Author Archives: Robert Fabricant

Please Vote for Me

Posted on by
4

“Please Vote for me” is an interesting look into Chinese culture. I think one of the most interesting points in the movie were the initial scenes where they asked these students if they knew what voting was and they had no idea. Growing up in obviously a very different environment I do not think that I can remember a time where I didn’t know what “voting” was. Moving on, this obviously was not a truly democratic process because, the class did not choose the nominees but instead the teacher did. I think Machiavelli would have agreed with the way Luo Lei acted. Luo Lie was the incumbent and definitely feared by the class but not to the extent of hate Machiavelli would agree that this is the best way maintain power. So, the class had no choice to vote for him. Xiaofei failed in Machiavelli’s eyes because she was loved rather than feared. In order to successfully consolidate power one should be feared, but not as much as the class fears Cheng Cheng. Considering all of these factors it would be obvious to Machiavelli that Luo Lei retained his position.

Democracy’s Prospects

Posted on by
1

After considering the readings and my own gut feelings, I feel that although in America Democracy will not implode any time soon, I feel that there are many aspects that may be eroding. That being said, I do agree that outside of the United States and other stable western countries, democracy is not as solid as it may seem. In the United States, especially after the election of Donald Trump, the illiberal trends mentioned in the readings are apparent. The polarization of the country is disconcerting considering the liberal doctrines this country stands on. I think that in less stable countries where democracy does not have as solid of a base, a similar polarization would cause the government to collapse. I also tend to agree with the point mentioned in the readings that democratic positions are filled with the wealthy and that in order to run for office one needs the necessary funds. This point is quite interesting because no matter how obvious this seems, there is no real way to combat the wealth gap in politics. Bernie Sanders attempted to bridge this gap I think, but in the end failed. It is possible that the economic elites will always rule in the current democratic system. That being said is it truly a democratic system if only the elites can actually hold power?

The Grocer and The Chief

Posted on by
2

In this parable, an interesting aspect, as Lerner points out, is the discrepancy between reality and what Tosun originally depicts the village as.  It is almost ironic that despite trying to avoid a contrived interview by attempting to interview the poorest among them, Tosun still views the village with his own prejudices towards them.  Although Tosun’s mistakes may have made the conclusions that Lerner drew easier to come by. What Lerner is really getting at is the modernization of the village.  He studied how the village was shifting away from a traditional society towards the modern world.  He saw the grocer as an agent of this change, that was suppressed by the old, the chief.  The other villagers went along with this out of fear of the chief but deep down they understood that the grocer was the “clever” one by playing the change.  I found the final paragraph most interesting after the change had occurred Lerner no longer could find what he needed there, despite his previous obsession.  The time had passed for his “ancient” village, it no longer was any use to his studies but only a a point of propaganda for the new party in charge.

Second Blog Post

Posted on by
5

In Orwell’s classic account, the possessor of power seems to be counterintuitive. On one hand, Orwell explicitly states that the crowd behind him propelled him to kill the elephant. On the other hand, Orwell was the so-called officer with the rifle. He was the man who “ruled” over the crowd behind him. Orwell states the crowd’s ability to exert power over him, the “ruler,” as the downfall of European imperialism in the east. Despite the fact that Orwell was the officer with the gun he was obligated to act by his position. I tend to agree with Orwell’s account in this regard. He perfectly states it as being an “absurd puppet” for this crowd that he has supposed dominion over. To Orwell, this is the price paid to rule over another body of people. The ruler has to wear a mask to rule them, but in turn, his true face starts to grow to become the mask. In the matter of killing the elephant, Orwell had no control over it. It was either kill the elephant or look the fool in the eyes of the Burmese. I must agree with these points because the ruling does come at a price. Obviously, this price is not as heavy as the price paid by those being ruled, but the ruler does lose some freedoms and personal identity when they choose to rule.