Machiavelli vs. Thoreau- Who's right?

After reading both Thoreau’s “Civil Disobedience” and Machiavelli’s The Prince it’s hard to determine which philosophy is truly the best. Thoreau is more idealistic and difficult to execute in life whereas Machiavelli’s is a lot more applicable but not as moral. Although both authors write to encourage a more proper government their philosophies comes from different ends of the spectrum.

One of the points that Thoreau and Machiavelli spend a great amount of time on is the relationship between the ruler and the ruled. Machiavelli stresses that a prince must do what is necessary to remain powerful. “A wise prince should establish himself on that which is in his own control and not in that of others.”  He believes that a prince should constantly be in control even if it means being feared by the people. Meanwhile Thoreau shows a different idea; that “government is best which governs least.” In this perspective the interventions of the government only succeed in holding back the state from becoming a more “prefect and glorious state”. When the people comply with the government’s law’s they are no longer individuals but ‘machines’.  Not only are Thoreau’s ideas different, they completely reject Machiavelli’s views on government. Machiavelli is writing on the assumption that the people aren’t competent to make their own choices and need to be governed to and protected from new states. This significantly differs from Thoreau’s notion that the government is unjust and that the people have the duty to act on their morals in correcting the corrupted government. Their philosophies on governing also reflect their value of the individual. Machiavelli’s rational but less compassionate ways shows that the state itself and its prosperity is a higher priority than the individual needs of the people. “Thus no prince should mind being called cruel for what he does to keep his subjects united and loyal.” Thoreau on the other hand, says many times throughout his story that one should be able to live contently by following their principles regardless of the higher authority. As someone who spends a night in jail because he refused to pay taxes he disagreed with, Thoreau is very concerned with the mental state of the individual people. Considering the idea that a government does not exist without the people it is interesting to see how the two regard the subjects in such contradicting way especially Machiavelli with his text The Prince that continuously says the ends justify the means.

At a quick glance Machiavelli does seem more logical but if taken seriously both philosophies can become extremely dangerous. Thoreau may be read as a cry for action by overzealous readers to take extreme action while Machiavelli could be taken as favoring a tyrannical rule. Neither is completely right. Rather than sticking to one side it would be beneficial to incorporate elements of both.  Maybe then we will have an ideal state that doesn’t act in extremities. 

Shut Those Slaughter Houses Down and Set the Turkeys Free

On Turkey Massacre Day—formerly known as Thanksgiving—turkeys nationwide are being killed to satisfy the obese hunger of greedy Americans. But is this right? Should these turkeys really be slaughtered to cater to our vision of a perfect Thanksgiving dinner? No! This is evil! This is unjust! From now on Thanksgiving should be spent honoring the lives of the murdered-but very delicious, turkeys. In fact a golden turkey shrine shall be built in the capitol of each state and on that day everyone—and I mean everyone will go on a pilgrimage to the beautiful turkey shrine of their state and pay their respect. There will be a grand dance in which everyone gets on the ground, bob their heads up and down, and flap their wings as they make realistic turkey noises. Towards the end of the dance a king and queen will be chosen; the chosen ones will then have the honor of choosing a young, tender, plump being from the mass of dancers. The chosen hero will be offered to the Gods of the shrine; much like how a turkey is plucked from a farm and sent to the slaughterhouse—expect this is much more fun and meaningful. Imagine the delight of the Turkey Gods to see a nice roasted human being offered to them! But don’t think of this as murder. For years we have been mercilessly hunting down turkeys that it’s only right that we redeem ourselves in this fashion. Besides, there’s always that one annoying useless kid that does nothing but complain and waste oxygen. Well now’s the chance to benefit society! Strange, you may say; but is it really?  However those who decide not to participate on this festive day will be punished. Dragged out of their homes and strung by the neck, these evil-doers will find themselves.  Together the nation will watch as the wretched bodies are soaked in Worcestershire sauce and parade throughout. Behold, the new Thanksgiving! 

New Thesis

In The Reluctant Fundamentalist Changez is expresses Hamid's admiration of America as well as his anti-American sentiment as he tries to find peace between between the tense relationships of America and Pakistan. 

Hamid As He See Himself in Changez

Karen Zheung

11/11/12

The Reluctant Fundamenlist

Topic One

Hamid As He See Himself in Changez

                When we want to know more about a person we usually look for a biography on that person. Interestingly enough there are not many biographies on Hamid and the ones that do exist are very brief and lack details. But rather than a short biography that tells us his date of birth and education Hamid’s writing reveals much more about his life and values. In The Reluctant Fundamentalist Hamid creates a character very similar to him not only to express his thoughts but to help him find peace between the tense relationship of America and Pakistan.

                According to Hamid’s biography he grew up in Lahore then attended Princeton and Harvard. Hamid spent most of his childhood in America adopting its culture before being familiar with his own Pakistan background. In the article “Why Do They Hate Us?” Hamid stated “I learned to sing "The Star-Spangled Banner" years before I could sing the Pakistani national anthem, played baseball before I could play cricket and wrote in English before I could write in Urdu.“ This is similar to how Changez became accustomed to the New York life as he continued to succeed in Underwood Samson. Both the author and the protagonist share an obvious love for the American and Pakistan culture. However as the novel progresses Changez becomes aware of how he has become a janissary begins to associate with his Pakistan background more. When Changez sees one of the World Trade Center tower collapses he smiles and says that his initial reaction was pleased. “I was not at war with America. Far from it: I was the product of an American university; I was earning a lucrative American salary; I was infatuated with an American woman. So why did a part of me desire to see America harmed?” (73) Although Changez was more pleased about the 9/11 attacks Hamid clearly states in his interview that he was worried. In this sense the two are different. After the terrorist attacks Changez’s American life becomes even more difficult with Erica slipping away from him and the racism he must face. As Changez becomes more concerned about the situation Lahore he grows his bread out adding to his suspicious appearance that keeps him from completely assimilating. Hamid shared similar experiences as well with his Muslim friends being harassed in the U.S. and his unpleasant experiences traveling with a Pakistani passport. (My Reluctant Fundamentalist Essay) In The Reluctant Fundamentalist Changez clearly emulates Hamid life and struggles as he tries to find comfort despite being split between America and Pakistan. By understanding Hamid’s history the reader is able to gain greater understanding in Changez’s character. Without reading Hamid’s biography a reader may incorrectly assume that Changez’s decision to stay in Lahore is the end. Rather than reading this novel and interpreting it as Hamid’s failure to belong to a culture it should be praised for how Hamid was able to remain connect with both cultures.