Tag Archives: Dickinson College and Carlisle

Proposal

Posted on by

 

Professor Karl Qualls

Utopias/Dystopias Seminar

 

Proposal

 

I will be comparing many works for my project such as Mores Utopia and Platos republic; However, I will also be looking back in history and studying the Finland/Soviet winter war (1939-1940). Finland, a small socialist and neutral nation, was invaded and aggressed by a neighboring nation and was forced to fight for its freedom and survival, despite Finland being anti war. Looking at this historical event, I will draw a parallel to Thomas More’s theoretical Utopia. Furthermore, I will be examining the idea of military/warriors in Utopian societies, and analyzing the idea of warfare in these societies. I will review the public policy regarding military presence, and how people in Utopian societies felt about war and questioning to what extent the views of those in Plato’s and More’s Utopias were realistic about the subject taking into account human nature.

 

Thomas Mores Utopia states that unless it is a friendly state or themselves, they are to avoid war at all costs. But how far can a society keep this sort of discipline? It is not always the case that a society has a choice whether or not to engage an enemy. In most cases, one side brings the fight to the other and there is no other course of action than to fight. This was the case for Finland in the winter war, and this is this is the course of action which Thomas More and Plato both state in their respective theories of Utopian societies. Human nature is to be the best, and this includes expansion and increasing population size when a certain amount of land no longer is sufficient for the society. So at this point, the warrior/soldier class would be forced to fight for reasons they might not agree with, as the Utopian policy is to only fight when aggressed or when a friendly state is in trouble. How can a society that is set on peace be peaceful when they reach a point that requires expansion and swallowing out whatever smaller societies are in the area. Furthermore, a society is set on equality. How can a class whose lives are on the line be equal to a class that stays within the city walls? The soldier class in a Utopia can not be compared to the working class or ruling class, because the warrior contribution has far more on the line than the others. Is it possible for the classes to be equal? Can the  balance be made?

 

The idea of Utopian society is that everyone is equal and lives for the good of the society. If the warriors are deployed to fight in wars which have nothing to do them, but are getting involved simply because a friendly society requested aid, then does that not go against key principles of the Utopian philosophy? The people work and live for the good of their society, not die for another societies conflicts, so how do these two key principles go together? Human nature has always been to be dominant. Societies want to be the dominant. Acquiring this dominance requires aggression, which goes against the principles of the Utopian theory, so I will analyze how Thomas More, Plato and other Utopian thinkers would justify this aggression.

 

I own all the main articles and sources I will need to have for my project. Any additional sources can be found in the library or ordered on the internet. I will primarily be using Thomas Mores, Utopia for the research, as I am basing the majority of my research on his Utopian community; however, Platos account of a Utopian republic, and the history articles I will be analyzing for the Winter War (Talvisota) of 1939, will be important to give a broader understanding of military in a Utopia.

 

 

 

 

Thomas More – Utopia, Cambridge England, Cambridge University Press 2002, 134p

Thomas More’s Utopia is the primary source of information that I will be using to research and review the concept of military in a Utopia. More’s theory of military and warfare will be the primary source of information in this essay.

 

Thomas More- Utopia, Or the Happy Republic. 1762.

This online source provides further information and facts relating to Thomas More’s Utopia.

 

Andrew Milner, Socialism, Utopian, and Scientific? Arena Journal, No. 31, 2008: [7]-20.

 

Plato – Republic

Plato’s Republic provides an essential background on a Utopia, conceived by Plato, Socrates and other philosophers. Plato’s Republic provides background on fundamental principles concerning military in their Utopian republic.

 

Ragnar Granitin – Talvisota, Historiallinen Arkisto; 2005, vol. 121, p346-405

This source will give a solid background on the Winter War, when the Soviet Union attacked, why they attacked, and how Finland managed to defend itself.

 

Encyclopedia of Britannica – Utopian Socialism

The Encyclopedia of Britannica will provide a proper explanation of the concept of Utopian Socialism, an important aspect of the essay, as the theory of Utopian Socialism takes into account Utopian Theory, Socialism, and ideas and visions of a theoretically perfect society.

 

Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels – The Communist Manifesto

The communist manifesto contains much information relevant to the question of military in society, and will be a helpful reference.

The United States Declaration of Independence and the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen

Posted on by

The United States Declaration of Independence and the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen

 

The United States Declaration, written in 1776, and the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen, written in 1789, are similar documents stressing freedom and equality; however are different, not because of the content, but because why they were composed. The United States Declaration of Independence was composed in order to outline how the States had been wronged and oppressed long enough by the British. The French Declaration was written to outline and put into writing the natural rights that each citizen had.

The Declaration of Independence refers to the people of the United States as being free, and outlines how the British royalty stands in the way of free people living freely. This is similar to the first clause of the French Declaration, where it states that all people are free and are to live in equality. This point is relevant and present in all declarations of this nature. When leaders come together to compose documents such as these, they rarely neglect to remind that everyone is born equal. The difference between these two declarations outlining the point of natural freedom and equality is the circumstance in which both were written. The United States, being oppressed by the British, were writing the Declaration of Independence to prove a point to the oppressors. The United States Declaration of Independence was written to achieve freedom and independence from tyranny. The French declaration was composed for the French, as a reminder and official document outlining what the French valued. The two civilizations were in very different social situations, so with that in mind, it is difficult to compare the two documents because they were written for completely different reasons.

The timing of the composition of the two documents is also important when comparing the texts and their content. The American Declaration of Independence was written in 1776, and the French Declaration 13 years later. Other declarations, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, also have the same root as the Declaration of Independence as far as content is considered. These declarations all have in common that they outline and stress free and equality of the individual. The United States declaration of independence started the trend of composing official documents stating natural human rights that all individuals possess.

The United States Declaration of Independence and French declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen were both documents standing for freedom and equality. The documents were written at different times, with different priorities; however, both stood for same cause. The United States declaration was fighting for freedom and equality, while the French declaration was simply enforcing it.

Robert Ekblom

Professor Karl Qualls

Utopias/Dystopias

Comparing The Relationships Between The Rulers And The Ruled In Thomas Mores and Platos Utopian Societies

Posted on by

Robert Ekblom

Professor K. Qualls

First Year Seminar 2012

 

Comparing The Relationships Between The Rulers And The Ruled In Thomas Mores and Platos Utopian Societies

 

 

Both Thomas More and Plato believe that Utopian societies must have class systems; however they have different views on responsibility in their respective Utopias. While Plato argues that a select and limited group of people should rule and have the important responsibilities, More argues that responsibilities are to be more spread out amongst the people.

 

Both Plato and More believed that in their respective Utopias the relationships between the rulers and the ruled would be positive simply because everyone in a Utopia must contribute the same amount in order to maintain equality. This means that regardless of the position or class, everyone will contribute equally, and thus the relationships between the rulers and the ruled will be positive, as it won’t be the rulers leeching off the working classes efforts.

 

Plato and More disagree on the subject of how the ruled in a society would feel about the rulers. Plato argues that those ruled in society would be happy to be ruled, and would not revolt. He argues that everyone is fit for their individual civic duties and they would not have an issue with being the ruled. On the other hand, More disagrees and argues that there must be collaboration between the social classes, as the people could revolt because of opinions of inequality of power. While both arguments have their strengths and weaknesses, More seems to have a more realistic opinion of human nature. A minority, with all the power, making decisions in a society with no collaboration with the masses is likely to have much more tension between the rulers and the ruled as opposed to a democratic society where the people are very involved in decision making.

 

Plato and More also do not see eye to eye when it comes to trusting the people. Plato believes that in his Utopia, the people in it cannot be trusted to live justly. Plato argues that the soul has more unjustness to it than justness, so the people have to be looked over more by the rulers. On the other hand, More argues that the people in society can be trusted and that the rulers do not need to oversee them.

 

In a society where everyone has to be watched over and observed, there is higher chance of tension between relationships when there is no trust. Mores Utopia is therefore more likely to have positive and strong relationships between the rulers and the ruled, as people are more free to live as they see fit and not only act as pawns in the society.