Tocqueville and Rousseaus Ideology on Anticipation of the Future
Rousseau Beliefs on Improving the Present Following his commentary about positive actions to improve people’s conditions, Tocqueville acknowledged that people might not improve their lives by acting positively concerning their lives rather than accepting the status quo. In his commentaries about industrialization, he didn’t believe that the developments that led to industrialization came from man’s desires to change the status quo. During the pre-industrialization time, people depended on agriculture. However, the shift became inevitable to move from dependence on agriculture to the industrialized manufacturing of products. During the time though, he noticed that the shift to industrialization allowed for small groups of individuals to produce food for the rest of the population, thanks to the improvements in technology.
The context comes off as the Carib sells his cotton bed but begins weeping for it and wants to repurchase it when darkness falls. It, therefore, means that man needs to anticipate the future and engage in positive actions in the present to maintain a bright life in the future. In the Carib’s context, the cotton bed symbolizes comfort in life, and selling off the bed symbolizes unwise actions that man could engage in in the present time. Furthermore, Rousseau depicts natural man as lacking language and notion of monetary gain that require foresight. He notes that speech distinguishes man among animals by nature. For a man to have evolved into political, he must have acquired the sense of language and reason, what he terms as becoming animals with logos.
To him, the origin of language seemed the same as the origin of political societies. Further, Rousseau depicts speech as being the first social institution that owes its form only to natural courses. His depiction in the story of the Carib, he tried to depict the natural sense that man had in his apolitical state, before reason and language. In the current state, according to Rousseau, man communicates in more than one language, which shows diversity instead of one language that was supposed to show likelihood among men (Davis). In his view, Nassau noted that the wage farmers were the wave of the future (Choi 165). The future, according to Tocqueville, lied in farmers becoming independent and to enjoy their produce however ample it came.
His sentiments were aligned with the desires that the English quest for bountiful produce would be adopted by the French. Rather, he wished that the self-reliance in the French economy would be adopted by the British. Rousseau’s ideology, however, revolved around understanding the factors that led to political inclination. With the French, he believed that the status quo was better than adopting the English way of industrialization. Regarding democracy, the English knew not the best way to exercise the nobility of the act as compared to their French counterparts. However, his sentiments in predicting the future of modern civilization were inaccurate on almost all prime points; his meaning of democracy incorporated tangible economic and social features of the nineteenth century societies depicting democracy societies.
His thoughts entailed a rudimentary extent of education, simple technology and the absence of professional specialty that were extensive. In this premise, Tocqueville warned against prescriptions of modern democratic societies. The future that lingered for man, according to his ideologies, comprised the need for man from different backgrounds to understand each other. Further, his ideologies acknowledge that the difference has become a demarcation of nations such that people see difference in others by acknowledging the difference in the languages that they spoke. Beliefs of President Obama and President Trump President Obama had his government committed to working towards openness in his administration. The government worked to ensure that info on its operations were made accessible to the public; much was done during his two terms as president of the United States.
In his two terms, President Obama solicited participation of citizens in making of decision by the government. Consequently, President Trump may assess international engagements in transaction manner as perceived by his ‘America first’ campaign. In his campaigns, President Trump implied less recognition of global common good (Wickett). In his foreign policies, President Trumps might, most likely, sacrifice his allies’ security in pursuit of America’s economic advantage which drives his policies. Moreover, his characterization would impact on his engagement in foreign affairs, considering he is brash, unpredictable and contradictory. What Obama and Trump Sold to America Considering the level of openness in governments that preceded President Obama’s administration, Obama administration seemed to promise Americans a more government than America had ever witnessed before.
President Trump’s relegation of the priority of a customary US strategy mercantilist has little or no appreciation for longer-term geopolitical dynamics. As a result, it would become pivotal with profound negative influence on the international stability of the US. Additionally, President Trump’s personality and style could damage collaboration in glogal organizations like the G7and APEC. In these international organizations, the personality of the president plays a prime role, but President Trump seems to present a brash, contradictory and unpredictable personality instead (Wickett). How Obama and Trump Motivate America towards a better Future In open government can prove essential in motivating citizens towards a better future. Trump’s rejection to pursue a change in regime and doubt on the need for the US to retain primacy in the Middle East has seen him focus on the fight against terrorism.
From $10 to earn access
Only on Studyloop