STATE V.S. SOCIETY

2014-07 BRITTANYBELL

Conquering philosophy and its critics, one page at a time

date Issue

#32

“F**K THE GOV”

Philosophers Speak Outpg. 11

WHY WE SUCK

Is Society Doomed?pg. 12

Editor-in-chief

Type to enter text

2 EDITORIALNEWSARTICLESQ&AFILM REVIEW

3489

COMIC1011 DEBATE

END13

Politics and society has existed since hu-

mans came to be. They are a main subject of study for many philosophers, such as Plato and Thomas Hobbes, and leaders like Martin Luther King and Gandhi. Collec-tively, the two have helped us evolve and improve, from the introduction of laws to social movements changing these very laws. This issue of Inn magazine celebrates - and criticizes - the battle between state and society and the philosophy behind it.

It is obvious that there is no such thing as the perfect society or those who govern it. Throughout history, we have seen the fall of many civilizations due to their state and the society under it. From the too-democratic Athens in 440 BCE, to Russia’s disastrous communism movement in the 1920s - there has always been conflict in state and society, and always will be. North

Americans have began to realize the many downsides in capitalism, and rebel, chaos erupt-ing all around the world. Many are quick to blame the government for so-ciety’s failures, others blame ourselves for al-lowing and triggering these injustices. The un-solvable question: is it them or is it us?

Philosophers like Tho-reau insist “that gov-ernment is best which governs least”, and that

society would be more capable without such heavy government interference. Therefore, it is our moral obligation to re-bel against government decisions that go against our best interests or opinion. For Thoreau, that meant not paying taxes to avoid enabling actions he did not support. Gandhi opted for a

more peaceful protest, relying more on numbers and education to oppose the gov-ernment than violent or extreme measures. Meanwhile, Mandela fulfilled his obligation by engaging in armed terrorist attacks against the government. Each of these leaders were jailed and beaten, yet re-mained dedicated to their beliefs and to their society.

Civil disobedience, no matter what the ex-treme, was a duty as not protesting turned a blind eye towards injustice and encouraged it. Today we are quick to talk and comment on issues that bother us, relying on our words as a form of protest. Is our reluctancy to protest without the protection of a com-puter screen the reason for society’s fail-ures, have we become too reserved and scared to stand up for ourselves and make a change?

Thomas Hobbes and Plato may argue that we rebel too much. Plato, who lived under Athens’ extreme democracy, encourages a more fascist approach of governing as many humans ignorantly vote, easily swayed by strong public speakers. Under Plato’s Republic, the guardians would have unlimited power over soldiers and workers, ensured to maximize social harmony and avoid conflict. Similarly, Hobbes agree that the only reason for human’s prevalence is the government, and that it’s necessary to obey and not question the government to avoid return to society’s perilous, war-ruled state of nature.

This issue explores all sides of the State VS Society battle, against the government and against society. It features a philosophic outlook on civil disobedience and when its warranted, and an overview of the many types of active societies proposed by phi-losophers. We hope to enlighten you on State and Society in a philosophical matter, leaving you to address and answer the ques-tion on who is to blame...if anyone.

EDITORIAL

STATE VS SOCIETY

ARE WE FIGHTING A LOSING BATTLE?

2

3WORLD NEWS

WORLDWIDE WARISRAEL-GAZA CONFLICT

Israel and Palestine have always had a rocky relationship...but this time it has gone too far. Uncovered by news stations and newspapers, what’s really going on in Gaza and why?

•Outrage began when 3 Israeli students were kidnapped and murdered in the west bank. Israel assumed it was committed by Hamas Operatives

•Israel fired air rockers in Hamas in defense; Palestinians retaliated; 6 Israelis killed a young Palestinian, his cousin beaten by po-lice for “revenge”

•On July 8, Hamas launched rockets towards Israel, poorly guided and not causing many casualties. First admitted attack since 2012.

•Angered, Israel intensifies, launching more strikes as an effort to make them “pay a heavy price”.

•On July 15, Israel accepts Egypt’s ceasefire proposal. Hamas rejects.•Israel continues bombardment, launching a ground operation. Over 160 Palestinians are killed, including militants and children.

•DEATH TOLL: 572 Palestinians dead; over 3,350 injured... 27 Israelis dead.

QATAR WORLD CUP - SLAVERYQatar is already planning and building infrastructure for the 2022 World Cup. Like all countries hosting, the World Cup is a huge event that requires a lot of work...however, in Qatar’s case, that work is done by workers who are not receiving their (little) pay.

According to Nepalesean men, their risky employment is burdened by disgusting living conditions with their wages missing for over a year and not being sent back home. They were abandonned by their employer, who they need permission from to quit their jobs and leave the country.

Although the Qatar police was informed of this months ago, there are still many trapped in Qatar, unpaid and un-able to go back home. This case is not uncommon in Qatar’s construction industry, but it comes as a surpise for the migrant workers who just expect their proper pay and a ticket to home.

882 indian immigrants working in Qatar (unable to come home) have died, from probable starvation or exhaustian, yet it’s excused as Sudden Death Syndrome. Their families are left shattered and devestated, often times unable to afford rent and uncompensated for by Qatar.

Click here for deeper insight

What is the ideal society, and more

importantly, is it achievable? In a world with such diverse structures of societies and utopias, how do we determine the best one for all? These are unsolved questions vari-ous philosophers and leaders have battled with for centuries, implementing experi-ments, failing and succeeding with no abso-lute resolution. However, this paper will at-tempt to determine the ideal society by ex-ploring Thomas More’s Utopia (perfect so-ciety), communism and John Rawls’ Justice as Fairness, highlighting their benefits and consequences in demonstration.

Thomas More wrote his Utopia theory when the Christian church was in midst of a reformation crisis, encouraging serious re-flection on the nature of sixteenth-century European society. Utopia’s main focus is on how society would be better off without the greed and temptation of money and private properties, working and fighting for each other than against each other. Unlike the European Society of his time, education is available for all Utopians and is a passion for most, studying happiness, the afterlife and the differences between authentic and artificial pleasure. Along with education, every Utopian has the right to proper health care and the freedom to be eutha-nized. Slavery is accepted as a means of punishment for those who break the rules of Utopia, unbiased on their skin colour, age or gender. Their Ruler is elected by their virtues, and may be overthrown if ruling improperly.

Overall, Utopian society are enlight-ened, honest and equal, with the right to proper health care and education. This may seem like an ideal society, however it is criticized for preventing human expression, as everyone dresses identically with the same houses and same work hours. Atheists and critics of the social order are at risk of

being executed, making it difficult for Uto-pia to expand and evolve if the population isn’t able to express concerns or lack relig-ion. The censorship and somberness of the Utopian society may cause Utopians to feel depressed and rebel, a consequence of the restriction on individualism. This theory provides an alternate reality in contrast to the faults and social classism of sixteenth-century Europe, allowing everyone the right to education and health care but cen-soring and denying individualism, ulti-mately encouraging totalitarianism and authoritarianism. Thomas More’s Utopia may have been an ideal society in opposi-tion to sixteenth-century Europe, but today freedom of expression has become one of the most important things to society, mak-ing it too problematic to execute.

Communism is a theory inspired by Karl Marx encouraging a total equal and democratic society where all property is publicly owned and everyone works for fair pay. Originally, Karl Marx intended his the-ory to be a prediction of natural progres-sions, until leaders like Vladimir Lenin in-tegrated their own tactics into marxism, revolutionizing the theory into commu-nism. The Soviet Union is the biggest ex-ample of a failed communist state, as lead-ers Vladimir Lenin and Josef Stalin were dedicated to force the development rapidly at any cost. Lenin lead the October Revolu-tion in 1917, elected afterwards. Subse-quently, he created the Soviet Union in 1917, the Russian Empire becoming a socialist state with equality of ownership. Lenin went to tragic measures in order to achieve his goals, over seven million Russians dying in the process, due to war, exhaustion from overwhelming sixteen-hour work days and famine. According to Lenin, "You cannot make a revolution in white gloves" but the costs far outweighed the benefits in his revolution, which was more of a mass genocide than anything.... [continued on page 5]

FEATURE ARTICLE

A PERFECT SOCIETY ACHIEVING THE IMPOSSIBLE

4

Josef Stalin replaced Lenin after his death in 1924, and was even harsher in his great project of socialism. Under Stalin’s

ruling, every-one lived in fear and was susceptible to one of his many purges, famine caused by his Collec-tivization or disease. Living conditions de-creased dra-matically and the population

was severely oppressed and depressed, Sta-lin viewing his people as disposable pawns with over twenty million deaths under his regime. Although communism is an equal, democratic and ideal society on paper, The Soviet Union is proof of how devastating communism becomes once corrupted, the ideal society all equally living in fear, fam-ine and blood.

John Rawls’ Justice as Fairness is a contemporary Utopianism of the twentieth century, transforming the discussion of an ideal society to an idea of society by agreement of its members. Justice as Fair-ness uses both Kantian and Utilitarian phi-losophy, developing a social contract through his Original Position thought ex-periment. In the Original Position, Rawls uses the Veil Of Ignorance as his basis to understanding what society would agree is ideal if they had no knowledge of what class they’d be assigned to. Therefore, peo-ple agree on principles by maximizing possible minimum benefits one could re-ceive, like accessible health care and edu-cation to individual freedom. The society begins at Liberty Principle, maximizing rights of all citizens and leads to Differ-ence Principle, where the ideal society al-lows equal opportunity to increase their place in society and wealth, guaranteeing no one is obtusely rich or poor. Although such social contract and agreement would allow everyone maximized rights, it is too abstract to be practiced without a reform and necessary state involvement. The the-ory also doesn’t describe the rules of the government that would regime, or how people would be placed in society. Similar

to communism, in order for Justice as Fairness Utopianism to work, everyone would need to want it and believe in it, work towards making it a reality. John Rawls’ Justice as Fairness theorizes a com-pelling society, however it lacks in realism and isn’t thoroughly explained, making it difficult to practice.

After exploring Thomas More’s Uto-pia, Communism and John Rawls’ Justice as Fairness, it’s evident that every theory has its flaws and requires an extreme amount of work and compliance in order to be applied. Thomas More’s Utopia offers extreme equal rights but lacks individual expressionism, while communism is ideal on paper yet easily corrupted and John Rawls’ Justice as Fairness is admirable, just too vague and easily open for misinterpre-tation. Although each has their flaws, it’s conclusive that John Rawls’ Justice as Fairness is the ideal society for the twenty-first century, as it helps put ideal princi-ples in perspective and allows the start of peace through agreement.

In order to execute this contemporary utopianism, society needs to be able to come together and the state needs to in-tervene to ensure that no one is too poor or too rich. It promotes a society based on principle and agreement which gives a sense of equality knowing that society’s ideals was decided by the members of it. In order for society to become ideal without fear of poverty, John Rawls’ Justice as Fairness is necessary to implement, as communism and Thomas More’s Utopia fail in practice.

I invite you to take a stand with me, for society to rise and overcome ourselves and any ill will of the State. It’s time to make a difference and become a tolerant, accepting society with equal rights and opportunity to grow, an overdue process that we NEED to begin, dedicate ourselves into until it is too late. As a city, nation and world we will persevere, inspire and win the war that prevents us from being happy and living comfortably. Every action, no matter how big or small, makes a differ-ence. It’s starts with you and ends with US.

[CONTINUATION OF PG. 4] 5

THE JUST WARIN THEORY...

Can war ever be justified? The Just War Theory by St. Thomas Aquinas attempts to answer that by offering conduct and cause principles. In order to be defined as a war, it must involve organized violence and bodies of combatants. In order to be justified as war is a different manner...

There are several types of wars that play a big role on whether the war is reasonable or foul. Aggressive and Defensive wars occur when one country attacks the other and the other country attacked defends. This term only applies to the start of the war, but it’s possible to fight a defensive war years after it occurs. Interventions are when you enter a war on behalf of an Ali, like when NATO attacked Serbia in ’99. Pre-emptive wars are very common but misrepresented, as the country needs to have big reason to suspect possible attack before taking on the role of aggressor and attacking first. Preventive wars don’t require prior knowledge on knowing you may be attacked, but they are used to show force and catch op-ponent off guard, ultimately scaring them away. Civil wars are common in Ukraine and Spain, where people from the same nation fight each other to violently reform a govern-ment. Meanwhile, Insurgency wars operate in small elusive groups to fight foreign occupa-tion. The last type of war is limited and total war, limited being the opposite of a total war where the entire society fights in war.

Now that we’ve discussed types of wars, we will outline what they need to have in order to be justified, according to Jus ad Bellum (reasons of war) and Jus in Bello (conduct in war).

Jus ad Bellum Reasons to go to War

• If not followed, there is not a Just War• Just Cause: good reason, like defending yourself or intervening to protect others

• Right Intention: fighting for justice of your cause, not for greed or gain

• Proper Authority: only political entities can go to war, or it’s criminal violence. Must have legit reason + Public aware-ness

• Last Resort: tried to perverse peace, but driven to war by enemy

• Probability of Success: War should be winnable, if not, it’s pointless violence

• Proportionality: overall harm caused by war must not be more than good hoped to achieve

Jus IN BellO conduct in war

• If not followed, there is not a Just War• Following Rules: obeys norms of interna-tional war conduct

• Discrimination between Combatants & Civilians: only combatants may be harmed intentionally; every precaution should be taken to minimize collateral harm to non-combatants

• Proportionality: excessive force should not be used, only force necessary to achieve victory

• Responsibility: war is suspension of nor-mal ethical rules; only proper violence is to be used and if rules aren’t followed they are committing murder; combat-ants must take responsibility for their ac-tions and ensure all actions are with pur-suit of cause

• No Inherently Immoral Acts: violence like genocide/ethnic cleansing, torture or mass rape is unjust and inexcusable; war crimes that individuals are held account-able for

6

7IN ACTION...

A JUST WAR?ANALYZING THE ETHICS IN BUSH’S POLITICAL OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM WAR

According to President Bush, Operation

Iraqi Freedom was a just war as it was for a positive cause and intention, fought by proper authority with a high probability of success. President Bush believes that Sad-dam Hussein is a huge threat and atrocity not only to his people, but to America and the world. Therefore, it is necessary to in-tervene in order to liberate and disarm the people of Iraq before Iraq attacks and hurts the citizens of America. In the Presi-dent’s perspective, the conflict has arrived and the U.S. needs to apply decisive force immediately so the U.S. does not become a war zone and victims of Iraq’s mass mur-der weapons.

Not only is the war entered with positive intentions, but it will be conducted prop-erly with the correct authorities, guaran-teeing success. Bush maintains that the army will not use excessive or violent force against innocent citizens of Iraq, and that they will respect not only these citi-zens but the religions and faiths that they follow. The only participants in this war will be the U.S. military with over 35 coun-tries and their bases backing, involving solely the proper authority which differen-tiates the war from criminal violence. The President issued a PSA regarding the war to inform America’s citizens, making the war public and not hidden. Overall, their is a high probability of success with the proper authorities, conduct and intentions which is why Operation Iraqi Freedom is a just war to President Bush.

While President Bush assures that Opera-tion Iraqi Freedom was a just war in his Public Service Announcement, when car-ried out the war remained unjust and ul-timately a failure. In President Bush’s re-lease statement on entering the war, he

states that the U.S. maintains a positive cause, proper conduct and with a high probability of success. It assures its citizens that Iraq poses a huge threat against the world, and that the only way to prevent that is to intervene and disarm Iraq while liberating its citizens. At first glance, Op-eration Iraqi Freedom is definitely a just war, but when we investigate further, we find that it’s anything but.

In reality, Operation Iraqi Freedom was unnecessary, unprovoked, caused harm against innocent Iraqis and worsened Iraq’s economy. In order to engage in a preemptive war, international law states that you need to know that you are going to be at-tacked. De-spite Bush’s concerns over Iraq, the Security Council felt that Iraq was not a suffi-cient threat, indicating that the war is preventative for U.S. to maintain power, not safety, and therefore they did not have a justified reason to arrack Iraq. During the operation, many innocent Iraqis were killed (particularly on March 23rd), despite the guarantees that they would be safe, making the conduct of the war hypocritical and harmful.

Not only did the army engage in miscon-duct of the preventative war, but the inter-vention ultimately worsened Iraq’s econ-omy and bank system, destroying infra-structure. Operation Iraqi Freedom was an unjust war as it did more harm than good, as its only reliable and maintained pur-pose was the U.S. to maintaining its power.

For a deeper analysis, checkout “Operation Iraqi Freedom - An Unjust War” by Joseph McInnis

REBEL WITH(OUT) A CAUSE?

Q&A PRESENTS...WHEN IS CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE JUSTIFIED, IF EVER? OUR PHILOSOPHERS OFFER THEIR EXPERTISE

Dear Philosophers,

Recently I’ve been invited to a protest against the northern gateway pipeline in British Columbia. Despite our thousands of speeches and letters to our govern-ment, they have ignored our pleas and re-fused to listen to the majority and put forth the decisions of the elitists. I want nothing more than to participate in this protest, however, there are many threats of violent and unlawful demonstrations to occur at this protest. I understand the values and history in civil disobedience, but don’t know if it will be effective or just destructive.

Please Help!Adam Dang

“Complete civil disobedience is rebellion without violence...civil resister simply ignores the authority of the State. He never uses force and never resists force when it is used against him.”

- Gandhi

I do not suggest going to a violent protest as that imitates the state. However, I suggest not paying your taxes which will “not be a violent and bloody measure, as it would be to pay them, and enable the State to commit violence and shed innocent blood.”

- Thoreau“Since being in India, I am more con-vinced than ever before that the method of nonviolent resistance is the most po-tent weapon available to oppressed peo-ple in their struggle for justice and human dignity”. ONLY support peaceful protests.

- M.L.K

“When a man is denied the right to live the life he believes in, he has no choice but to become an outlaw”. If this proposal interferes greatly in your life and spirit, you must support the protest...even if violent. Gandhi rejects reality.

- Mandela

8

OMAR IN’S MOVIE OF THE YEAR:

Omar tells the story of three young Palestine boys, Omar, Amjad and Tarek rebelling against Israel while battling for Tarek’s sister, Nadia’s, love. Their journey is portrayed in the main title-character’s perspective, Omar, a loyal young man caught in cross-wires between his friends, the Is-raeli forces they attempted to murder and the love of his life, Nadia. Throughout Omar, the philosophical themes of political and personal betrayal, mankind and truth are explored and broken as their friendships become corrupted by the Palestine-Israeli war.

It all begins with Omar climbing up The Israeli West Bank Barrier to re-enter Israel: a key object in the film. It represents the ongoing conflict be-tween Israel and Palestine, highlighting Omar’s struggle between his political and personal be-trayals that dominates his life. The West Bank Barrier creates two separate, relative realities: his personal life with Nadia and his friends, and his political duties in Israel. It is similar to Plato’s Cave Allegory: Palestine and Israel are forced to experience different realities that are less real to the other, their perceptions of truth limited to their country’s propaganda models. Throughout the film, Omar is actively crossing between the walls by rope, unwilling to adapt to one reality at risk by the other, desperately trying to unify the two. However, Omar ultimately chooses his po-litical Israel reality over the other, his trips in-creasingly infrequent. Near the end of the film, Omar attempts to cross the wall as a final visit to his abandoned personal life in Palestine, and is unable to climb over it without aid. Omar uses the wall to show not only the political conflict of the two countries, but the philosophical conflict of balancing, and betraying, two separate yet relative realities with different truths.

The skewed concept of humanism manifests the three young men’s quest for the freedom of Pal-estine, initiated by Tarek. The young men rebel against Israeli forces by shooting one of their

soldiers, an outcome of frustration and boredom that Tarek perceives to be a murder for mankind. The majority of the film focuses on the flaws of mankind and the world we live in today, how-ever the few humanist moments in the film are touching and revealing. One of these moments is when Rami and Omar chuckle and bond over the persistent phone calls from the Rami’s wife, a glimpse of how in midst of their manipulation and opposition, the two can bond and enjoy each other’s company, even if for just one minute. Omar reveals how humanism is twisted to com-fort ourselves and others, and that political and religious differences aside, we all can share and relate to the same simple human moments.

Amidst the falls of friendships and death of oth-ers, the biggest victim of belief and betrayal is the doomed relationship between Omar and Na-dia. Their relationship turns from promises of a honeymoon in paris to accusations of working with the enemy, until it is finally destroyed when Amjad tells Omar something about Nadia that haunts their lives forever. Heartbroken yet still desperately in love with Nadia, Omar believes in his friend and cuts off contact with them, but years later learns that Amjad lied. However, the biggest betrayal is not Amjad's deceit, but how the lovers believed others’ truths at face value, allowing it to corrupt their faith and feelings for each other. This romantic tragedy proves how deceptive and impactful one’s perspective of oth-ers’ statements can be, especially when it’s ac-cepted without investigation.

Overall, Omar is an impactful psychological thriller that explores the philosophical concepts of separate realities, determinism, humanism and weltanschauung - highlighting their haunt-ing consequences. Filmed in the perspective of Omar, the viewer endures a heart wrenching and shocking journey as they too are deceived and manipulated, their judgement becoming their own worst enemy.

9

THE IDEAL SOCIETY A VISUAL EXPLORATION

10

11

F*CK THE GOVERNMENTINSIGHT...

WHEN PHILOSOPHERS DISCUSS SOCIAL AND POLITICAL THEORIES, ONE OF THE RESOLUTIONS IS, SIMPLY PUT, F*CK THE GOVERNMENT. THIS IDEOLOGY HAS EXISTED FOR CENTURIES, AND WE’VE LISTED THE MAIN MOVEMENTS, THEIR REASONS & PHILOSOPHY BEHIND IT

Anonymous: We  are  Anonymous.  We  are  Legion.  We  do  not  forgive.  We  do  not  for-­‐

get.  Expect  us;  Interna&onal  group  of  hackers  who  launch  a3acks  on  government  and  relig-­‐

ious  websites  to  oppose  internet  censorship  and  control.  Some  of  their  biggest  endeavors  

involve  shu<ng  down  the  U.S.A  Government's  websites  for  considered  censorship  of  the  popular  site,  Megaupload.  This  group  has  no  leader  but  carry  extreme  influence  with  only  3  

rules:  do  not  disclose  one’s  iden&ty,  talk  about  the  group  or  a3ack  media.

WikiLeaks: “WikiLeaks  exposed  the  most  dangerous  lies  of  all...told  to  us  by  elected  

government”  -­‐  Khan;  non-­‐profit  organiza&on  that  publishes  secret  documents  and  leaks  

with  the  help  of  anonymous  sources.  Their  goal  is  to  reveal  important  news  and  informa-­‐

&on  hidden  from  the  public,  a  movement  with  complex  legality  that  has  resulted  in  being  censored  by  the  U.S.A  and  a  constant  change  of  website  hosts.  They  have  received  mostly  

praise  for  their  work,  but  their  founder  and  sources  have  faced  many  consequences  from  

their  offending  countries.  

William Godwin: PoliCcs  and  modes  of  government  will  educate  and  infect  

us  all.  They  poison  our  minds,  before  we  can  resist...;  in  1793,  Godwin  founded  the  idea  of  anarchism,  viewing  the  government  as  a  self-­‐corrup&ng  and  oppressive  force  to  so-­‐

ciety.  Due  to  his  controversial  and  influen&al  theories,  he  was  forced  to  hide  for  decades  -­‐  

reputa&on  tarnished  by  conserva&ves  for  his  candid  autobiography.  He  was  ahed  of  his  &me,  warning  people  that  the  government  will  only  con&nue  to  grow  worse  and  worse...

Henry Thoreau: That  government  is  best  which  governs  not  at  all;  born  in  1817,  Thoreau  lived  a  life  of  civil-­‐disobedience,  opposing  slavery  and  Mexican-­‐American  

war  by  refusing  to  pay  his  taxes  and  hiding  escaped  slaves  in  his  home.  Like  many  of  us,  Thoreau  believed  in  the  necessity  of  a  government,  but  an  extremely  more  just  and  honest  

one  that  confided  in  society.  He  insisted  it  is  society’s  duty  to  protest  against  their  govern-­‐

ment  and  certainly  devoted  his  life  to  it,  making  him  one  of  our  most  influen&al  philoso-­‐

phers.

YOU (letter to editor): How  can  you  argue  for  the  government  when  they  

are  the  cause  of  social  injusCce  and  innocent  children  dying  in  war  worldwide?;  Ever  since  I  was  a  teen  and  witnessed  my  friends  being  arrested  just  for  the  colour  of  the  

skin,  I’m  convinced  that  the  whole  government  and  its  authority,  policemen  to  lawyers  to  

President  are  all  corrupted  and  don’t  care  who  they  hurt  or  how  many..-­‐  Andrea  Zuckerman,  USA

12INSIGHT...

SOCIETY SUCKS

IN CONTRAST, MANY PHILOSOPHERS PUT THE BLAME ON SOCIETY FOR BEING SELF-DESTRUCTIVE AND ANIMALISTIC IN NATURE. READ BELOW FOR THE MOVEMENTS, THEIR REASON AND THE PHILOSOPHY BEHIND IT

Thomas Hobbes: The  condiCon  of  man...  is  a  condiCon  of  war  of  everyone  

against  everyone;  According  to  Hobbes,  born  1588,  the  state  of  nature  without  govern-­‐ment  caused  a  war  against  all.  Life  was  “solitary,  nasty,  bru&sh,  and  short”  as  everyone  

could  do  what  they  willed  without  consequences,  erup&ng  chaos  amongst  society.  The  

only  reason  humans  prevailed  is  when  they  organized  Governments  to  monitor  and  con-­‐

trol  society,  therefore  we  must  obey  the  government  to  avoid  perilous  state  of  nature...with  less  opposi&on.

Neo-Nazism: “Hitler  was  right”  ;  Hateful  organiza&ons  like  the  Na&onal  Socialist  Movement  in  the  UK  are  prime  examples  as  to  why  we,  as  a  society,  suck.  From  their  per-­‐

spec&ve,  society  is  insane  for  le<ng  non-­‐whites  have  the  same  rights  as  us  and  advoca&ng  mixed-­‐race  couples.  However  from  everybody  else’s  perspec&ve,  these  many  hate  groups  

worldwide  are  proof  to  why  we  are  to  blame  for  the  con&nuing  inequali&es  in  the  world.  

On  a  less  extreme  measure,  modern  society  hasn’t  fully  become  equal,  just  less  racist  and  

sexist.  

Benito Mussolini: Believe!  Obey!  Fight!  ;  the  inventor  of  fascism  states  that  per-­‐

sonal  endeavors  and  happiness  is  unimportant  in  comparison  to  the  state.    Individualism  

causes  desire  and  greed,  which  leads  to  disorder  and  corrup&on  in  society.  Instead  of  focus-­‐ing  on  personal  liber&es,  society  needs  to  dedicate  themselves  to  the  state,  ensuring  har-­‐

mony  and  a  greater  quality  of  life.  Do  as  your  told,  obey  and  don’t  think  too  hard  or  ques-­‐

&on,  as  that  only  leads  to  stress  and  frustra&on.  It’s  important  to  note  that  fascism  brought  

stability  in  Italy  during  the  1920s  crisis,  but  short  lived.

YOU (letter to editor): Society  is  self-­‐oppressive,  unproducCve  and  ulC-­‐mately  the  cause  for  our  falls;  I  must  admit  that  I  was  quick  to  blame  the  government  

for  my  and  the  world’s  issues  as  well,  it  was  the  more  obvious  and  easiest  choice.  I  con&n-­‐

ued  to  do  this  un&l  I  finally  took  a  look  in  the  mirror  and  realized  that  we  have  ALLOWED  

and  SUPPORTED  the  government  in  all  its  misconduct,  whether  by  ignorance  or  on  pur-­‐

pose.  Due  to  our  oblivion  and  overwhelming  self-­‐interest,  our  world  has  gone  up  in  flames...and  we  have  nobody  to  blame  but  ourselves.  

-­‐  Brandon  Walsh,  President  of  California  University

CONCLUSION13IN...

This issue of In Magazine, State VS Society, was intended to en-lighten and open our readers’ perspective and understanding of the conflict between government and society, outlining the ideal utopias and concept of a ‘just’ war.

Who is to blame? Society or the government? It may be a mix of both. Ideally, we are able to stand up for what we believe in and op-pose any government movements that contradict our morals... many of us either aren’t doing so or the government isn’t listening. That’s for you to decide.

As for the best society, it seems impossible to achieve and agree on one that is right for us. However, centuries of experimentation in these societies has always left society wanting more and government not doing enough. Perhaps we will never reach the harmonious state of society, unless we work together instead of for ourselves.

Check out incent.com for more articles, videos and editorials. Our online, PDF subscription begins at 17.99/year and includes VIP access to HD and unreleased content.

Thank you,

In Magazine.

BRUISE.COMPHILOSOPHY; WAR; METAPHYSICS; BEAUTY; ZEN

ONLINE SUB STARTS @ 17.99/YEAR15% OFF CODE: JXZ492P

NEVER MISS A BEAT!