Sylvia Ruiz

April 14, 2016

Humanities 312
Essays #2
1. What was Robespierre's position on foreign vs. revolutionary war
around 1793 / 1794? What arguments did he offer for his position? Try to
relate his arguments to our own circumstance. Do you agree with his
central claims? Defend your position.
-Robespierres position on life itself was that you do what you need to do to
make yourself happy. In his exact words he said, Yes, if you had either to lose your
colonies, or to lose your happiness, your glory, your liberty, I would repeat: perish your
colonies. (pg 21) When it came to foreign vs. revolutionary war, he believed that all
enemies deserved death. During his time in power, over 1,000 foreigners that were
captured were guillotined. When it came to the revolutionary government, he believed
that they should provide their people with protection and whatever the people needed.
The arguments that Robespierre offered were that the people of France were living
under false notations. Not only did he say they were living under false notations, but
that the people were confusing their nation as one who has relations with the population
and one who is conspiring with the enemy. I do not agree with his claim that enemies
deserve death. I believe that it is a bit harsh and there are other ways around it. Death
is just a temporary fix to a deep, and larger problem. As a country, we have many
enemies and killing them all at once is not possible.
2. What evils did Thoreau oppose in his essay on Civil Disobedience? What
was it that he criticized the most in his fellow Americans? What remedy does he
recommend? Do you agree with his position? If so, try to say what he might call
for today. If not, say why not, in detail.
- Thoreau claimed that the government was an evil in America. He believe that it
did not allow man to use their conscious and it made man a subject before a person. He
also believed that the government was not doing what was best for the people. He also
believed that the big corporations were working with the government instead of trying to
help the people. He criticized his fellow Americans for just going along and working with
the government. He believed that a man can not serve American government without
disgrace being associated with it. He believe is was associated with disgrace because
everyone in the government was likely to serve the devil without intending it because
they did not make moral decisions. He also believed that it would be disgrace because
when working for the government, you were treated more as a slave then a person and
you had no worth as a person. He believed that if others wanted change as well, they
needed to come together to reform and start a revolution. With this, he was hoping a lot
of people would come together and there would be a situation where they could cast
their vote to have change to the government. I do agree with what he says about
government. Todays government seems to try to control everyone! They do this by
making laws. For example, a big debate is abortion. Through this law, the government is

trying to control women's bodies by not allowing abortions. As a whole, women and men
are coming together to vote against or for this law, just like Thoreau suggested should
happen. I believe that if he could see what was happening today, he would call for
people a big mass of people to come together and overthrow or vote against their
government. I do not think he would agree with how many intrusive laws the government
has made today, which he might say, does not allow the people to think for themselves.

3. Marx claimed that capitalism produced various forms of "alienation," and

he called for a violent overthrow of the entire system. Describe at least two of
these forms of alienation, and be careful to say how Marx's critique attacks the
very base of capitalism itself. Do you think Marx is right? Respond and give
reasons for your position.
- Two types of alienation that Marx discussed were alienation of the worker
from the work- from the product of his labour and alienation of the worker from
working -from the act of producing. Alienation of the worker from working -from
the act of producing has to deal with the fact that the corporations were reducing
their wages, which would not allow the workers to live a stable life. Another
problem that was occurring was that the corporations were not allowing the
workers to produce the items they specialized in. Alienation of the worker from
the work- from the product of his labour deals with the fact that the workers had
no say in what they produced. The workers were only allowed to produced what
the capitalist class said they could. With regulations like these, the workers could
not be proud and happy with their work. I do agree with Marx. I agree because I
believe that workers should be happy in their working environments. If workers
are not getting the pay they deserve or they are not producing items they
like/appreciate, I do believe the workers would not be happy. Another reason I
agree is because a worker should never be alienated from their work in no way,
shape or form. If a worker put their everything into something, they deserve the
happiness.
4.Explain Lenin's plan for revolution. How does he suggest it can be prepared
for, and what are its immediate, intermediate and final goals? Do you think he's
right about what would have to take place? In particular say whether you agree
with him about leadership and about the use of the state. Explain and defend your
position.
- Lenins plan for a revolution started with him wanting Russia
to change to a social-democrat mindset. His plan was to start with the
industrial workers. He wanted them to be exposed, not only politically but
economically, to the ideas of socialist democrats so that the workers would
realize how it would benefit them. Lenin also hoped that it this would
promote working class consciousness. From this, he believed that the
workers would help create a revolutionary party which would then start
demanding change. He did say that no movement can be durable without

a stable organization of leaders and maintain continuity. (pg 365)

Because of his beliefs, he believed that the revolutionary party would also
have to get some form of outlet on their side, and his choice was a nonlocal newspaper. Not only would this get the news out and allow it to
spread to other workers in different areas, it would allow them to get them
to talk to someone who had not already built a biased opinion about the
situation. He also believed the movement needed strong leaders so he
and others began training men to be strong leaders. The end goal of all
this was that everything be taken over by the people. I do believe in what
Lenin says has to take place for a revolution, leadership and use of the
state to get noticed. The example I will use to prove my point is the Black
Lives Matter Movement. I spoke to you about this after class and it helped
strengthened my opinion. The Black Lives Matter movements had leaders
who were mentally strong and that all stuck together. The Movement also
had many outlets, including non-local outlets covering it. The Movement
also had a huge mass of people supporting it. These were all things Lenin
believed mattered if people wanted a different and the Black Lives Matter
Movement proved him right. The Black Lives Matter is still talked out
today, people are still fighting for equal rights, and I did not even have to
explain what this movement was because it so well globally known. Not
only did the leaders come together in person, but they came together on
social media as well and this movement went global! Most people who
have access to social media have heard about it and it is because of
strong leaders coming together, staying persistent and having good media
outlets.