George Washington

Hands down, I would nominate George Washington for the “Presidential Hall of Fame”. Quoting from George Washington's eulogy, the famous cavalry General Henry “Light-Horse Harry” Lee describes George Washington as “First in war, first in peace, and first in the hearts of his countrymen”. Washington was a man who had a selfless devotion to his country; he believed in liberty and freedom for all; he had integrity with a total sense of moral responsibility, and above all played a key role in our nation's history. I believe he indeed walked “ untrodden ground” in his presidency and became a “precedent” or landmark for all the presidents who followed him. In the following paragraphs, I will present my case why the attributes mentioned above, along with others, I believe, have given this first President of the United States of America the position as the “Father of Our Country” and the 'Presidential Hall of Frame'. (pbs.org, 2010) (biography.com, 2010)
I do not believe George Washington, himself, probably realized when he was a young man that he was destined to become our first President. His innate tenaciousness for learning did not only stop with his limited time in school, but through his need to experience the world around him from human contact and through the opportunities and challenges he encountered on his way. In many ways, I believe his bountiful past experiences impacted his character, courage, and sense of who he was about to become, President to the United States. His older step-brother Lawrence, prior to his death, had a great effect on George Washington life after their father died when George was at age 11. Lawrence Washington, educated in England, was commissioned under Admiral Vernon to fight a Britain's squabble with Spain and after arriving home he joined the Virginia militia as a ranking officer. He influenced George Washington in the direction of the military, and cultivated George with ethics, mathematics, music, books and the theater. In 1749, at age 17, George Washington was appointed official surveyor for the Shenandoah Valley. His comfort with the outdoors and participation in surveying jobs for Lord Fairfax exposed George to the wilderness's rough terrain and Native Americans, which also became attributes to his military career. (biography.com, 2010)

In 1752, the surveying experience gave George Washington credential to joined the Virginia militia where he was commissioned the rank of major. This was just a stepping stone to the eventual commander in chief. The beginnings of the encroachment from the French on the English territory, led George Washington's military career in fighting in the French and Indian War 1954. I can only surmise that Washington's initial weakness may have been due to the lack of any 'military' experience especially fighting the Native Indians;(prehistorylleyforge) however, his innate ingenuity, good judgment eventually overcame his weakness and became his strength. After his first brief engagement with the French, George Washington writes to his brother Jack describing the moment, “ I heard the bullets whistle, and, believe me, there is something charming in the sound.”(37) With in the coming days, months, and years another story would exhibit what it was like to be defeated by the enemy. One of Washington's first taste of defeat was when he volunteered to be an aid-De-camp to the British Major General Braddock in retaking Fort Duquesne from the French in 1755. That Battle of the Monongahela was fought against the French and their allied Native Americans. The battled ended with a bloody defeat for the British, a dying General Braddock, along with the lost of most of their total advanced force ; however it was the brave Colonel George Washington who maneuvered the wounded General and the rest of the men still standing out of harm's way.(nps.gov/archive/fone/fonehist) It was the same battle where George Washington experienced “two horses shot out from under him and miraculously was unharmed as a bullet rushed through his hat [while] three more passed through his coat”. ( A.M. Allison, Perry, J.A., pg 37, 2010) (biography.com, 2010),

Washington maintains his existence came “by the miraculous care of Providence”. This defeat did not stop Washington from performing his duty as a Colonel. Due to the war was extending into years, he learned from past mistakes and adapted away from the British tactical maneuvers with his own maneuvers which gave his men a fighting chance to succeed and to survive. Washington also made his soldiers change their uniforms into “Indian hunting garb” for durability and flexibility. (biography.com, 2010) ( A.M. Allison, Perry, J.A., pg 47, 2010)
The war had weakened Washington's health with bouts of dysentery. In December 1758 he resigned from the military and return to beloved Mount Vernon. After hearing of Washington resignation, his regiment responded to Washington in writing their regrets in loosing “such a great commander, ...sincere friend, and so affable a companion.” In 1770, after the French and Indian War, fifteen years after Braddock's defeat, George Washington meets an old Native American Chief of the northwestern tribe who fought along with the French during that very battle with Braddock. The old Chief shares his prophecy with George Washington along with other men that have accompanied Washington that time.. The Chief states: “Listen! The Great Spirit protects that man, [directing it to George Washington] and guides his destinies – he will become the chief of nations, and a people yet unborn will hail him as the founder of a mighty empire!” This expressive acknowledgment was never passed on by Washington himself; although his friend Dr. James Craik, who also witness this event, eventually shared the Native American Chief's prophecy with the soldiers in the Revolutionary War. (biography.com, 2010) ( A.M. Allison, Perry, J.A., pg 59-60, 61, 2010)

Between wars, George Washington married a wealthy, widow Martha Custis, assumes his duties in the House of Burgesses and eventually restores Mount Vernon, along with farming. In 1763, a treaty is finally signed between the England and France, ending the French and Indian War, consequently, the Motherland decides that the colonies should help with the burden of debt created by French and Indian war. In 1975, the parliament passes the Stamp Act, which were taxes on newspapers and other legal documents. This did not sit well with the colonist for a couple of reasons. The Parliament could not pass taxes on the colonists because they did not have direct representation in the Parliament. Secondly, the colonists believed they do their own taxation through their own assemblies.(98) Essentially is this not the beginnings of the domino effect for independence from the British? George Washington could not have said it better when addressing a correspondent to the Parliament, “the Parliament of Great Britain have no more right to put their hands into my pocket, without my consent, than I have to put my hands into yours for money.” Distrust among the colonist and Great Britain begin to develop to a new level, by 1968 British troops arrive in Boston to enforce custom laws. June 16 1775 George Washington becomes commander in chief of the Continental Army. War is surfacing on the horizon. Commander George Washington writes his opinion about the war to his friend George W. Fairfax who now lives in England, “Unhappy as it is … to reflect that a brother's sword has been sheathed in a brother's breast, and that once happy and peaceful plains of America are either to be drenched with blood or inhibited by slaves. Sad alternative! But can a virtuous man hesitate in his place?” (767) (US Military.gov, 2010) ( A.M. Allison, Perry, J.A., pg 98, 767, 2010)

Declaration of Independence signed on July 4, 1776. Relationship with England has become null and void because of Great Britain's breach of contract with the colonies, the War of Independence advancing. The closing of the Revolution War came in 1783; however our valiant commander- in- chief stopped a military “armed” revolt against their country. The officer and solders having not been paid for eight years that they have sacrificed for their country. They blamed congress and most of all they were criticizing their commander in chief for his failure to see that it being done. George Washington showed up to one of their meetings and addressed his “honorable” men about their plight for justice. His first commentary did not change the officers' nor soldiers ' opinion about their cause; however his second speech did. General Washington stands in front of his men and pulls out a letter from his pocket that has been written by a Virginia congressmen in support of the military plight. He fumbles to put on his reading glasses that no one in the audience has seen before and states, “ Gentlemen, you must pardon me. I have grown gray in your service and now find myself growing blind.” The moment and modest gesture created by Washington emotionally moved his fellow officers and soldiers. They decided to patiently wait for congress for their reimbursement, which it did come. Washington indeed prevented a military dictatorship. .(wsu.ed, 2010) (biography.com, 2010) ( A.M. Allison, Perry, J.A., pg 385, 2010)

Although the colonies where now rejoicing their independence from Great Britain, they had no real central government to guide them in their endeavors to prosper. George Washington felt this restlessness among the 13 colonies and he saw the necessity having a central government to bring unification among the colonies. Washington describes the colonies' position as “ Like a young heir come prematurity to a large inheritance, we shall wanton and run riot until we have brought our reputation to the brink of ruin;” (455) Thus the answer to his fear of what may happen to this independent nation was the birth of a new constitution September 17, 1787. ( A.M. Allison, Perry, J.A., pg 455, 489, 2010) (pbs.org, 2010) (biography.com, 2010)

Up to now, I hope I have imprinted facts why this great man George Washington was so exceptional to be our first president. It was almost like the “providence”, whom Washington frequently referred to often, was paving the way. The Question I need to review now, is why I nominated George Washington for the 'Presidential Hall of Fame'. Perhaps the first conclusion I may have submitted to myself is that the survival of our country might not have been made possible if not for George Washington's influence. Fittingly, he was an inspirational leader for our military, had exemplary character and through his calm nature and deeds , he held the most esteem presence among those around him. No wonder in January,1789 the union selected their electors, in February, they cast their votes, but it was not until April did they count the ballot. Weather prevented to this sooner. April 6, the electors voted unanimously s for George Washington for president. John Adams was named Vice president. Once it was established Washington was going to be President, there was no doubt how to address him, Mr. President. April 30,1789 the inauguration took place on a crowded Federal Hall portico, in New York City [temporary used as the United States capital] It is interesting to note that when finished repeating the last word of the oath “I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of the President...” he added the words “So help me, God,” followed by bowing and kissing the Bible.( A.M. Allison, Perry, J.A, pg 520, 2010)
George Washington's uniqueness was he did not want to be President. He presided over the convention forming the constitution and at that time felt his work was done. He just wanted to retire from public life. He writes to his good friend Lafayette about his personal dilemma, “The presidency has no enticing charms and no fascinating allurements for me. My only wish is to live and die an honest man on my own farm.” However, with Hamilton encouragement, George Washington conceded that if he accepts the position of president it “would be the greatest sacrifice of my personal feelings and wishes that ever I have been called upon to make.” (biography.com, 2010) ( A.M. Allison, Perry, J.A., pg 508-509, 2010)

“As the first of everything, in our situation will serve to establish a Precedent,” Washington wrote James Madison, “it is devoutly wished on my part, that these precedents may be fixed on true principles.” New independent nation with a new constitution along with a new government, could be overwhelming to for anyone, except President George Washington. He looked at the challenge with “I walk on untraded ground” with seriousness and believed “The Constitution of the United States, and the laws made under it, must mark the line of my official conduct. President Washington had an criteria in choosing his cabinet of “four” which are the following: (1) The candidate must be fit to fill an office. (2) The person must have served well in other positions in the past. (3) As much as possible, all states must be equally represented in the appointive positions. Washington proceeded to choose Thomas Jefferson to be the Secretary of State, Alexander Hamilton to be Secretary of Treasury, Edmund Randolph to be Attorney General, and Henry Knox as Secretary of War. During the inauguration, the oath was given by the Chancellor of New York, and not by the justice department, because they did not have a supreme court at that time. Washington nominated John Jay as the first Chief Justice of the new Supreme Court. One of many points I admire about Washington is he made decisions when he had all the information . He also did this with his cabinet members. He would visit each separately, get their opinion and when he heard everyone's voiced opinion he would make a conclusion. (biography.com, 2010) ( A.M. Allison, Perry, J.A., pg 524, 2010)

To conclude this paper, when George Washington became President, he realized the his own countrymen and the Powers of Europe would be watching every move he made. I like to share some of his precedents not already mention. In the constitution, the executive branch was to receive advice and consent from the Senate in regards of treaties. Washington initially went to the Senate to discuss a treaty with the Creek Indians. It did not go well and Washington became frustrated with them . Because of this experience he refused to go directly to the Senate again and neither has any president after him. The Whiskey Rebellion was another occasion when he wanted to make a precedent stance. Congress passed in1790, an excise tax on whiskey. States rebel and sometimes violence occur because of it. Washington wanted the people to know that the government had the power and the will to enforce laws created. He dressed up in his military uniform and led his troops against them and the people making trouble dispersed, ending the rebellion. Again, Federal troops have been used to enforce Federal law by presidents after Washington. Lastly President Washington established a precedent for only a two term for the presidency. (biography.com, 2010)



References
Anonymous. (2010). George Washington
Retrieved September 05, 2010, from Biography website
http://www.biography.com/articles/George-Washington-9524786
Anonymous. (2010). A History of US. Webisode 2: Revolution. Segment 7
Retrieved September 05, 2010, from PBS website
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/historyofus/web02/segment7.html
Anonymous. (2010). George Washington
Retrieved September 05, 2010, from US Army website
http://www.history.army.mil/books/RevWar/ss/washington.htm

A.M. Allison, Perry, J.A. (Ed.). (2010). "The Thick of Battle"
The Real George Washington, Eighth Edition. (pg 37) USA:
National Center for Constitutional Studies.

A.M. Allison, Perry, J.A. (Ed.). (2010). "The Thick of Battle"
The Real George Washington, Eighth Edition. (pg 47) USA:
National Center for Constitutional Studies.

A.M. Allison, Perry, J.A. (Ed.). (2010). "Defending the Frontier"
The Real George Washington, Eighth Edition. (pp. 59-60) USA:
National Center for Constitutional Studies.

A.M. Allison, Perry, J.A. (Ed.). (2010). "Defending the Frontier"
The Real George Washington, Eighth Edition. (pp. 61) USA:
National Center for Constitutional Studies.

A.M. Allison, Perry, J.A. (Ed.). (2010). "Seeds of Rebellion"
The Real George Washington, Eighth Edition. (pp. 98) USA:
National Center for Constitutional Studies.

A.M. Allison, Perry, J.A. (Ed.). (2010). "Timeless Treasures from George Washington"
The Real George Washington, Eighth Edition. (pg. 767) USA:
National Center for Constitutional Studies.

A.M. Allison, Perry, J.A. (Ed.). (2010). "A Half Starved Limping Government"
The Real George Washington, Eighth Edition. (pg. 455) USA:
National Center for Constitutional Studies.
A.M. Allison, Perry, J.A. (Ed.). (2010). "Forming the New Constitution"
The Real George Washington, Eighth Edition. (pg. 489) USA:
National Center for Constitutional Studies.

A.M. Allison, Perry, J.A. (Ed.). (2010). "Best Fitted for the Presidency"
The Real George Washington, Eighth Edition. (pg. 508-509) USA:
National Center for Constitutional Studies.

Cap and Tax

Dear Paul Ryan,

I think you should be against the cap and trade bill. They say that cap and trade will limit or cap, carbon dioxide emissions for fossil fuel. Over time, such a cap will require greater cuts in emissions. They're doing cap and trade, because S 2191 which will target carbon emissions aggressively will be costlier than other improved versions that will give economy more time to adjust to energy constraints. Why can't you find a better cap and trade than S 2191. S 2191 raises the cost of $800 to $1300 per household by 2015. It would raise from $1,500 - $2,500 in 2050. There has been so many negative surprises in Europe's Kyoto Protocol., their reduce greenhouse gas emissions. I wouldn't wish a 1.6+ trillion dollar tax over a eight year period on all Americans and private sector. The government doesn't see it as a tax as long as it keeps spending it for some poor reason. Cap and Trade is not a dollar to dollar equivalent of direct cash flow. The reduction in GDP will allow real wages, because of the labor supply changes and reductions in productivity in capital and labor. The jobs lost for S 2191 is supposed to be 1.2 million to 2.3 million by 2015 according to Charles River Associates. S.2191 will really raise domestic manufacturing costs. Developing nations refuse to impose similar restrictions. American economy would experience a lot of outsourcing of manufacturing jobs. You don't want to go down this slippery slope. The cap and trade bill S 2191 is just a government re-engineering of the American economy! The congress has no intention of using this money for tax cuts on small business community. Why do you think businesses call it eco-socialism? Don't you think that the government will get more of the tax than small businesses. (littlegreenfootballs, 2009)(Justmeans, 2009)(Heritage Foundation, 2010) (Wall Street Journal, 2010)(wikipedia, 2010)
Why do you need to cut emissions by government control when the technology is available, companies will do it themselves. Businesses don't want energy rationing going on in a country as large as ours and resources as abundant as ours. There are some incredible hydrogen power plant technologies that don't pollute the Earth as much. Namely, laser reactors, ITER and HiPER reactors made in the United States and France don't pollute the earth at all, because the nuclear waste is completely saturated at the fusion temperatures. In the future, to close that 33% energy usage, hydrogen power plants could do that easily. United States manufactures its nuclear fuel in Iowa and North Carolina unlike most countries that dig Uranium up. Shockwave Power inside the revolutionary hydrosonic pumps designs can apply heat and evaporate liquids without scale buildup, it proves more efficient process for mixing dissimilar fluids. This can be used for heating and these are a lot cheaper than nuclear power plants. It has reduced energy requirements, improved process efficiencies, and elimination of process downtime. The Shockwave Power generator takes fluid and with the geometry of the holes in the cylinder, clearance between the cylinder, and rotational speed created differences where bubbles form and collapse. the collapsing bubbles create shockwaves for heat. It generates 33% more heat than electricity. The new inexpensive nuclear power plants burn up significantly more of the nuclear waste by firing streams of neutrons into the waste. Hybrid Fusion-fission reactors are about five years out until the technology is ready to mass produce. The laser reactor the DOE is building in North California is supposed to have tests into 2040! You should need to build nuclear power plants up until then to fill demand. The government could buy hydro-sonic pumps and would be very near the 33% savings in Kilowatts in my opinion. Then build those hybrid fusion-fission reactors. China likes to think this way too so it is the right thing to do. The S-2191 would reduce US economy GDP 1.5% to 2.5% annually, many net jobs would be lost, and would cost 100s of billions in a few decades. A new act making a government agency that protects the environment makes more sense than cap and trade's eco-socialism and it's way cheaper. If America have Cap and trade, where is America going to get enough GDP to pay for nationalized healthcare? The country would have double dip recessions and wouldn't be able to cover both. (Parsons, S, 2009)(University of Texas, 2009)( Schwartz, A, 2009)(RexResearch, 2010)(Fox News, 2010)

In a new little Ice Age, America would need more nuclear power plants, fusion power plants and hydrosonic pumps which are self-reliant and output more energy than inputted. We manufacture our own nuclear power fuel. There are always places to store the nuclear fuel. I think that China's idea of manufacturing nuclear power plants is a lot better idea. We should do all of these options, because we have when 2017 until China surpasses our GDP. I think how does Serbia in Russia survives with cold weather and low sunlight? Russians build a lot of nuclear power plants of course! I don't see why we can't start replacing the power plants that are ready to retire! This is why I don't believe the federal government should implement eco-socialist cap and trade. (nextbigfuture, 2010)(wikipedia, 2010)



Reference

Anonymous. (2010). Cap and Trade Pros and Cons
Retrieved August 22, 2010, from littlegreenfootballs website
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/34066_Cap_and_Trade_Pros_and_Cons
Anonymous. (2010). What is Carbon cap and Trade in US and In Europe part 2
Retrieved August 22, 2010, from justmeans website
http://www.justmeans.com/What-is-Carbon-Cap-Trade-In-US-In-Europe-Part-2/9795.html
Anonymous. (2010). Climate Change - Letting Go of Perfect Solutions Necessary
Retrieved August 22, 2010, from justmeans website
http://www.justmeans.com/Climate-Change-Letting-go-of-Perfect-Solution-Necessary/6287.html
Anonymous. (2010). Beware of Cap and Trade Climate Bills
Retrieved August 22, 2010, from Heritage Foundation website
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2007/12/Beware-of-Cap-and-Trade-Climate-Bills
Anonymous. (2009, March 6). The Climate Change Lobby Has Regrets
Retrieved August 22, 2010, from Wall Street Journal website
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123630254209847245.html
Anonymous. (2009, March 6). CBO Grossly Underestimates costs of Cap and Trade
Retrieved August 22, 2010, from Heritage Foundation website
http://blog.heritage.org/2009/06/22/cbo-grossly-underestimates-costs-of-cap-and-trade/
Anonymous. (2009, March 5). How to Hide a Trillion Dollars
Retrieved August 22, 2010, from Heritage Foundation website
http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/05/how-to-hide-a-trillion-dollars/
Schwartz, A. (2009, June 01). Worlds largest laser to Attempt Nuclear Fusion
Retrieved August 22, 2010, from Inhabitant website
http://www.inhabitat.com/2009/06/01/worlds-largest-laser-to-attempt-nuclear-fusion/
Anonymous (2009, June 01). HydroSonic Pumps
Retrieved August 22, 2010, from RexResearch website
http://www.rexresearch.com/griggs/griggs.htm
Parsons, S. (2009, June 22). New Nuclear Reactors may almost Completely Destroy
Atomic Waste. Retrieved August 22, 2010, from Inhabitat website
http://inhabitat.com/2010/03/22/new-nuclear-reactors-may-almost-completely-destroy-atomic-waste/
Anonymous. (2009, January 27). Nuclear Fusion-Fission Hybrid Could Destroy Nuclear Waste
And Contribute to Carbon-Free Energy Future
Atomic Waste. Retrieved August 22, 2010, from University of Texas website
http://www.utexas.edu/news/2009/01/27/nuclear_hybrid/
Anonymous. (2010, August 2). History and Future of US and China GDP
. Retrieved August 22, 2010, from Next Big Future website
http://nextbigfuture.com/2010/08/history-and-future-of-us-and-china-gdp.html
Anonymous. (2010). Eco-socialism
Retrieved August 22, 2010, from Wikipedia website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eco-socialism
Anonymous. (2009, June 1). Giant Laser Reactor Unveiled in California
Retrieved August 22 2010, from Fox News website
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,522857,00.html
Anonymous. (2010). International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor
Retrieved August 22, 2010, from Wikipedia website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITER
Anonymous. (2010). High Power laser Energy Research facility
Retrieved August 22, 2010, from Wikipedia website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiPER

Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau

In the United States today we have a lot of different views as to how the country should be run. The two major political parties are at ends with each other and every month we can see that there are wars waging inside the Senate and House of Representatives. How do you decide who is correct? How do we know what the correct political order is? To get to any conclusion you have to ask yourself, what is the state of nature? How can mankind continue to make strides in human development and the arts of science and nature? Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Thomas Hobbes both attempted to tackle these questions and develop an irrefutable conclusion as to what the state of nature is and how a nation should be run to achieve the greatest success possible.

Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau were born almost 125 years apart, but missed each other by only 33 years and were both a large part in the enlightenment period of history. Both started with the same core idea that every man is born free, but from that standpoint, they go into completely different directions. Hobbes, for example, believed that man was evil by nature and that we needed on sovereign to govern the masses and if you didn’t abide by the laws of the sovereign you could leave. Rousseau, on the other hand, believed that man was free to do as he wishes with only a morale code to abide by and a representative government set up to work for the greater good of the people as a whole unit (OSU, 2002). So how did these two great minds end up in completely different end places? Rousseau adored and considered Hobbes as one of this greatest influences and spent many years studying up on his teachings. While Hobbes writes about “the mutual transferring of rights” (i.e. implied contracts) (Hobbes, 1651) and extensively writes about what contracts we hold as humans to one another, Rousseau writes about how man must be “forced to be free” (Rousseau, 1762) by a form of democracy in which the duties of the representatives are to enforce where the people are to enact (Bertram, 2013).

Jean-Jacques Rousseau was born in 1712 in the city-state of Geneva. His father was a watchmaker and he did not know his mother since she did nine days after he was born. During his formative years he received most of his education from his father who, after Rousseau had learned to read on his own, had him read many books about the Roman Empire and those written by Plutarch, Plato, and others on the republic of Rome.  When he was ten years old, his father had to flee the city in order to escape arrest, and he was sent to live with a Calvinist pastor and apprenticed as an engraver for six years until he left the city to see the world and learn more of the world around him (Bertram, 2013).

It was during this time wandering that Rousseau converted to Catholicism and first saw the corruption within himself when he falsely accused another servant in a household he was working of stealing a ribbon (OSU, 2002). He continued to travel and learn for many more years coming under the influence of those he met – at one point writing operas, becoming a teacher, and becoming the secretary to the French Ambassador (Bertram, 2013).

One day while he went to visit Diderot in prison, Rousseau saw a newspaper that was holding an essay competition in which the Academy of Dijon asked whether man’s progression in art and science has improved or corrupted the minds and morals of the people.  It is then that the gears in his head went into overdrive and he formed his belief that man is inherently good by nature, but that it is society which turns man evil. Throughout his life, Rousseau debated many other philosophers on what makes man good or evil and why, which pulled primarily from his own life experiences including his putting all five of his children at a foundling hospital shortly after birth, his visits to the Italian countryside where he wrote many operas,  and most importantly his exile from Paris and Geneva. He lived the rest of his life in England living with many friends he had made along his travels, but was sent through periods of mental instability which got more frequent as he aged (Bertram, 2013).

During the high point of his life, Rousseau published The Social Contract which centered on how we have progressed from being a free man in nature to a corrupt society. Rousseau’s most popular quote, which helps to get a better understanding of his world views is that “man is born free, and he is everywhere in chains” (Rousseau, 1762). This brought the ideas of his first and second discourses full circle to be proven correct in The Social Contract, he argues that we began our lives as humans as complete equals no matter who you were because we were originally solitary beings. Everything and anything that we needed we were able to get from nature such as food or shelter, but as we grew, we soon got concepts of ownership because we were living in closer and closer proximity to each other. Where one man could own the land, another had to work hard for it. However, in his book Rousseau discusses the central problem with living in close proximity to one another; by living together and forming a collective group of people you have to submit your own personal wills to the wills of the people, otherwise known as the general will of the people.

He argued that this is how we started the real foundation of society and that by conforming as one we work towards the betterment of mankind and the common good. The common good of the people meant, at the same time, more progress in the arts which in turn meant giving up more of your own inherent freedoms to the general will which is brought forward by representatives of a specific collective to work through any and all issues a person may have and make it the law of the entire land (Rousseau, 1762). This many seem like a familiar process to many of us because in Rousseau’s The Social Contract he actually lays out the foundation of republicanism and the democratic process which we still use today.

On a different end of the spectrum we have Thomas Hobbes who was born in 1588 to a clergyman in Malmesbury, England. He was a highly educated man in that he studied at Oxford University and later worked for a wealthy family that allowed him the opportunity to continue to educate himself and his student by using the family’s money to get access to books freely and allowed him to connect easily with other philosophers and scientists, most notably with René Descartes and Francis Bacon (Stewart, 2013).

            It is during a decade in exile from England in France that Hobbes wrote his popular book to date, Leviathan.  Leviathan is a dark story that focuses on Hobbes’ beliefs that man is selfish, materialistic, and without the help of a single sovereign the world would be in a constant state of war. Hobbes, similarly to Rousseau, believed that man was originally entirely free and all of humankind was equal, but that is where the similarities between Rousseau and Hobbes end. Hobbes was in the belief that without some sort of government that was more closely aligned to a monarchy rather than a democracy (though it was more of a middle ground between the two during his time) (Stewart, 2013), man was unable to function properly because in nature there were no rules, no contracts outright, and that because there was no definite distinction between good and evil (it is up to the individual to decide what he decides is good or evil) that greed can always take over and that “the weakest has strength enough to kill the strongest” (Hobbes, 1651). This meant that while you may be the weakest man physically you still have enough strength to instill fear into your fellow man’s heart and that you can muster up enough strength to put a dagger into your enemy’s heart while he slept (Friend, 2012).

            It is from this that Hobbes argues we must have a contract with each other that we mutually transfer our natural rights such. This means that I will give up my natural right to steal your chickens because you also give up your right to steal mine. This brings forth the idea that if another man will not “lay down their right, as well as he, then there is no reason for anyone to divest himself of his… that is the law of the gospel: Whatsoever you require that others should do to you, that do ye to them” (Hobbes, 1651). This is what we know today as the Golden Rule, and he took it rather seriously.

During his time, he believed that it was the work of a single sovereign to dictate an equal punishment for those who did wrong to another, similar to an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.  He stated that it is the sovereign’s responsibility to dictate and rule over the “leviathan” that is the state or commonwealth in order to keep it safe from itself and from others who have gotten out of hand and broken the contracts we hold (Stewart, 2013).

So how did two philosophers who both believe that all men are created equal in nature end up with two completely different ideas of what the social contract theory is and how we need to operate in order to continue to achieve greatness? A lot of this has to do with how each was brought up, Hobbes believed that man was evil from the beginning and is good because of the works of parliaments and others and this is likely because he had access to other philosophers, books, scientists, and an Oxford education during his formative years. Rousseau, on the other hand, had a rough childhood in that he was moved around, had to take jobs in which he worked for little pay and made sacrifices in order to just survive. He saw first-hand how one man will voluntarily throw another man’s well-being to ruins without any thought or even any reason.

Their lives are reflected in their works and show what we already know today in that a lot of what you view is politically correct or how the government should act or react is based on how you were brought up. The life of Rousseau was challenging not only from the beginning with his mother’s death to his father’s abandonment but his own exile and at the end of his life where he struggled with self-identity, and he wrote about how advancements in the arts and wealth are what brought the world to lose its own freedom and corrupt society. On the other hand, you have Hobbes’ life which was a lot better off than Rousseau’s because of his almost unlimited access to knowledge and had a more stable livelihood where he argued that it is from the privileges that come with having advanced as a society we are able to learn to be good beings and can work toward the good of society without losing our own freedoms.

References

Bertram, C. (2013). Jean Jacques Rousseau. Retrieved from Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy website: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rousseau/

Friend, C. (2012). Social Contract Theory. Retrieved from Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy (IEP) website: http://www.iep.utm.edu/soc-cont/

Hobbes, T. (1651). The Leviathan.

Jean-Jacques, R. (1762). The Social Contract.

Oregon State University Social Sciences Department (OSU). (2002). Great Philosophers: Thomas Hobbes. Retrieved from Oregon State University website: http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl201/modules/Philosophers/Hobbes/hobbes.html

Stewart, D. (2013). Thomas Hobbes. Retrieved from Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy website: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hobbes/

Martin Luther vs. Plato

            Imagine using a time machine to go back to the period of the classical thinkers like Plato and Martin Luther. When given the chance, what would you ask them? While the possibilities are practically endless, these two great philosophers revealed in their works, the circumstances and political and social atmosphere required to create and maintain a good society. It will be discovered how Plato’s ideas found in The Republic reveal what justice is in three realms, political, social and individual. The relationships between classes create a just society. It will be shown that while Martin Luther’s ideas on Christianity and the ideal society are vastly different than Plato’s, each great thinker contributes something to political thought that remains relevant today and elements of each author can contribute to a more ideal society, even in modern times.

            History reveals that many systems of thought have existed and each following generation has viewed the world with a slightly different lens. While this is clear, many of the same social issues have been discussed since the beginning of recorded history. In order to get a clearer understanding and foundation for comparison, we must first focus our attention on the life and theories of Plato. It is said that political thought began to emerge around 400 B.C through the philosophical ideas created by Socrates. While he was very well known for his contributions to political thought, he never officially recorded his ideas for others to share. This is what makes Plato so important and a worthy subject of research, as he was the man to follow Socrates and was responsible for recording much of what is known about both Socrates and Plato’s ideas, as an offshoot of his teacher. Plato’s method of thinking was different than that of the thinkers who came before him. Authors note “Plato’s explorations of political questions in the form of written dialogues, or fictitious philosophic conversations, that are still admired for the beauty of their composition and studied for the depth of their wisdom” (Deutsch & Fornieri, 2009, p. 2). What is remarkable about this great thinker was his devotion to truth and justice, through continuous and deep reflection. Perhaps Plato’s most notorious political concepts are contained within his great work known as the Republic. In this work, he utilizes his creation of dialogues to evaluate many aspects of life, particularly of great relevance to our discussion, is the idea of a good society.

            Throughout the Republic, Plato continues to utilize Socrates as a main character of his philosophical inquiry. Through the conversations with close friends and other well-known thinkers, he is able to bring up the ideas commonly held by others and follow up with reasons why these ideas are valid or not, and to what extent. During book one of the Republic, his conversation with others focuses on the meaning of justice, and commonly held notions of how to go about acting upon this idea. It is said “In response to Thrasymachus’contention that injustice is more profitable than justice, Socrates observes that in justice leads to faction or conflict among human beings, so that they cannot then cooperate with a view to a common enterprise” (Deutsch & Fornieri, 2009, p. 4). With this thought in mind, what can be said about the social and political climate that allows for the creation of order yet seeks to create harmony and find the good of the community? These ideas are discussed in further detail in book one and other sections of the Republic.

            The nature of justice itself is only an intangible dream. What makes the ideal worthy of study is the practical application of the ideal settings in which justice can thrive and the common good can be met, thus creating the ideal society. One main concept discussed by Plato is the idea of social classes, giving way to a more productive society and one which allows specialized involvement of each member of society for a preconceived purpose. In this way, Plato also goes on to discuss the importance of the ideal society having appropriate rule. This can be established through a relatively unknown concept at the time. Plato believed that while each class had their purpose in this ideal society, the ruler should be a philosopher, capable of dialectic inquiry. Authors note;

He concludes by writing that those who become properly trained in argumentation must be tested in the city’s matters before being allowed to practice philosophy and rule the city…Plato argues through the allegory of the Cave and the divided line that philosophers possess true knowledge, and thus are best suited to be guardians (Lublink, 2011, p.5)

The idea of an educated and justice seeking ruler is not the only forefront of the just society but also includes three other classes, with could be said to be just as important. Many have argued the direct reason for acting just during very trying times as experienced by Plato and his fellow thinkers. Due to an imbalance of power and strength, injustice, as manifested through acting out on what one wants despite the chances of others getting hurt as a result, is not the ideal state of being for the common good. We should understand that “Rather than suffer this, the many agree to treat each other justly—not because they believe justice is good in itself, but rather because they fear being treated unjustly by others” (Deutsch & Fornieri, 2009, p. 5) This inherent need throughout society would benefit from a system intended on creating harmony. Perhaps one of the most interesting and important additions to the ideal city is out of the need to find a balance. By following this line of thinking it can be said,

Thus Socrates (as purposed by Plato) contends that the human community requires a division of labor according to which people work only at the jobs for which they are best suited by nature, or for which they have the greatest aptitude. ‘‘One man, one art’’ and ‘‘minding one’s own business’’ become fundamental principles of the Republic’s city in speech (Deutsch & Fornieri, 2009).

Three classes each have their own role in the ideal society. The Artisans purpose is to create goods that can be used by the rest of society. Next, there must be citizens willing to lay their life on the line and protect the public as well as carry out orders of the ruler. Finally, the ruler is meant to be full of wisdom and seek justice. This is why the ruler should ideally be a philosopher. In some ways, the ruler would be known as the true guardians of the city. Authors state “The city’s guardians must be ‘naturally dialectical’, which means that they must be capable of achieving the kind of unified vision described in the allegory of the Cave” (Lublink, 2011, p. 5).

Not only is the class system an important part of the ideal society, other subjects work to form elements that either add or take away from achieving this end. Other virtues are important for the individual as well as the whole society and can be particularly important for the ruler.

These ideas are the emphasis on self-discipline to control physical desires, the value of dialogue, and the requirement that leaders of the ideal state must have acquired adequate knowledge, sufficient experience and wisdom that comes from reaching a mature age before they can start their work as rulers (Lotter, 2003, p.190)

The notion of the importance of wealth in the idea society is also discussed by Plato, and is imperative in understanding his political thought. Not only does this notion allow for the betterment of the citizens but also perpetuates Plato’s notion of seeking and being just. Plato uses dialect found in the Republic to speak on important issues concerning individual morality and thus, also introduces us to circumstances which would either create the ideal society or prevent it. In speaking with an old man in the beginning of the Republic, Plato (technically his characters) question the value of old age and in doing so, gets the response that some money is necessary to help aid morality and good behavior. Authors note “By implication Plato is saying that a lack of money-poverty-makes it very difficult to live a moral life. Adequate resources to escape poverty thus seem a prerequisite for living Plato’s moral life” (Lotter, 2003, p. 192). Other important subjects relevant to fostering the ideal city according to Plato include education and the development of the youth. Perhaps he believed that raising the youth required careful planning and deliberate introduction to certain ideas. Deutsch and Fornieri note;

Both the formation of character in the young and the preservation of character in the mature, it seems, require that some things not be heard. Thus the city in speech, the just city, requires a regime of censorship or public control of speech and artistic expression (Deutsch & Fornieri, 2009, p.13).

The ideas developed by Plato are ones which may seem foreign to the modern society but used and adapted accordingly could serve to bolster a stronger economy and create a just community of loving and caring citizens. The practical application of such ideas will be discussed later in terms of how our modern society may benefit from reverting to classical modes of thought.

            Many philosophers have learned and adapted theories of previous great thinkers while some have looked at an issue or concept in a completely different way. Given the time gap between Plato and Martin Luther, it would be easy to assume that the theories held by each would be drastically different even when attempting to find solutions to similar problems. The theories held by Martin Luther will be the next topic of discussion. A central focus of Luther’s is the idea of giving an order to the balance between politics and Christian thinking. It is through his ideas on Christianity and just actions that we may understand what he may have believed to be the ideal society. He is well known for his actions in resisting the Catholic Church and many of their political expressions of authority over the common people. Authors note the extremist views of the church during the time of Martin Luther in stating “By the end of the Middle Ages such religious claims over the political realm had been formalized in the clearest and most extreme fashion in the idea of absolute papal supremacy” (Deutsch & Fornieri, 2009, p. 145) It was Luther who played a significant role in changing the tide of roman catholic rule and thus helped changed the political culture of the era.

            An important concept to understand is the basis of Christian belief and distinction between Roman Catholicism and Lutherans ideas. Previous thinkers like Aristotle developed the notion of learning to cultivate virtuous and moral behavior through equally virtuous and moral deeds. Authors note;

Theologians from Aquinas down to Ockham and Gabriel Biel had adapted this teaching in various ways to limit the biblical teaching concerning the fallenness of human nature and thereby to define a role in the economy of salvation for the moral efforts of human beings” (Deutshce & Fornieri, 2009).

Luther believed that the Roman church used this thinking to control the citizens of the community in expecting them to do certain deeds, all of which did not necessarily help the individual gain religious salvation. According to his famous posting on the church door at Wittenberg;

For this reason most people are necessarily deceived by that indiscriminate and high-sounding promise of release from penalty… Thus those indulgence preachers are in error who says that a man is absolved from every penalty and saved by papal indulgences (Fordham, 2013).

 It is with this focus that we could take elements of Luther’s beliefs to create the ideal society, through the actions of the individual affecting the rest of society.  Luther does not use his ideas to deny the just and helpful actions of individuals in society yet he understood that these actions could not lead to salvation but nonetheless could lead to a better society. Authors state “ At the same time, the very meaning of good works shifts from an emphasis on sacramental performances, dependent upon the authority of ordained priests, to ordinary service addressing the mundane needs of one’s neighbor” (Deutshce & Fornieri, 2009). In a way, Luther believed that if society was made up of true Christians, who did good deeds and worked towards the betterment of all mankind, there would be no need for traditional leadership or kingship. Another concept covered by Luther was the idea of resistance to tainted authority. He allowed the community to resist the powers of the ruling class if they were to work against the things that were commanded as Christians. It is on this reformation of thought that Martin Luther’s political thoughts are based and despite the fact that they may not hold outwardly obvious relations to political application, the very society created by followers of Luther’s ideas would in fact result in a more ideal society, an important focus of political ideology.

After examining some key points of each philosopher, we can see how each topic discussed can stand alone and also be useful in understanding the larger picture. Each philosopher’s perspective establishing justice, the ideal citizen and the proper use of authority and morality, work to form the ideal society. While the topic is the same, the methods of getting there differ from thinker to thinker; therefore a comparison is needed for further reference. Luther’s ideas were not inherently political while Plato’s did appear to have a more obvious political tone. Both philosophers spoke adamantly about justice yet it was defined in different terms and was manifested in different ways. Luther’s ideas were based mostly off of the recognition of Christian based values and teachings while he spoke out about Roman Catholicism and their political use of papal authority. Plato focused more on establishing a class that helped the ideal society through the division of labor and ruler being distinctly capable of virtuous and moral dialectic thought. To this end, the ruler must be a philosopher to be an effective guardian (ruler). Plato spoke about the role of each person in society in the terms of this separation of jobs based on specific abilities yet Luther used the idea of Christian virtues and actions to establish that everyone should be ministers of Gods words despite the current separation of priests and laity. He believed in the concept of the priesthood of all believers. Plato also spoke about communism of property in regards to the way in which the guardians lived. Luther did bring up concepts regarding the order in which power was established for secular and religious authority and worked against the traditional established ideas of his time and spoke up about the authority of the individual citizen to resist tyrannical authority. This type of resistance did not appear to be a significant idea held by Plato.

While these two philosophers had different ideas on what could lead to the ideal city or society, each author was a product of their era. Luther’s reform and ideas of the importance of Christian beliefs has been an element that has stood the test of time. To some extent, Christian virtues are still seen as an important commodity among political actors. Plato’s idea of the just city is one which may be more practical in theory than in reality when it comes to modern day society, yet many elements of his works hold important relevance to today. Earlier accounts of an attempt to utilize elements that mirrored Plato’s republic were only somewhat successful to say the least. It had been termed the perfectionist movement in the 19^th century and was a cult type setting established by John Humphrey Noyes. One element that was derived from Plato’s republic was the sharing of property and wealth. Authors state “From the mid-1840s on, therefore, they agreed to share all their belongings, giving their goods and money over to the community and in turn being supported by it” (Foss,2010, p.4). This was similar to the concept of community forced upon the guardian class of Plato’s republic. Other elements from family relations to sexual partners were dictated by rules which could be seen in both Plato’s Republic and Noyes’s society. Regardless of this early attempt to follow Christian teachings and elements of Plato’s political ideas, the Republic has implications for the 21’st century.

The idea that mature age brings knowledge and helps calm the desires, choosing moral obligation and conversation over desires, is one which we currently hold, to a small degree, in America. Presidents are meant to be over a certain age, most likely to have experience enough to have gained wisdom and understanding. President Clinton made it painfully clear how important control over physical desires can be when it comes to an ideal society and acting as rulers. His inability to remain faithful to his wife had gotten in the way of his moral and political obligations. The role of money and wealth is in fact an important discussion to be made in regards to the ideal society both back then (Plato’s era) and in modern times. In many ways, money is necessary to live a life where other ideas and actions can be perused. If someone is in constant need of money, they may be more willing to act immorally to get it and thus individual justice and society’s justice is lost. An important idea of wealth found in ideas by Plato also discusses the concept of having too much wealth. In America, there is a significant gap between the rich and the poor and this may be why there is a sense of jealousy, discontentment and immoral behavior. Statistical analysis shows that there is a disparity between crime committed by certain races, who tend to be minority and live in areas of high poverty and little distribution of wealth. Immoral acts are committed in an attempt to gain power and provide for oneself, a concept that was meant to be controlled in Plato’s republic.

In some ways, politicians seem to rely on the fact that the majority of society has no formal training and does not necessarily know what is being spoken. Society members are not well versed in the ability to follow Plato’s method to the truth and therefore, modern day politicians are capable of easily leading and misleading the average voter and citizen. Authors state “Plato’s warning in Republic VII is thus a warning about the practice of dialectic in general, and especially a warning about practicing dialectic with or in front of young people “ (Lublink, 2011 p. 9)..Plato seemed to believe that those who blindly seek the truth, (let us say from dialectic questioning politicians) will become more lost than they had been before and will most likely be at the mercy of those providing the information. This has become a major problem with the media and politics today, that the average person is bombarded by information, and will likely trudge through to find the truth only to get lost. Plato also believed in public control of speech and artistic expression. In a modern society this does not exist in most cases. While we do have the FCC who regulates certain mediums like the lyrics of music deemed inappropriate, our society’s freedom of speech allows the expression of the utmost ridiculous ideas and concepts. This can be seen by evaluating the purpose of music and certain television shows. The youth could become corrupt through daily exposure to these mediums and popular culture plays a large role in the socialization of society. This has seemed to create a less than ideal society. Perhaps we would benefit from the regimen of controlled public speech and artistic expression purposed by Plato yet the reality is that Americans are too set in their ways to relinquish this right they deem inalienable, as set forth by the constitution. Despite the goodness it may cause, we are blind and dumb to the far reaching consequences of our actions.

Luther’s contribution to modern thought is also important. America is purported to be founded on Christian beliefs. The constitution was written to be vague enough to allow for interpretation of specific laws according to the situation at hand. It is a living document that is the law of the land in modern times. As a whole, our society has become less and less religious and our political correctness has attempted to establish a clear cut line between church and state. It is based on Luther’s religious focus that I believe many of our society’s problems could be remedied. His ideas on the relevance of Christian virtues would allow us to treat others like we want to be treated; the golden rule. His ideas of resisting tyrannical rule also come into play in our modern society. At times, some rulers may come across as being manipulative and may lie to gain control. Luther’s ideas of resistance in accordance with morality and the harmony of the community would serve the best interest of our nation.

Upon understanding the main concepts of Plato and Martin Luther, we realize that certain blanket problems existed even during their days and will continue to exist well past ours. While the problem of the ideal society can be examined and reached by changing different elements of that society, the combinations and actors will determine which route is necessary in a dynamic society like the United States.  We may understand the importance and relevance of these two philosophers’ ideas yet their practicality may not be as tangible as we may wish. A stubborn society will be one who is not open to new ideas or even ones which were well established in different times throughout history.

           

           

References

Deutsch, K., Fornieri, J. (2009) An Invitation to Political Thought. Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth

Fordham (2013). 95 Theses. Retrieved from http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/luther95.txt

Foss, C. (2010). Plato's American Republic. History Today, 60(12), 36-42

Lotter, H. P. (2003). The significance of poverty and wealth in Plato's Republic. South African Journal of Philosophy, 22(3), 189-206

Lublink, S. (2011). Who May Live the Examined Life? Plato's Rejection of Socratic Practices in Republic VII. British Journal for the History of Philosophy, 19(1), 3-18. doi:10.1080/09608788.2011.533009