Disembodied... Never Disengaged!
Philosophy, Politics and Society, all in one place.
-
Egalitarianism in the Western World: Thomas Jefferson’s Nature of Man
Posted on February 17th, 2009 No commentsThomas Jefferson, in analyzing different forms of society, proclaimed, “whether no law… or too much law… submits man to the greatest evil, one who has seen both conditions of existence would pronounce it to be the last” (Matthews 63). It would seem, despite his grouping with people like Madison and Hamilton as a founding father, Jefferson stands in opposition to the market society advocated by others, instead contending that an egalitarian, limited government society – if any government – is the best option. Furthermore, Thomas Jefferson stands as one of the few Western philosophers to truly preach that all mankind is created equal and with an innate ability to govern themselves. It is this view on the nature of man that formulates Jefferson’s basic political theory and allows him to stand on the side of anarchism and in opposition to the tyranny of capitalism and big government.
-
The Necessity of and Alternatives to the State
Posted on February 17th, 2009 No commentsThe great anarchist thinker Pierre-Joseph Proudhon announced, “The government of man by man is servitude.”(Guérin 15) Since the times of the Ancient Greeks humans, as a whole, have consistently insisted on being ruled by a government. This insistence has led many theorists to prepare rationalizations for the state in hopes of justifying the oppression a government brings with it. However, these journeys of logical leaps and bounds have invariably been unable to fully and consistently justify any realistic form of government. In the end, it must still be asked if government is necessary, and if not what is a viable alternative. To attempt to solve this century old problem, it is necessary to first explore some political theorists who have attempted to justify government, then examine the general justifications for government and how both government and social anarchy fit within these justifications, and finally, with all exploration complete, conclude whether or not government finds itself legitimate in today’s day and age.
-
Guiding Reason: An Exploration of Spinoza’s Political Philosophy
Posted on February 17th, 2009 No commentsInfluenced by Thomas Hobbes, among many others, Baruch (Benedict) Spinoza offers an interesting twist on the social contract tradition while also containing much of what made Hobbes, Locke and even Rousseau so popular among political theorists. While he offers a similar path of rational growth, from the state of nature to the nature of the state by compact, he does so in a fashion wholly different from any of the social contract theorists. Instead of arguing for a juridical state, like Hobbes, and arguing for any form of legal philosophy, like Rousseau, Spinoza takes an approach which strives for maxims for actions based on empirical knowledge. (Geismann 48) By examining Spinoza’s notion of the state of nature, the extent of power for the sovereign and the ends of a commonwealth both clear similarities and key differences can be found that make Spinoza’s theory very unique while maintaining it in the tradition so popular during his time.
-
Escaping International Anarchy: Reconceptualizing the Ethics of World Politics
Posted on February 17th, 2009 No commentsThe creation of Presidential Decision Directive 25 by President Bill Clinton in 1993, and the continuance of the directive under George W. Bush has brought to bear a real conundrum for those interested in international relations, and particularly the ethics of international relations. This Directive, which aimed to reform US involvement in international peacekeeping by making involvement dependent upon there being “vital interests” at stake effectively allows the US to avoid intervening in humanitarian crises abroad. While it may not be the only initiative that takes a step away from an international ethic it may well be the pinnacle of the problem. (Burkhalter) It is because the world at large has almost completely forgotten its promise to not let grave atrocities like the Holocaust happen again that a formulation of international ethics is now so important. Absent a workable morality nation-states will continue to work under the guise solely of ‘national interest’ and be justified in doing so. Therefore, the aim here is to first examine the current state of international affairs from an ethical viewpoint, then establish a normative theory with the aim of providing a workable solution to the problems associated with the current system. Finally, it will be important to defend this new normative theory against alternative theories and against general opposition to ensure that it won’t fall victim to the international community’s egoism like previous theories seemingly have.