riches, but in Mr. Holland’s life it has led to a multitude of personal and professional riches. References Grossman, P. (2003, January/February). Teaching: From A Nation at Risk to a profession at risk? Harvard Education Letter. Retrieved April 14, 2008 Herek, S. (Director). (1995). Mr. Holland’s Opus [DVD]. Hollywood: Buena Vista Home Entertainment/Hollywood Pictures. Only a Teacher: Interview with Frank McCourt. (2003). Retrieved April 18, 2008, from http://www.pbs.org/onlyateacher/index.html. Steffy, B. & Wolfe, M. (2001, fall). A life cycle model for career teachers. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 38(1), 16-19.   

Atmosphere and Setting

The novel The Reluctant Fundamentalist by Mohsin Hamid, follows the protagonist Changez’ journey through American business fundamentalism. Hamid utilises a plethora of surroundings that convey specific feelings, throughout the novel to heighten the emotions felt by Changez. This is first evident through New York City’s drastic change from optimistic to hostile, following the 9/11 attacks, which correlates with Changez understanding himself. Further as Changez is through his travels exposed to difference countries such as Greece and the Philippines, he becomes aware of the disparity between Americans and himself.This eventually leading him back to Lahore where he is disgusted to realise that he has become a â€Å"foreigner†. Shortly after . time in Valpariso ultimately leaves him disenchanted with American. Hamid creates such environments and atmospheres to amplify Changez conflicting beliefs about his place in America and Pakistan. The changes in atmosphere and s etting of New York City, mirror Changez changing attitude towards America and his identity in the milieu of New York City.Before the 9/11 attacks New York is depicted as a society that is diverse, modern and full of opportunity. The city itself exudes a feeling of encouragement and optimistic, welcoming individuals of all cultures. Hamid portrays, the city like this to consequently allow Changez, the protagonist to feel as though he belongs. Changez feel at home, in New York because of the taxi drivers speaking Urdu, the Punjab deli and his skin colour falling â€Å"in the middle of the colour spectrum†. He remarks that he â€Å"never [felt] like an American†, but â€Å"immediately [felt like] a New Yorker.To Changez, New York offers him an opportunity to achieve the â€Å"American dream†, it made â€Å"everything possible†. It is because of these specific feelings that Changez experiences towards New York City, that he is infatuated with America. Howeve r after 9/11 New York becomes of city of patriotism and paranoia, much more seclusive and guarded. At this point in the novel, Changez has begun to see the inhumanity of the pragmatic and materialistic America that he has accepted. Hamid, changes the atmosphere of New York, to further amplify Changez' dislike for America.Changez feels as through the city is saying â€Å"We are America-not New York†, making him uncertain of his place, as he never really felt like an â€Å"American†. In addition, New York's tense atmosphere provokes rumours of racism: Pakistani cab drivers being beaten†¦.. the FBI raiding mosques†¦ Muslim men.. disappearing. As a result this atmosphere makes Changez feel uncomfortable and unsure about where he stands in America. Changez time in Greece and the Manila provides the perfect enviorment for him to become increasingly aware of the disparity between Americans and himself.Hamid's use of Greece is significant, due to its laid back, relax ing atmosphere that juxtaposes against New York. This provides the ideal environment to stimulate Changez' American companions, to exhibit their preconceived American superiority. Changez becomes aware of the â€Å"ease at which they parted with money†, and their â€Å"self righteousness†, as though they were part of the â€Å"ruling class†. He becomes increasing attentive of this self satisfaction that American's carry with them. Further, Hamid uses Manila because of its similarity to Pakistan and its idolisation of Americans.Thus, Changez finds that, â€Å"it was one thing to accept that New York was more wealthy than Lahore, but quite another to swallow the fact that Manila was as well†. This setting evokes pride and jealousy in Changez. Hence, he attempts to â€Å"act and speak†¦. more like an American†¦ [he] wanted [his] share of that respect†. Despite his belief that his â€Å"Pakistaniness was invisible†, the glare that he r eceives from a driver of a jeppney, with its â€Å"undisguised hostility†, shakes Changez. He consequently realises, that this driver has seen through him and this once again makes him feel as though he is betraying Pakistan.The atmosphere in Lahore and Valparaiso plays an important role in concreting Changez disenchantment with America. When Changez first returns back to Lahore, he notices â€Å"how shabby [his] house appeared†, he was â€Å"saddened to find it in such a state† and ashamed that this was where he had come from. Hamid creates such an atmosphere to act as crucial for Changez’ realization of who he has become. Soon after Changez releases that his surroundings had not changed since his departure, he â€Å"had changed†. He realises that he, † was looking†¦ ith the eyes of a foreigner†¦. [of] that particular type of entitled and unsympathetic American†. This setting forces Changez to become aware of his new identity and question his loyalty to Pakistan. Changez feels as though he is â€Å"abandon[ing] his people†. Upon realising this, he begins to appreciate his home’s â€Å"enduring grandeur† and â€Å"rich†¦ history†. Furthermore, Hamid chooses Valparaiso as the next crucial setting because Changez associates the city with Pakistan, hence feeling more comfortable there.The city's decline as a great port reminds Changez of Lahore. Therefore he is able to trust the chief of the publishing company, Juan Bautisa. Thus, when Juan-Bautisa tells Changez of the janissaries', Changez is able to realise that he has become,† a servant of the American empire when it was invading a country of kinship to mine†. This setting and atmosphere provides the vital catalyst that convinces Changez that he no longer belongs in America. He now knows that his â€Å"days of focusing on the fundamentals were done†.Hamid uses particular settings and atmospheres in his novel, to provoke his protagonist Changez to feel certain emotions and act accordingly. The environments prove to be crucial in how the plot unfolds as they are all are essential in influencing Changez subsequent actions. The changes of New York City's welcomeness, his observations in Greece and his sense of comfort in Valparaiso all affect Changez emotionally. Overall, had the novel not used such specific surroundings, Changez feelings may have not been realised to their full intensity.

Women as object in contemporary Hip Hop - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 3 Words: 1026 Downloads: 2 Date added: 2019/08/12 Category Music Essay Level High school Tags: Hip Hop Essay Did you like this example? Rap music has its roots in protest and still functions as protest platform today. Rap songs most often protest society and the system. In the case of African American rappers, these protests often involve an objection to inherent racism in society, gender inequalities unequal opportunities for African Americans, and prejudices that they face in a supposedly equal country. Rap music performed by people of other races call attention to social injustices that affect their lives, as well. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Women as object in contemporary Hip Hop" essay for you Create order For example, female rappers of all races will often speak about gender inequality. Rap music is built upon similar protest platforms; poetry and music. It is an incredibly useful medium to spread a message quickly, and its captivating sound gives it the potential to attract a large audience. The contemporary hip-hop industry is regarded as highly misogynistic. It is quite degrading on women and sometimes depicts acts of sexual and physical violence against women. Some hip hop music videos aired in the BET and MTV music channels have been criticized for showing Black female bodies as faceless and nameless sexual objects whenever the lyrics have little concerning women or sexuality. However, the recent times have seen many female artists come up, many of whom strive to address the extreme social inequality that underlies the society today. Outstanding among such female artists is Angel Haze whose music is large carries important social message. Her original name is Reykeea Wilson. She is gay but describes her identity as pansexual. She is also of a mixed race and taught herself the Tsalagi, that is a language of her Native American family predecessors Featuring in Macklemores single, Same Love, Angel Haze set the record straight on his intents and feelings regarding gender issues in the music industry. He muscles herself up to represent the LGBTQ communitys voice in this song that won at the 2013 VMAs the Best Video with a Social Message award. In place of the gay/straight alliance verses of Macklemore, she decided to rap about her own personal experiences. In this song, she begins noting that her mother knew that she was not straight at age thirteen. She described her predicament of being locked out of the world as her mother preferred seeing a part of her die rather than her thriving. This led her to realize that bei ng driven by ones choice is an optical illusion, now she understands that there is not always confusion. Her settling on this particular beat of Same Love is quite significant in spreading her message on the need to respect and accept the LGBTQ community. When it won at the VMAs, the song received plenty of resentment, notably from the NYC rapper, Take Lelf, who picked up a beef with Macklemore for having received massive praise for being an LGBTQ voice. Haze used this song to ask the society one particular question, Besides the rap world, can a pansexual artist be accepted at the music scene? Will the orientation of the artist be misinterpreted for bisexuality? And why does sexual orientation even matter? She answers by rapping, I am whoever I am when I am it (Manders, par 4). Angel Haze has not only been focused on gender issues only. She has developed quite a voice in criticizing the extreme racism that is inherent in American society. In her bullish, self-released album dubbed Back to the Woods, Haze is quoted rapping, Ive got my middle finger up to white America for trying to whitewash my blackness (Cragg, par 1). The rapper is clearly one of the most outspoken hip-hop voices. Haze particularly tailed Cleaning Out my Closet track to tackle the sexual abuse she endured as a child between age seven and ten. She exposes everything to the listener: from graphic details to what happened to her body to the trauma and fury running through her. She notes that at the end redemption is attained, but after one is left reeling physically. The 20-year-old rapper notes that there are people who go through such ill experiences every day, but people turn a blind eye. The victims themselves are often too scared to narrate their ordeal. Cleaning Out my Closet bares a br utal catharsis that lies in barred honesty evident in her work. If the most basic and essential maxim of hip-hop is to keep it real, then Haze has well passed the test and redefined it too. All of her mixtapes released dissects and documents her inner life and deeper experiences with dexterous intelligence and skill ranging from the gothic fantasies to evocative deluge of deep-feeling love poetry as well as remunerations on religion and sexuality. In the same mixtape that featured Cleaning Out my Closet, Haze blatantly calls out Lupe Fiasco. This followed Fiascos attempt in the original version of the track Bitch Bad to defend misogyny and blaming women for his predicaments. Haze attacked the narrative, explaining how men and boys are influenced by and end up demonstrating the anti-female attitudes. Haze had no regrets embarrassing Fiasco for making the woman-shaming attempt (Macpherson, par 6, par 9). Angel Haze has also some reservations for the rapists. The rape culture had become dominant news in the media following the rape and murder of a medical student in Delhi and the emergence of allegations of an attempt to cover-up on an alleged gang rape in Ohio. Haze was p articularly furious in her reaction to the topic of rape going arms up against those people who blame the dressing code of the rape victims. She notes that the rape victims never get justice as most of the cases are dismissed for lack of evidence. This has given the rapists more confidence in their actions as they know people are less likely to believe the victims (Macpherson, par 20). In conclusion, it is a common knowledge that the hip-hop industry since its inception has been dominated by the male artists who have tailed situations in their favor, constantly using women as their subject and objects. However, many female artists are contemporarily rising to the occasion to not only defend themselves against the men but also fight against social inequalities. Angel Haze thus far has demonstrated incredible enthusiasm in this course.