Unit 3 Reflection

Charlie Zhang

Gabriele/Pronko

Unit 3 Reflection

19 January 2012

            Today’s structured societies are watched over by governments of quite literally all shapes and sizes. Depending on the viewpoints of those in power and those under it, these different organizations have varying degrees of success. I know that personally as a libertarian (fiscally conservative but socially liberal), I too have my own opinions and perceptive on the way certain governments operate. However, through the course of Unit 3 in AP English Language, I have gained greater views on the ways that not only governments should be run, but also how their citizens should be expected to respond. Individuals within society have an obligation to abide to their fullest ability to the laws set by the government, yet in return it is the job of the government to dramatically increase its citizens’ qualities of life, and also be open to political and social change. It would seem obvious that individuals within a government would have to obey its rules, but I myself have often questioned the laws of USA.

            As individuals protected by a government, we should obey by its laws set. Adherence to these regulations promotes the necessary and common order of government. This doctrine is best explained by Socrates, whose words were recorded in Plato’s Justice. He elaborates upon the concept of justice, of how between the individuals and the state exists what is known as a social contract. The stipulations of being a citizen are that an individual must adhere to the just laws established by the state. As his disciples fervently attempt to dissuade Socrates’ sense of moral righteousness, Socrates one by one uses syllogism to remove each argument and then leaves one standing moral of justice and social contract. Socrates’ dialogue clearly presents the obligation that an individual has to government: though somewhat simple, the individual must obey by a government’s laws if he is to live in that society. When this order has been established, the government can only then fully carry out its obligations to its individuals.

            In a society of order where (most) individuals obey to a government’s laws without change, the government now has an obligation to fulfill its part of the aforementioned “social contract”. One of the government’s first obligations to its individuals is to dramatically increase the quality of life for its numerous citizens. This concept is primarily displayed in John Locke’s Second Treatise of Government, which also deals with the social contract. In addition to an individual’s agreement to obey, which Locke refers to as “giving up certain rights”, the government exists to promote a higher quality of life. At first this concept surprised me, but Locke’s reasoning convinced me of his logic. Locke explains how that a society without a government is known as a “state of nature”; even in this seemingly anarchic society, order and freedom still persists. Locke describes how a government is only formed so that individuals can pool resources and freedoms to improve the general qualities of their lives. Upon speculation, I found this to be true. Common benefits of living in governed societies, such as food and security, allow not only for those guaranteed rights but also the improvement of other aspects of life that would be impossible to achieve. For example, the development of art would be not only impractical but also near impossible if one constantly fears for his life.

            However, this is not to state that individuals who live in a government are free of pressure or unhappiness. Rather, to the contrary, there are complaints that individuals have when problems arise within societies. Thus, it is a reciprocal obligation that the individual and state must share: the individual must honestly present what he believes could be improved or is at fault with the status quo, and it is alternatively the role of the government to not necessarily act upon such requests but at least listen with open ears. History presents numerous examples of individuals who rebelled against the status quo. Elizabeth Stanton, a feminist in the United States, is the paradigm of the rebellious but true-hearted individual who seeks positive change in her government. In her Declaration of Sentiments, Stanton displays powerful rhetorical mastery and skilled use of logic. By using the structure of the Declaration of Independence as a rhetorical basis, Stanton is able to use ethos to simply prove that her arguments make sense. If they worked for a free nation, shouldn’t they work for a declaration of women’s rights?

            Before the awareness that Unit 3 provided me in terms of political diversity and decision, I had a much more narrow view of governments. I thought that the only government that really “worked” in my mind was one that proved to have a flat tax and did not let old traditions cloud judgment on questions of morality and social liberties. However, I now realize that governments in themselves are testaments to the successful relationships that exist between citizens and states. Particularly in America, where democracy can in itself be interpreted as the government’s way of listening to the people,  all the obligations are fulfilled; regardless of whatever political afflictions exist, it is a quintessential government.