Compare and contrast On Liberty by John Stuart Mill - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 5 Words: 1383 Downloads: 7 Date added: 2019/10/10 Did you like this example? Introduction This paper simply has to compare and contrast on various books in connection with the issue of political science and how they relate to one another on various issues discussed by the writers. â€Å"Address to the German Nation† by Johann is one of the books in which it addresses some of the issues on German nationalism on the matters of the manner in which the people reacted to the occupation of the Napoleon and the French emperor on their territory. This is a political literature book that summarizes some of the reactions that the citizens of the nation had to go through to make sure that they cover their territories. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Compare and contrast On Liberty by John Stuart Mill" essay for you Create order Karl Marx is a philosopher who wrote the other book â€Å"Communist Manifesto† where he wrote the book back in 1847 together with Friedrich Engels. The publication that is very brief simply shows the manner in which Marx declares some of the arguments and the platform that the communist party had. A manifesto is one laid down strategy in which a party or a political party should have to the people and  Ã‚   Marx wrote the book on the basis in which the Communist Party in England had laid to the people of the country. Finally, the third book to put into comparison is the one from an English philosopher John Stuart known as the â€Å"On Liberty†. In this case, the publication done in the year 1859 shows how the writer applied his ethical systems for utilitarianism in front of the society and the whole state. The philosopher in this book tries the manner in which he will simply relate the issue of authority and liberty within the nation and this is why the book is regard ed to be one of the best writes in political philosophy. Therefore, these are the three books in which the paper will compare and contrast the manner in which all the writers had similar and contrasting opinions on the issue of political philosophy and literature (Mill, 2015 Pg. 67). First, â€Å"On Liberty† the given author has tries a lot in establishing the standards for the given relationship between the issue of authority and the liberty issue in the country. All these two are based on the given importance of individuality within the society and the state we live today and this is the reason as to why the philosopher John Stuart is attempting to relate the two. Comparing to the book by Johann, â€Å"Addresses to the German Nation†, this political literature write simply tries or attempts to advocate on the issue of German nationalism. Nationalism is the feeling that a person or a society has a belief in his nation or state. This is simply compared to John’s book on the issue of liberty and authority where every person is attempting to face the issue of individualism within the nation. The two books are a show of the manner in which the people within the nations have to cover up their nation and face all the problems be it political toget her. Johann explains the manner in which the issue of nationalism was seen in German that time when the Napoleon Empire tried to seize some of the lands and other properties from the people and other societies. The reaction from the people of German in that time simply showed nationalism and the issue of individualism is reciprocated in these actions. Actions on liberty and the manner in which people should respond to such occasions is a liberal thing that compares the two literatures writes at any given time. Napoleon and the French empires that were seizing the rights of the people within German are a symbol of authority that is mentioned in the other book for the case of liberty for the people (Johann, 2013 Pg. 56). Marx book on the communist manifesto is a literature write on the issue of politics in which this is a common theme in all the three books. Politics and the manner in which the states are run during the time in which the authors were writing these books is a common agenda to address to the people and the readers have to note the same. In this book from Marx, it is evident that he is giving a manifesto for the Communist Part in the country of England. Marx states in the book that the given history of the hitherto and other existing societies in the country is the history of that class that simply struggles to live. This is the theme the writer gives the Communist Party in England on the manner in which it should program their manifesto so that they can cover all the angles for the people to be satisfied with the issue of governance. Not leaving behind the theme of the paper, the comparison of the book to that of Stuart it is important to understand that he builds his writings on the p eople.   Like Marx, Stuart uses the issue of liberty and free governance where the people have to realize that for them to achieve their goals as the citizens in that country, the government has to start working simply as an instrument in order to delegate the people’s will and wishes. This is simply a given manifesto in which the government should have so that it can make sure that the people are well taken care of within the government set programs. Therefore, the issue of the communism and the issue of manifesto and liberty all has to be achieved through the sitting government for the people to understand the whole idea behind having a good government (Mill, 2015 Pg. 67). Also in the addresses of the German nation by Johann, the same gospel of how liberty and authority has to be achieved by the people is laid down. This is in the manner in which the citizens have to realize how they have to react and participate in any issues regarding their nation for them to have liberty. For example, the manner in which the German people had to respond to the Napoleon attacks and stealing of their property is a show of the manner in which the people will have to take part in any given situation to save their country. Communism manifesto and the liberty book shows how the citizens should have to realize that for them to have peace they have to task the government on various issues regarding their rights and the standards of living. The only contrast between the three books is that Marx wrote on the issue of communism, Johann wrote on the matters of nationalism and individualism whereas, Stuart concentrated on the liberty for the people and the manner in which the pe ople should have to behave within a given government. On liberty simply shows the manner in which the majority of the given opinion would serve for the citizens for them to feel that they are not sidelined on any issue of governance within the country. Marx dwelt on the issue of communist within the government with their manifesto having to be followed at any given time. This is simply a show of contrast between liberty where in this case it is simply democracy and the fact that communist has to be laid down strategies or manifesto to be followed strictly (Marx, 1992 Pg. 45). Conclusion In concluding this deep comparison and contrast between the three political literature writes from different authors, it is seen that Marx uses the communism act of the government to pass all the information through a manifesto. Johann with his calculated write simply attempts to show the manner in which some standards are applied within the issue of authority and liberty for the people to feel that they are governed. Also, the manner in which the people reacts to some of the prepositions of the government like the manner in which the German people reacted to the issue of the Napoleon Empire attacks. Within the context of Stuart, it is simply democracy within liberty and the manner in which the government has to play a role within the people and the structures of the same state to make sure the people are safe from anything. In this case, the majority’s opinion counts a lot within the governance of the people and how they will have to behave.

The Constitution Best Suitable For Palestine - 2283 Words

The constitution best suitable for Palestine would be based upon the comparison of USA’s and UK’s constitutional models. However, this analysis would also include a third model for the purposes of proposing a more practical constitutional setup for Palestine, similar to the one in Pakistan. Following any of the two oldest constitutions, either it be of the USA’s or UK’s, may seem like a feasible option in theory and most academics seem to agree as well. However, in reality Palestine’s problems are much more niche and in order to practically deal with them, it may be necessary to devise a unique constitutional model. The United States constitutional model is the most influential throughout the world. Many countries have been inspired and†¦show more content†¦If this can be achieved in Palestine then the tyranny of the majority would cease to exist if the constitutional defence mechanism were such that it would set out checks and balances over other institutions of the state. The US model distinctly sets out the features of each limb of the state under Article 1, 2 and 3. Article 1 of the Constitution sets out the role of the legislative, i.e. the House and Senate. More importantly, in Article 3, the Supreme Court and the judicial body is set up. The framers of the constitution inspired by Montesquieu’s work favoured a strict separation of power. James Madison stated; ‘By which the majority...be rendered unable to...carry into effect schemes of oppression’. Palestine’s constitution must contain a strict separation of power like the USA’s model and this would be a featuring characteristic as religious and political liberty should be its direct aim. Moreover, the independent Judiciary in the USA was devised by the framers of the Constitution to do one primary thing, to prevent the majority from ruling with an iron fist and curtail abuse of power. The Judiciary in the USA can declare any law unconstitutional if it is deemed to go against the rights guaranteed in the constitution. Similarly, in Marbury v. Madison it was held by the US Supreme court that a ‘law repugnant to the Constitution is void’ . Furthermore, in Wallace v. Jaffree, the courts held that

With Malice toward None the Legacy of Reconstruction free essay sample

Starting with the Radical Reconstruction, the South was attacked by laws that were intended to make them become states free of black oppression. Radical Republicans wrote the Civil War amendments that made every man free and equal, made them citizens and gave blacks the right to vote. The father of Reconstruction, the first men to have a plan to reconstruct our nation was President Lincoln. He believed in forgiveness and reunification; he wanted the U. S. To heal quickly to better the prosperity of the country. His Ten-Percent Plan reflected his opinion on reunifying the action.This plan required of a Southern state to swear oath the union to gain the status as state and be accept back in the U. S. The only people that were not given amnesty were the Confederate Generals. After President Lincoln assassination, his Vice-President took over and kept a very similar plan for reconstruction. President Johnson was a democrat that was not liked by congress because of his inability to make important decision on laws and amendments. We will write a custom essay sample on With Malice toward None: the Legacy of Reconstruction or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page He believed states right and thought it was the white men of the Souths job to reestablish government. Congress had to overwrite veto after veto that Johnnys weak policies did not accept. His refusal to punish the South and force them to enter blacks in their societies brought the congress to an attempt of impeach meet that failed. In the Legislative branch, the Reconstruction started with battles with President Johnson. The Radical Republican Congress stressed the fact that the faster unity is made, the better it will be for the prosperity of our nation. They pushed the enforcement of civil right and wanted to end black oppression.What did the South think of all this pressure from the North for black suffrage? We need to remember that the Civil War was a war for unity that destroyed the souths economy that was based on agriculture. The souths economy was also based on slavery, which was needed for labor on the field. Many plantation owners lacked Of manpower and their goal was to overcome legislature that was passed to free blacks and make them equal. Measures taken by Congress to limit the South were replied with ruling from the Southern Democrats.The laws kept limiting the blacks lives to a point were they were under some new kind of slavery. The first legislation piece restricting the South was 13th Amendment. It officially abolished slavery, but did not prevent Southern states from placing major restrictions on blacks such as black codes. The Black Codes required black to have jobs and when they did not have job, it forced them into sharecropping, which is using a plantation owners land to grow crops part of which would be used to pay rent for the land.Usually blacks would still be in debt after a year of working for the white landowner and have to work for another year. Then, Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1866. This act stated: all persons born in the united States were now citizens, without regard to race, lour, or previous condition. As citizens they could make and enforce contracts, sue and be sued, give evidence in court, and inherit, purchase, lease, sell, hold, and convey real and personal property. iii When the Congress was worried that the South would amend the Civil Rights Act, they created the 14th amendment to add on to the act.It officially defined requirements for citizenship and said that no state had the right to interfere with any citizens basic civil rights. Iv The only problem with this amendment was that it did not require states to accept black suffrage. The 1 5th Amendment was passed in 1870 and was considered the final step of the Radical Reconstruction. It did not allow governments to restrict voting right because of race, color, or previous condition of servitude. v This is the point where Radical Republicans finally achieved their goal of black suffrage.Unfortunately their success did not stay around for long. Radical Republican had a lot of issues with their Civil War Amendments. They had to create too many pieces of legislature to reach to goal. Think the content Of the amendment could have been a lot more concise and precise; imitating predictable issues and legislature that couldve been created by the South. However, the timing was good, they had to make a piece of legislature to regulate the south from becoming what they were before the Civil War. If they would of taken more time to think their amendments through to make a good one that covered all aspects, the South wouldnt of had so much time to created overwriting pieces of legislature that kept black oppression for too long. Reconstruction was supposed to bring unity and equality and only one of these goals have had been reached when it ended. The Reconstruction Era as more of trial and error period where the North afflicted many pieces of legislation that were overwritten by the South. Its legacy was very negative and led to many debates and revolt for black rights.Many examples can prove its failure. The positive point is that finally after a decade Of hard work, the South and North could be called the united States again. When the North redrew its army in the south, it gave place to former Confederates and Slave owners to regain power and this meant the return to the old South policy. They allowed sharecropping and passed black codes. As result, Northerners were tired of dealing with the South. They saw their work for black equality as meaningless and they stopped to worry about black civil rights.The South and the North came to a conclusion where they would set aside race inequalities to unify the union. This lead to a new feeling in the CA. S. : before the Civil War, they were a country, but after they became a nation. For the racial discrimination, sharecroppers, white supremacist groups, it was only in the 1 asss that blacks regained support of the Federal Government. During this period of time, many protestors tried to spread equality and respect for black. A very well known man called Martin Luther King Jar. As one of the most important lobbers for black rights. He was admired for his courage to speak up under oppression and his dream of a world without racial discrimination. His most famous speech was l have a Dream where he describes his dream of a nation where every race was equal, a world where there was not the feeling of being looked upon by others. A white person who believed he did not have to right to speak up assassinated him. This is a good example of the mood during those years. The Ignited States had a problem that Reconstruction lacked to solve.The Civil Rights movement of the second half of the sass Was a worldwide political movement for equality before the Allah. I. It had a great influence on the United States and in 1 965 there was the Voting Right Act that finally recognized blacks as citizens. It was a great step for humanity. Finally, the goals of reconstruction for reunifying the country and spread equality. The Radical Republicans took a long time and passed a lot of pieces of legislature to give blacks to right to vote. This Reconstruction brought unity in the United States that could then be called a nation.

Romeo And Juliet Essays (637 words) - English-language Films

Romeo and Juliet Romeo and Juliet is one of Shakespeare's plays about tragedy. It is about two lovers who commit suicide when their feuding famillies prevent them from being together. The play has many characters, each with its own role in keeping the plot line. Some characters have very little to do with the plot but some have the plot revolving around them. Friar Lawrence does not have very much time on stage but the time he does have is crucial to the plot line. Through his words Friar Lawrence demonstrates the he is a good intentioned, yet sometimes short-sighted, man who is not afraid to take risks to help others One of Friar Lawrences most favourable traits is how good intentioned he is. He may do something out of the ordinary if he thinks the outcome will help someone he cares for. For example, when he says "In one respect I'll thy assistant be; for this alliance may so happy prove, to turn your households rancour to pure love."(Act 2, Scene 3), he is saying that the only reason he will marry Romeo and Juliet is because he hopes that the marriage will end the hostilities between the two houses. When he says "Shall Romeo by my letters know our drift, and hither shall he come; and he and I shall watch thy waking, and that very night shall Romeo bear thee to Mantua." (Act 4, Scene 1), he tells Juliet how everything will be all right. Unfortunately, for all his good intentions the play still ends in tragedy. Friar Lawrence is a man who is not afraid to take risks when he feels it is neccesary to help someone. For example in Act 2, Scene 6, when he marries Romeo and Juliet, he is risking his reputation as a Friar so he can help the two lovers. Also, when he says "Take thou this vial, being then in bed, and this distilled liquor drink though off;" (Act 4, Scene 1), he is suggesting that Juliet drink a potion so that she might feighn her own death and avoid marrying Paris. This is an extremely risky thing to do because anything might happen to Juliet while she unconscious. Even after all Friar did to help Romeo and Juliet the play still ended in tragedy because of Friar Lawrences' short sightedness. When the Friar married Romeo Juliet in secrecy, he did not think of all the complications that would arise but instead went on with the marriage because at that time he thought it was the right thing to do. In Act 4, Scene 1, he gave Juliet a sleeping potion without thinking of the possible outcomes of such an outrages plan. He admits that much of the fault of the tragedy lies in his hands when he says "And her I stand both to impeach and purge myself condemned and myself excused", and when he say "Her nurse is privy; and, if aught in this miscarried by myself..." (Act 5, Scene 3). Although Friar Lawrence does not have an especially large role, his role is none the less important. It is because of his good intentions that he was willing to help his friends that Romeo and Juliet were married - a key event in the play. It is because of his willingness to take risks for his friends that Juliet aqquired the sleeping potion - another key event in the play. Finally, it was the shortsightedness of his actions that in part led to the deaths of the two lead characters. This demonstartes that Friar Lawrence was a man who was a man with good intentions who was willing to take risks to help his frieneds. If he had been any other way, the play might not have turned out the way it did.