Political theorists and practitioners are in agreement that the recent Egyptian revolution was triggered by the rapid deterioration of the socioeconomic and political conditions in the country under the oppressive and authoritarian regime of President Mubarak, leading to a situation whereby most Egyptians felt that they had been denied their self-dignity and inherent sense of worth (Fahmy 350-351). Almost four years after the revolution, it remains unclear whether the popular uprising has been able to transform the country or even achieve any of the ideals that people fought for during the revolution (Saikal 532). This paper attempts to analyze the political situation before and after the Egyptian revolution.
Available information indicates that “the Arab Republic of Egypt is located in North Africa, bordering on the Mediterranean Sea to the north, Libya to the West, the Gaza Strip to the east, and Sudan to the south” (Encyclopedia of the Nations par. 1). Egypt has a population of 84.55 million people according to 2013 statistics (World Population Statistics par. 1), and its main economic activities revolve around mining (extraction of crude oil, natural gas, coal), services (tourism, the Suez Canal, financial and retail), manufacturing and construction (Encyclopedia of the Nations par. 7-25).
To analyze the political situation of Egypt before the revolution, it is essential to look at the political arrangements that were predominant under Mubarak’s rule. Extant literature demonstrates that after Mubarak assumed power in the wake of President Anwar al-Sadat’s assassination in 1981, the president “set out to rule by a state of emergency under Law No. 162, which extended police powers, legitimized censorship and suspended constitutional rights” (Saikal 531). This model of government enhanced the authoritarian system of party-bureaucratic-security governance, facilitated political and socio-economic stagnation in the country, and also triggered foreign policy debacles
It is indeed true that the political and socioeconomic situations in Egypt before the revolution acted as significant catalysts in fueling discontent among the masses. In the domain of politics, the general feeling among the masses was that President Mubarak had sat at the helm of an oppressive and authoritarian regime for far too long (Saikal 531). The harsh government had given rise to a multiplicity of political and socioeconomic concerns, including:
high levels of poverty among the masses
heightened police brutality instigated by an excessive and unchecked exercise of power, which was legitimized through sustained emergency laws,
extreme socio-economic inequalities triggered by policies and strategies of a government dominated by businessmen,
state’s increasing withdrawal from the provision of basic services in essential sectors such as education and health,
high levels of corruption in government and industry following an excessive form of a capitalist free-market restructuring bill (Fahmy 350).
To further worsen an already difficult situation, the economic restructuring programs initiated by Mubarak’s successive governments over the period 1991-2011 not only gave rise to an increasing rate of unemployment but also aggravated the standard of living among the middle class as the rich got richer and the poor got poorer (Fahmy 351). Consequently, in the last quarter of 2010 and the first quarter of 2011, the Egyptian masses took to the streets to demand a pro-democratic transformation of the country, driven by them rather than outside powers and Mubarak’s governing regime which had by all standards failed in its attempt to instill democratic changes and good governance. The media, especially blogs and social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter, played a significant role in mobilizing the masses to take part in the revolution that eventually ended Mubarak’s regime (Salvatore 10).
Following 18 days of an unparalleled spontaneous public uprising, Mubarak eventually gave in to the demands of the people and handed over power on 11 February 2011 to the High Command of the Armed Forces, with the expectation that Egypt would transition to a mature democratic society (Saikal 534). However, the ensuing political situation in Egypt demonstrates that Egypt is far from transitioning to a democracy. First, it can be recalled that the Muslim Brotherhood under Mohamed Morsi won the ensuing election, but was soon deposed by the military for continued human rights violations, as well as demonstrating theocratic leanings and impressive extremist views.
The Morsi regime failed to make an impact in terms of facilitating democratic transformations in the country, in large part due to apparent lack of the necessary institutional and procedural foundations including “an appropriate legal-rational framework, respect for the rule of law, separation of powers, independent judiciary, vibrant civil society, constitutional guarantees and respect for minorities” (De Smet 18). Political power is now back to the Military Council, but critics remain pessimistic on whether the Council has the necessary intrinsic political wisdom and detached self-interest to deliver on its promise to initiate political and democratic reforms in the country based on the will of the people.
From the analysis, it is evident that Egypt is far from achieving the democratic reforms the people have regularly fought for from the initiation of the revolution. Although President Mubarak ensured a sustained deterioration of political and democratic ideals during his tenure, it is clear that these ideals are yet to be guaranteed today, not mentioning that people are still experiencing substantial socioeconomic disparities. The only way to guarantee democratic reforms and ensure the will of the people is respected, in my view, is for the Military Council to first put in place the necessary institutional and procedural foundations before calling for new elections.
Works Cited
De Smet, Brecht. “Revolution and Counter-Revolution in Egypt.” Science & Society. 78.1 (2014): 11-40. Academic Search Premier. Web.
Fahmy, Hazem. “The initial perspective on the winter of discontent: The root causes of the Egyptian revolution.” Social Research. 79.2 (2012): 349-376. MasterFILE Premier. Web.
Saikal, Amin. “Authoritarianism, revolution, and democracy: Egypt and Beyond.” Australian Journal of International Affairs. 65.5 (2011): 530-544. Academic Search Premier. Web.
Nowadays, it represents a commonplace assumption among many people that the so-called ‘independent press’ in the West, is by definition concerned with covering international events in the most objective manner. This assumption, however, cannot be considered discursively valid, because the very paradigm of how privately owned ‘free’ Media operate, creates a number of objective preconditions for the covered events to reflect the politically engaged points of view, on the part of the concerned journalists (Borjesson 3). In this paper, I will explore the validity of the above-stated, in regards to how the different aspects of the so-called Ukrainian Revolution of 2014/ ‘Maidan uprising’ have been covered by the newspapers: Irish Times (Ireland), Wall Street Journal, Europe (Belgium), Daily News (Sri-Lanka) and University Wire (USA).
In his article Ukraine’s Revolution: Triumphant – and Wary (Wall Street Journal, Europe), Matthew Kaminski strives to provide readers with an in-depth insight into what can be considered the actual motivations behind the earlier mentioned Revolution, which culminated on February 22, 2014 (the date when President Yanukovych was deposed). The author indeed needs to be given a credit for the fact that in this article, he succeeded in exposing a number of the thoroughly impartial reasons, which predetermined the development in question. For example, Kaminski mentions that, ever since Ukraine became an independent nation in 1991, the country’s economy continued to deteriorate, which in turn contributed towards the creation of the situation when, as of today, Ukraine can be well discussed in terms of a ‘failed state’.
The author also points out to the fact that Ukraine can be the least referred to as a ‘unified nation’, since a good half of its population consists of Russians, who happened to be much more loyal to Russia than to the country of their formal citizenship. Nevertheless, there are many idiosyncratic overtones to how Kaminski discusses the subject matter. For example, according to the author, one of the reasons why throughout the month of February, the Ukraine’s capital Kiev continued to be affected by the violent confrontations, is that protestors could not find anything better to do but to preoccupy themselves with destroying the cultural legacy of the Soviet Union: “Across Ukraine, statues of Lenin are falling” (13).
The fact that, while destroying the statues of Lenin, the much praised ‘peaceful protestors’ have often been reported flying flags with swastikas (I refer to the live-coverages by CNN and BBC), Kaminski prefers to dismiss as the part of the ‘Kremlin propaganda’: “Vladimir Putin’s television channels call this awakening ‘neo-fascism’ and ‘ultranationalism’ and a threat to Russians here. The Kremlin won’t accept the fluidity and diversity of Ukrainian identity” (13).
Thus, even though that Kaminski’s article does contain many analytical insights into what caused the outbreak of the revolutionary violence in Ukraine, it cannot be referred to as being thoroughly objective. After all, while writing it, the author made a deliberate point in trying to represent the depicted events, as such that should benefit Ukraine in the long run – without giving any consideration to the fact that that there may be other points of view, in this respect. There is even more – the manner in which Kaminski reflected upon the events of February 22, implies the author’s strong affiliation with the specifically American geopolitical agenda, which has always been concerned with the U.S. trying to weaken Russia. Kaminski is quite frank about it: “The Maidan uprising stopped the Kremlin from steering Ukraine away from the European Union” (13). This once again suggests that the discussed article is a rather biased journalistic piece.
Another example of how seemingly an objective article can nevertheless serve the purpose of promoting its author’s subjective points of view, can be well regarded the cover-story Deposed President Reported to be in Russia (Irish Times) by Shaun Walker. In it, the author goes about informing readers that Yanukovych, which was ousted from the office on February 22, 2014, ended up finding a refuge in Russia. Nevertheless, there is so much more to this specific article than merely the author’s intention to keep readers informed, as to what is going in the world. The reason for this is that, while discussing the event in question, which can be considered the Ukrainian Revolution’s climaxing point, Walker promotes the idea that Yanukovych can no longer be considered the legitimate President.
The validity of this suggestion can be illustrated, in regards to the following line from the discussed article: “Mr. Yanukovych said he continues to believe he is the legitimate president of Ukraine… The deposed president called the current session of Ukraine’s parliament – which among other things is electing a new government – ‘illegitimate’” (11). Even a brief glance at this sentence reveals it to be psychologically manipulative, as it contains the rhetorical device of an ‘appeal to ethos’. The sentence’s first part aims to convince readers that Yanukovych is indeed illegitimate, because nobody else but himself believes in his legitimacy. The sentence’s second part strengthens this impression even further, because it implies that the legitimacy of the Ukrainian ‘revolutionary’ government is a well-established fact. The author, however, does not bother to substantiate the validity of the above-quoted suggestion logically.
The reason for this is quite apparent – it could not be done, by definition. After all, according to the Ukrainian Constitution, there may be only three possible circumstances, in light of which the country’s acting President could be relieved of his duties – his death, his mentally incapacitating illness or his impeachment. What it means is that, formally speaking, Yanukovych continues to remain the thoroughly legitimate President of Ukraine. Apparently, while promoting the ‘Maidan uprising’, as such the reflected the Ukrainian citizens’ adherence to the ideals of democracy, Walker exposed himself as an individual who is not aware of what allows people to enjoy democracy, in the first place – namely, their willingness to live according to the provisions of an impersonal/secular law.
Thus, it will not be much of an exaggeration, on our part, to suggest that even though this article was published in the Irish newspaper, there are strongly defined hypocritical overtones to it, which in turn implies that the author happened to be affiliated with the cause of ‘Pax Americana’. The rationale behind this suggestion is that, as it was illustrated earlier, Walker tends to treat the notion of democracy as the practical tool of geopolitics, rather than an abstract ideal.
In this respect, the article Revolution in Ukraine: Take Two (University Wire) by James Bradbury is much different, as it strives to provide readers with an analytical (non-biased) insight into the actual causes of the ‘Maidan uprising’. For example, in this particular article the author goes to show that what is happening in Ukraine right now, cannot really be described within the context of ‘good vs. evil’ – the apparent split between citizens in the country’s Western and Eastern regions has been predetermined historically. As Bradbury pointed out: “A country (Ukraine) that had always been divided between an industrial Eastern half with historical and linguistic ties to Russia and a largely agricultural Western half that leaned more towards Europe, now saw that division etched permanently” (5).
It is needless to mention, of course, that the above-quoted suggestion implies that, contrary to how many Western journalists view it, the Ukrainian Revolution of 2014 is more geopolitically than politically motivated. This, of course, gives the author a credit on the account of his willingness to explore different aspects of the issue at stake.
What also contributes to the article’s discursive value, is that in this article, the author was able to expose the Ukrainian Revolution of 2014, as such that has been triggered by the former government’s reluctance to sign the Association Agreement with the EU. As he noted: “When Yanukovych announced the suspension of the Association Agreement talks in November, it was at first established opposition parties that called for protests in Kiev” (5). This, of course, naturally prompts readers to think of the followed ‘people’s uprising’ in terms of a ‘punishment’, imposed upon Yanukovych for his unwillingness to act in the manner, prescribed to him by the EU and America. Consequently, readers begin to suspect that, while lending their support to the ‘peaceful Ukrainian protesters’ (armed with automatic weapons), the European and American top-officials were the least concerned with trying to observe the international law’s most fundamental principles.
Walker leaves only a few doubts as to the fact that, contrary to how many people in the West tend to think of it, the most recent Ukrainian Revolution will not establish the precondition for the living standards in Ukraine to begin improving. Quite on the contrary – the article implies that, due to the recently occurred ‘people’s uprising’, it is only the matter of time, before the Ukrainian economy will find itself on the threshold of a complete collapse: “What will happen to Ukraine’s economy? The West will not provide as substantial of a financial assistance package as Russia offered in December” (5).
Thus, the article Revolution in Ukraine: Take Two can be considered generally critical of what is going on in Ukraine. Initially, this state of affairs with the discussed article may appear somewhat illogical, because it was published in the US-based newspaper. Yet, as we are well aware of, the America’s governmental officials wholeheartedly supported the ‘Maidan uprising’ from its very beginning. Nevertheless, the mentioned inconsistency can be well explained, once we take into consideration the fact that the newspaper University Wire, which contains the concerned article, is expected to appeal to the intellectually advanced readers, capable of understanding what accounts for the relationship between causes and effects. Given what has been said earlier, we can well conclude that in the realm of journalism, the notion of ‘objectivity’ is synonymous to the notion of ‘analyticalness’.
The article Defeat Neocon Conspiracy in Ukraine! (Daily News) by the anonymous author, can well regarded as another example of a strongly biased journalistic piece. However, in the case with this particular article, the biasness of the contained themes and motifs is strongly anti-Western. The reason for this is that the article’s author refers to the Ukrainian Revolution of 2014 in terms of an anti-constitutional coup, financed and supported by the American neo-conservatives (neocons). According to him/her, the events of February 22 (2014) in Kiev were nothing but yet another instance of how the U.S. goes about violating the international law under the excuse of helping the cause of democracy: “The disposal of the Ukrainian government of President Viktor Yanukovych last week by neocon operatives from within the US state department… breached Articles 2(4) and 2(7) of the UN Charter” (1).
As such, this article promotes the idea that the ‘Maidan uprising’ was only formally concerned with the citizens’ willingness to get rid of the corrupted government of Yanukovych. It simply reflected the American imperialism’s true agenda – to spread chaos throughout the world, as the mean of maintaining the commercial appeal of the U.S. treasury bonds. The article also exposes the actual mechanism of how the U.S. is able to meddle in the domestic affairs of foreign countries – this is being done by the mean of building the network of the so-called ‘Non-Governmental Organizations’ (NGOs) across the world, which in turn provide the official ‘roof’ for the CIA operatives: “The neocon maneuverings leading up to the coup… showed that the so-called ‘protests’ were conceived, financed and orchestrated by the US… with the connivance of a number of so-called NGOs operated by the US state department and the CIA” (1).
In order to substantiate the validity of this suggestion, the anonymous author refers to some secret documents (which supposedly confirm the America’s involvement), obtained by the Russian intelligence. However, he/she does not specify what accounts for these documents’ actual content.
Nevertheless, even though that, as it was shown above, the discussed article can indeed be considered strongly anti-American, it does mention a number of the de facto proofs of the contained claims’ legitimacy. For example, the article refers to the recently leaked conversation between the U.S. State Secretary Victoria Nuland and the American ambassador in Ukraine, in which both individuals refer to the Ukrainian ‘democracy-supporting’ politicians as being nothing short of lowly puppets, who are expected to act as they are told. Another reference has been provided to one of Nuland’s recent speeches, in which she bragged about the Ukrainian Revolution’s actual cost: “In a speech to the National Press Club on December 13, 2013… Nuland boasted that the US has ‘invested’ $5 billion in ‘organizing a network’ to give Ukraine ‘the future it deserves’”. (1).
Thus, there is a certain paradox – even though the article Defeat Neocon Conspiracy in Ukraine! is indeed strongly opinionated, there can be only a few good reasons to think of it, as such that does not deserve to be read. Apparently, it is also possible to for a newspaper-article to be simultaneously biased and yet highly informative.
I believe that the provided earlier line of argumentation, as to how the mentioned articles ‘generate history’, is fully consistent with the paper’s initial thesis. In light of what has been said in the paper’s analytical part, there appears to be indeed very little reason to think that the journalism’s actual aim is concerned with seeking the objective truth about what is going on in the word. Rather, it is concerned with ‘creating’ such a truth.
Works Cited
“Defeat Neocon Conspiracy in Ukraine!” Daily News. 2014: 1. Print.
Borjesson, Kristina. Into the Buzzsaw: Leading Journalists Expose the Myth of a Free Press. Amherst: Prometheus Books, 2004. Print.
Bradbury, James. “Revolution in Ukraine: Take Two.” University Wire. 2014: 5. Print.
Kaminski, Matthew. “Ukraine’s Revolution: Triumphant – and Wary.” Wall Street Journal, Europe. 2014: 13. Print.
Walker, Shaun. “Deposed President Reported to be in Russia.” Irish Times. 2014: 11. Print.
In early 2011, Egypt witnessed a major revolution, which attracted international attention. A popular uprising that emerged in January 25, 2011 in Egypt triggered the revolution. The uprising was characterized by widespread demonstrations, civil riots as well as strikes (MacQueen, 2011). The protesters were drawn from varied socio-economic and political backgrounds. The Egyptian revolution was largely inspired by the success of the Tunisian revolution that led to the overthrow of President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali (Roskin & Berry, 2010). Similarly, the Egyptians were determined to overthrow President Hosni Mubarak who had served for three consecutive decades. A number of legal, economic and political reasons led to the outbreak of the uprising.
The Causes of the Turmoil in Egypt in Early 2011
First, the Egyptian protesters were against the country’s state of emergency law. The law had been in effect in Egypt since 1981. The law extended police powers, legalized censorship and suspended constitutional rights (MacQueen, 2011).
According to Mubarak’s government, the law was meant to curb terrorism. Second, the Egyptian protesters were against police brutality. In most instances, the police and other law enforcement agencies used force in order to extract information from suspects (MacQueen, 2011). Third, the uprising was also triggered by lack of free and fair elections. During Mubarak’s reign, the electoral process was always characterized by corruption and manipulation of election results (MacQueen, 2011). Moreover, non-state actors as well as the country’s opposition were not allowed to monitor the elections.
The Egyptian turmoil of 2011 elicited mixed reactions across the globe. For instance, the Iranian government and its opposition had different views about the uprising. Ayatollah Khanenei who was Iran’s supreme leader when the Egyptian revolution broke out expressed his support for the uprising (Nikou, 2011). Khanenei described the uprising as a Muslim awakening. He further stated that the uprising was important because it would help in denouncing the treachery of Egyptian leaders. Khanenei’s remarks showed his preference for the Muslim Brotherhood, which Mubarak’s government had always opposed. It was also an indication of resentment towards the West that was an ally of Mubarak’s government. The opposition leaders in Iran also supported the Egyptian revolution. However, they saw the uprising as an example that other Arab countries should emulate (Nikou, 2011). The opposition further stated that the Iranians’ also required the freedom to demonstrate like the Egyptians.
The Prospects for the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt
The prospects for the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt largely seem bleak. A number of the Muslim Brotherhood’s vocal leaders have been jailed whereas others have gone to exile. Consequently, this has jeopardized their operations and may affect their future activities in the country’s political arena. However, others have also argued that the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt can never be wiped out of Egypt’s politics.
Summary
The Egyptian and Tunisian revolutions have been considered as major revolutions in the Arab world (MacQueen, 2011). These uprisings inspired other revolts in different Arab countries. The revolution brought an awakening to the Egyptians. It enabled the Egyptians to overthrow Mubarak’s regime that was characterized by lack of freedom of speech, corruption and police brutality. Additionally, the Egyptians demanded for a non-military government in Egypt that would be responsive and allow citizens to participate in the country’s governance (MacQueen, 2011). The Egyptian revolution sparked varied views in different parts of the world.
For instance, the uprising was considered a major threat to diplomatic relations between Egypt and the United States of America. For several years, America had developed close relations with Egypt because of its adamant fight against terrorism. Thus, the overthrow of Mubarak’s government was seen as a setback to America. On the other hand, other Arab leaders described it as a revolution that would help to restore ideal Islamic principles in Egypt.
Forward-looking educators seek to improve their understanding of teaching practices (Lavigne & Good, 2015). An essential part of the continuous improvement process is the development and evaluation of the robustness of educational theories with the help of objective methodologies. It has to be borne in mind that no theory can emerge outside a conceptual matrix or a paradigm. Therefore, it is of utter importance to understand fundamental changes that occur within a body of scientific knowledge with respect to basic theoretical assumptions of a discipline. The paper aims to outline three questions related to Thomas Kuhn’s book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions for the consideration of the class.
Discussion
The articulation of new theories and assumptions about the nature of both physical and immaterial reality inevitably leads to the transformation of science. This transformation can be either cumulative or revolutionary, which has been beautifully demonstrated by Kuhn (1996). The scholar argues that the evenness of scientific development is episodically disrupted by the introduction of new frameworks of cognitive organization. At such periods of revolutionary disturbance, the rigid structure of science is reviewed to accommodate new explanations for piling abnormalities that cannot be squared with old disciplinary matrices.
The scholar’s approach to science helps to understand that a paradigm change cannot occur without a crisis (Kuhn, 1996). This view is closely aligned with Popper’s proposition that an existence of a scientific anomaly necessitates a revolutionary change of a theory (as cited in Barseghyan, 1996). Therefore, the first point that should be considered by the class is whether or not the current educational theories are characterized by the presence of contradictory pieces of evidence.
Kuhn has often been criticized for his relativistic approaches to both philosophy and history (Hessenbruch, 2013; Stegmuller, 2013). However, in his book, the scholar does not assert that there is a presence of several independent standpoints of rationality with respect to the truth. Contrary to the criticism leveled at his analysis of scientific history, Kuhn (1996) asserts that paradigm shifts redefine the meaning of rationality.
In addition, the scholar argues that in order to conduct research, scientists do not necessarily have to be aware of all constituent parts of a paradigm. Thus, it can be argued that the process of dislodging a scientific paradigm by a new one is congruous with a nonrelativistic approach. Therefore, the class should discuss whether or not the existence of rationality gaps can be explained by relativism of disciplinary matrices?
Kuhn’s (1996) analysis of scientific progress is crowned by the assertion that this process does not unfold steadily. Instead, it is punctuated by sudden bursts of concept alterations during which the existing structures of scientific knowledge are superseded by new ones. A corollary to this proposition is that shifts in scientific paradigms occur randomly. Thagard challenges Kuhn’s assertion that scientific discovery is a non-linear process (as cited in Gonzalez, 2011). The scientist’s analysis of several historical cases points to the fact that the adoption of new theoretical matrices is a rational process that falls in line with the search of interpretive consistency. Thus, it is necessary to consider whether or not Thagard’s insight deserves merit.
Discussion Questions
The following questions will be addressed to the class:
Whether or not the current educational theories are characterized by the presence of rationality gaps?
Does the relativism of scientific paradigms explain the existence of contradictory pieces of evidence?
Does the introduction of new scientific paradigms occur randomly?
Conclusion
The paper has presented three questions related to Kuhn’s discussion of scientific paradigms. The class will be encouraged to discuss rationality gaps in current educational theories, relativism of the scholar’s argument, and linearity of the scientific process.
References
Barseghyan, H. (2015). The laws of scientific change. New York, NY: Springer.
Gonzalez, W. (2011). Conceptual revolutions: From cognitive science to medicine. London, England: Netbiblo.
Hessenbruch, A. (2013). Reader’s guide to the history of science. Abington, England: Routledge.
Kuhn, T. (1996). The structure of scientific revolutions (3rd ed.). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
Lavigne, A. L., & Good, T. L. (2015). Improving teaching through observation and feedback: Beyond state and federal mandates. Abington, England: Routledge.
Stegmuller, W. (2013). The structure and dynamics of theories. New York, NY: Springer.
At the height of the French revolution, there still stood some characters that dared to stand out and speak for the rights of the people. Despite the machinery at play, the idealism and freedom at stake, there was a crop of leaders who had natured a people-centered leadership within themselves. They shared and highlighted to the people what was at stake. For this they have crowned heroes in their capacities, as a result of this their views on national matters were highly rated.
Edmund Burke, born in 1729 in Dublin, was one such leader. He did not show open criticism to the French revolution at the initial stages, but with time as the effects of the revolution on the local culture and belief systems came to play, he was categorical in stating his opposition.
The rote in leadership was questioned in the policies that the French were imposing on their subjects. These policies include the civil legal code, removing the guilds creating a free labor market, and what was left of feudalism, the introduction of the policy that everybody is equal before the law irrespective of their affiliations. Privileges conferred to others as a result of the aristocracy were also done away with.
Civilization
Burke, a great political writer cum politician had his mindset twisted in the course of the revolution. This came about when he witnessed the political, moral, and cultural decadence in the west. Burke set out to explore the state of things like they were then, to change this for the good of society. When he left trinity, his mindset was inclined towards religion, general improvement, and venturing into politics.
Religion and Christianity for that matter, whose leaders happen to be among members of the national assembly are threatened. The leaders of these churches happened to hide under the umbrella of salvation, yet they are corrupt and rarely heed the doctrine. An example is Doctor Richard’s price, while preaching at the house of the old jewelry, had an extraordinary sermon in which he fused religious and political opinions.
This erodes the virtues within which this institution was founded and operates on, altering religious idealism (Burke, 1790). The other aspect is liberty. Freedom to do anything without being subjected to public scrutiny and open judgment by the people. He compares this to ten years ago when the institution was governed by upright individuals, unlike today where judgment is rendered by ‘madmen’.
The other institution is the proposal of the bill of rights that hands to the people the mandate to ‘choose their governors, to cashier their leaders for misconduct and to frame a government to themselves’.
He argues that the people do not want that system of governance, asserting that the people will fight even to the death to oppose that system of leadership (Burke, 1790). He also urges that succession politics and hereditary leadership do not always provide for the best chance for quality and sound leadership. This is because the constitution bounds them to power and therefore hardly allows for a change in case of reckless leadership. He asserts further that the people shall not copy ideals and systems they have never tried; neither shall they try out the systems that looked suspicious upon earlier trials.
Conclusion
All in all, Burke was conservative about their methods of governance. He found fault in almost every aspect of the foreign ideas therefore was selective in the change that was happening around him (Burke, 1790).
Works cited
Burke, Edmund. “Reflections on the Revolution in France”. constitution.org. Constitution society. 2004. Web.
This paper looks into four major ideas that are at the centre of Kuhn’s ‘Structure of Scientific Revolution’. The four basic concepts are paradigm, normal science, crisis and Inconsumerability. Through discussing the given concepts, the paper will delve into Kuhn’s belief with regards to progress in science.
Kuhn is credited for having changed the general understanding of progress in science. Traditionally, science was understood to involve a progressive linear movement or accumulation of insights. Contrarily, Kuhn illustrates that science is marked by dramatic shifts that are akin of violent revolution. It is only after a revolution that a stable phase follows; a conceptual world that is radically different from the initial one (Andersen, 2001, p. 25).
Kuhn successfully challenged the common notion that science is always objective. Scientific inquiry is not a purely independent venture (Ladyman, 2002, p. 98). Science is not purely objective because scientific inquiry does not happen in a vacuum. The scientists operate in a given setting and are affected or determined by their circumstances.
Further, their work is based on established theories and facts whose truthfulness is accepted on trust. For example, a researcher in ecology has to have certain assumptions. The methodology he or she adopts was developed basing on given assumptions. Further, as an individual, the researcher has influences on self and from the environment that impact on his or her interpretation of study results (Ladyman, 2002, p.122).
The researcher has to be clear about what he or she wants. Then, he or she chooses methods that will guarantee that he or she gets what he or she wants. There is a general bias in the working of the scientist; his or her efforts are geared towards ensuring he or she gets what he wants. This kind of concern changes the researcher from an impartial subject to a subject that is influencing towards achieving a given kind of result.
The different phases or conceptual states are what Kuhn referred to as paradigms. Scientists in a given paradigm hold to a given set of collective beliefs or agreements (Robert, 1952, p. 132). They share in a perception or general approach to problems or challenges that they tackle. Each scientific undertaking happens in the context of a given theoretical frame work. There are certain assumptions that inform scientific inquiry or work.
The assumptions or collective beliefs guide or form basis for kind of methodology adopted, data interpretation framework and general analysis schema. For example, psychologists researching on human behavior base their inquiry on given assumptions. If a researcher based the research on a behavioral as opposed to psychoanalytic approach, the data they collect and the basis on which the same is analyzed would definitely lead to different results or theories (Godfrey-Smith, 2003, p. 80).
According to Kuhn, it is the implicit paradigm assumptions that help distinguish sciences from other areas of study (Hoyningen-Huene, 1993, 169). The implicit assumptions of a paradigm act as criterion that is used in study or to validate study. The changes in the implicit assumptions lead to a paradigm shift.
All paradigm shifts, according to Kuhn, happen through a revolutionary process. The hall marks of scientific revolution are a radical shift in theory and fact bases. A paradigm shift is a radical change in the way science as a study and criterion for accepting scientific findings is modeled.
The phase between two revolutions or paradigm shifts is what Kuhn referred to as a normal science phase. Normal science according to Hoyningen-Huene (1993, 165) did not receive much attention or scrutiny until Kuhn developed his ‘structure of scientific revolutions’.
During the normal science phase, scientists’ efforts are geared towards the consensus in assumptions (Hoyningen-Huene, 1993, 169). All theories and established facts support the status quo and deviating findings are considered out rightly wrong. In common practice, any findings that do not conform to established consensus or that contradict the basic paradigm assumptions are ignored.
Instead of occasioning or triggering further research, such findings are considered as erroneous. Galileo’s findings, for example, were considered out rightly wrong because the basic assumptions based on Ptolemy’s theory was in line with the sun going around the stationary earth. Normal science is often shrouded in tradition and protected with a vengeance (Nickles, 2003, p. 143).
Changing the status quo meets a lot of resistance because people generally fear the unknown. Therefore, a shift from a science paradigm also meets a lot of resistance. The resistance is occasioned by the fact that new paradigm often goes against expectations (Hoyningen-Huene, 1993, 177). The tension resulting from choice between maintaining status quo and charting new ground causes was referred to, by Kuhn, as scientific crisis.
Science seeks to answer questions; however, scientific inquiry is ignited by a puzzle. The puzzle is a problem or incidence that can not be explained by existing assumptions. However, it is on the basis of the existing assumptions that the problem is analyzed. This paradox i.e. a problem that established assumptions have no explanations for but being investigated on the basis of the established assumption, is what Kuhn identified a crisis in scientific research (Nickles, 2003, p. 152).
Crisis in science occurs when occurrences, incidences or discoveries no longer fit into the schema of established theories (Godfrey-Smith, 2003, p. 83). Scientists can either use established assumptions to come up with a convincing explanation, the problem can be left for later scientists to deal with it or a paradigm shift occurs. A paradigm shift means that new assumptions that challenge old assumptions are created.
The old assumptions have become like the common sense and thus challenging them is like challenging the obvious. The majority will see the proponent of a new paradigm as either insane or really foolish. If the new paradigm garners a critical few; a paradigm war is in the offing. A battle in supremacy or over which view is right ensures. The battle is supposed to be intellectual but in some instances it goes physical.
Kuhn further raised objections against test by falsification; a method of testing theory that had been developed by Karl Popper. Popper’s view was that if a theory did not fit into existing schema or assumptions, then it was to be rejected. Theorists aimed at establishing theories or findings that would be universally accepted (Hoyningen-Huene, 1993, p. 170).
However, as Kuhn argues, such a method is inconclusive and non-rational. As already indicated, science investigates into puzzles that current theories do not explain. If the current theories and assumptions can not explain the puzzle, then it would not make sense to discard findings that would warranty departure from already established assumptions (Nickles, 2003, p. 144). Rather than discarding, it makes more sense to investigate further into the given findings.
Kuhn’s other contribution to the debate on progress in science was his rejection of ‘incrementalism’ (Robert 1952, p.132). He believed that scientific inquiry or progress does not necessarily lead to establishment of ultimate truths.
It is latently and occasionally implied in discourses that developments in science have led to discovery or establishment of the ultimate truth. However, looking into the array of gray areas and contradictions in science, one can not be convinced so. Ultimate truths are far from being established in many areas of scientific interest.
Commensurability in science refers comparability of theories (Ladyman, 2002, p. 117). If a theory can be compared thus judged conclusively based on established assumptions, the theory is commensurable. If a theory can not compare with established theories or guiding assumptions, such a theory is considered as incommensurable. According to Kuhn, scientific paradigms are not commensurable (Robert, 1952, p. 142).
Paradigm’s incommensurability is occasioned by the fact that change in paradigm is change in world view. Therefore, people in different paradigms can not compare their views because they base their theories on different world views.
Secondly, often when paradigm shifts occur in science, methodology is also affected (Bird, 2004). If a study is done basing on a different methodology, there is not much ground for comparing it with another done based on some other methodology. Further, even the jargon or concepts used by different paradigms differ in a big way.
The way concepts are related in one paradigm does not resemble another paradigm due to change in assumptions. Finally, Kuhn expressed that paradigm shifts happen after sometime. When a paradigm shift occurs, scientists’ training and even experience changes, which makes paradigms incomparable (Bird, 2004).
From the foregoing paragraphs, it is clear that Kuhn’s ideas were in themselves seeds for a paradigm shift. Traditionally, it was believed that science is progressive with one idea leading to another successfully until ultimate truths are established. Kuhn championed a shift in paradigm.
The new paradigm challenges the claimed objectivity in sciences and obsession with comparability with established theories or knowledge. According to Kuhn, science progresses in a revolutionary way. The resistance to change due to established consensus and expectations make change or shift in paradigm very hard. Those who seek new ways or acknowledge unpopular findings that do not support established assumptions are met with insurmountable resistance.
Reference List
Andersen, H. (2001). On Kuhn, Belmont CA: Wadsworth.
Bird, A. (2004). Thomas Kuhn. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Retrieved from file:///C:/DOCUME~1/Owner/LOCALS~1/Temp/thomas-kuhn.htm
Godfrey-Smith, P. (2003). Theory and Reality. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Hoyningen-Huene, P. (1993). Reconstructing Scientific Revolutions: Thomas S. Kuhn’s Philosophy of Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Ladyman, J. (2002). Understanding Philosophy of Science. New York: Routledge
Nickles, T. (2003). Thomas Kuhn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Robert, K. (1952). Introduction to Philosophy of Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Change is as good as rest and good for everyone and by extension every society. Change is a phenomenon that is everlasting. Meaning that it is inevitable and all spheres of human life in all societies have been perpetually undergoing change(s). Thus our present experience is a consequence of the various changes- some drastic others normal and even unnoticeable- that have taken place in the past. Revolution is synonymous with change. Johnson explains that “revolutions are social changes” (1). This definition encompasses the broad meaning of revolution in the sense that there are various forms of revolutions including political, socioeconomic, and academic or philosophical all of which are intertwined. This task is a discussion of the thoughts and opinions about the philosophical aspect of the Copernican revolution on the basis of Phillip Frank’s article titled “The philosophical meaning of the Copernican Revolution.”
Philosophical Revolution
Drastic changes occur not only in the political and socio-economic spheres of human society but also in academic disciplines especially with respect to their philosophical, methodological, and theoretical foundations. It is important to note that all academic disciplines have got their own philosophy. That philosophy forms the source of knowledge in that particular discipline both among the social sciences as well as the natural sciences. Philosophical revolutions are usually accompanied by changes in the way professionals, experts and scholars in that field view their subject matter. In other words, they are accompanied by philosophical implications like the ones Phillip Frank seeks to address in his article regarding the philosophical meaning of the Copernicus revolution.
Philosophical Meaning of the Copernican Revolution
The copernican revolution was a change in ideas, that is, a revolution in man’s understanding of the universe and his relation to it Kuhn (1). Kuhn further adds that this occurrence in the rebirth of thought has been termed as a phenomenal turning point in the scholarly development of Western society. Phillip Frank begins his article by pointing to the fundamental problem with the philosophy of science which he argues is founded upon what faces a physical scientist, that is, observation of the real physical feature in the universe and on the other side the generally accepted principles of science. In between these two sides, he argues that there is an enormous gap that needs to be highlighted over and over again to succeed in helping the students of science in understanding the universe Frank (381).
The significance of the Copernican revolution lies in its ability to enable human thought to apprehend the fact that what is found in our senses and in particular the “…’Naïve’ sense experience” is far removed from reality in the real world situation Frank (381). In other words, Frank’s work contributed immensely towards the realization of the gap between what our senses fathoms in relation to a given feature of the universe. An example is given of the long-held believe that our earth is at rest which Copernicus proved wrong by attesting that our planet is in motion. Frank argues that Copernicus depicted the misapprehensions of our senses. In doing so he came up with a new pattern of explanation of our observations. Even though his theory was dismissed by some as philosophically irrational and illogical Frank asserts that even his greatest opponents did not doubt the fact that his system was a significant advance in astronomy.
On theory, Frank argues that in virtually all eras of the history of science a theory had to be in agreement with the general principles of physics. While previous theories on the celestial bodies such as the ptolemean theory which is said to have been in harmony with the Aristotelian philosophy and physics were embraced as true, Corpenicus theory was said to be a disturbance to this harmony and that it would clearly contradict the laws of physics known during the medieval period. However, he claims that before the Copernicus revolution there was in every theory an inconsistency between mathematical and philosophical truth.
Copernicus affirmed that he did not put forward his theory in opposition to the previous doctrine. Instead, he felt free to put forward a new hypothesis assuming the movement of the earth because there was no established doctrine as a result of lack of agreement between the earlier hypotheses with laws of physics which required the homogeneous circular motions around the earth as core. His theory explained for the observed motions nearly as perfectly as the Ptolemean theory of epicycles. Through his theory the movements of the planets were defined as orbits around the sun with the sun at the center. Since there was less epicycles and more similar-centric orbits than in Ptolemean system Copernicus maintained his theory was closer to requirements of the Aristotelian physics and the geocentric system. Corpenicus went to the extent of claiming that he had given the world a true picture of the universe in the strict sense of the term.
The culmination of Copernicus’ philosophical implications came to be realized through Isaac Newton’s work titled “Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy” which appeared 150 years after the Copernicus revolution. Frank argues that through these principles the Copernicus doctrine could be logically derived, it is also apparent that Copernican system was true in the whole sense of the word, both philosophically and mathematically.
Conclusion
The philosophical meaning of the Copernicus revolution derived its motivation from the conviction that prior to his theory there was no established theory from where he felt he was free to craft a theory that assumed motion of the earth and other planets and the suns at the center. This was a drastic paradigm shift in astronomy even though it was not embraced until many years after his death. As argued by Frank his theory presented wake up call to the realization that what is learnt through observation is more often than not away from reality. He despite opposition managed to enable scholars to differentiate between what is real from what is a mere illusion of our senses. Frank asserts that Copernicus “cleared the way for the great truth that we have complete freedom in our choice of a system of reference…. and that his revolution was the first step in a series of revolutions which climaxed… in depicting a democratic order of the universe in which all bodies play an equal part” (386).
Works Cited
Frank, Phillip. The Philosophical Meaning of the Copernican Revolution. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society. Vol.87.No.5, 1944, p. 381-386.
Carlos Fuentes was among the authors of the American literary Boom. One of his major works was “La muerte de Artemio Cruz” (The Death of Artemio Cruz).
The Death of Artemio Cruz critically analyzes the shortcomings of the revolution in Mexico and looks into the history and prospects of the country by examining different aspects of the community, beliefs and politics. Through the account, we get to see pervasive class differences between the poor and the rich in Mexico (Hart 67).
Carlos contends the capability of language to portray actual happenings using the typical third- person account by telling the story through the first, second, and third person perspectives. He begins every chapter in the novel using the first-person view of Artemio Cruz. As Artemio lay on his deathbed, he notices the fuss surrounding him when he sees his family members and the priest.
The priest, who is Father Paez, is performing the final ritual for Cruz. The method of using the present gives the reader a chance to navigate into Cruz’s mind, to listen to his opinions, search his conscience, and experience his internal mental condition during his last moments.
All episodes end by incidences that use the future tense or the second person narrative (You). One such ending is evident in the incident where Cruz and his son Lorenzo are out riding.
“You will bring Lorenzo to live ……without need on your part to explain the motives behind your labor in reconstructing the burned walls of the hacienda and reopening the flatland agriculture. The two of you will go out into the sun. You will pick up the wide-brimmed hat and put it on your head” (Fuentes161)
Words representing the future tense “you will” are all over the novel. This implies that both Cruz and Mexico have a predestined future. Every chapter begins with the scene at the deathbed and ends with circumstances of the future. In between are the flashbacks to the central incidences of the life of Cruz.
Using the third-person narrative technique, which is the most commonly used style, the author manages to drive the reader from the contemporary into the earlier life of Artemio, and similarly, of the empire of Mexico (Duran 57).
One key literary device that Carlos uses in Artemio Cruz is time alteration. Unlike other narratives that start with the birth of a character and then his death, Carlos’s work starts with the death of the main character Artemio and ends with a description of his birth.
Duran, a Latin America Literature Professor, thinks that this inversion of time is symbolic. He explains that Carlos used the style to symbolize the ‘death’ of Mexico subsequent to the 1910 Revolution and of its ultimate ‘birth’ as soon as the present corrupt capitalist power vanishes (Duran 56).
Before the realization of the Revolution goals, Mexico has to eliminate the fraudulent post-Revolutionary powers like Cruz (Gilly 43). Carlos’ description of Cruz’s birth at the end of the story denotes the renaissance of Mexico.
The Death of Artemio Cruz clearly demonstrates the barbarism of the Diaz rule. The well spelt out expressions anchor the tale to a bleak past reality in which Artemio Cruz navigates. Cruz was born as an illegitimate son. Despite his father being a rich hacienda vendor he neglected him. He found refuge among the peasants and this experience made him realize the wide gap between the wealthy and the poor.
As a youth, Crutz embraces the objectives of the Revolution, particularly lessening the gap between the poor and the affluent and he becomes a member of the rebel forces of the Revolution. However, he later accumulates a large empire through fraud, opportunism and craftiness.
Carlos, in his work, describes the profligate lifestyle of Crutz. He bought cars from overseas and often travelled in Acapulco for holiday. His mode of life highlights the cruel difference between the lavishness of the privileged Mexicans and the predicaments of the poor. Some of Crutz assets included:
“ Real-estate investments, the mines in Hidalgo, the logging concessions in Tarahumara, the pipe factory, the fish business, financing of financing, the net of stock operations, the legal representation of US companies, the administration of the railroad loans, the advisory posts in fiduciary institutions, the shares in foreign corporations…..”(Fuentes 9).
The acquisitions of Crutz differ broadly with the poverty he encounters as a peasant child. However, affluence becomes worthless due to his weakening health and looming death. As his life ends, the feeble Artemio develops into a shell of his earlier self and leaves with no material things.
In conclusion, the Death of Artemio Cruz by Carlos Fuentes is a multi-layered, intricate piece that provides an in-depth analysis of revolution in Mexico during twentieth century and its failures.
The author uses a unique narrative structure that combines the first, second, and third person perspectives, thus allowing the reader to understand the present, past and the future of Mexico. The novel condemns present evils, while maintaining a sense of positive hope for the future.
Works Cited
Duran, Victor. A Marxist Reading of Fuentes, Vargas Llosa, and Puig, London: University Press of America, 1994. Print.
Fuentes, Carlos. The Death of Artemio Cruz, New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1991. Print.
Gilly, Adolfo. The Mexican Revolution, New York: The New Press, 2005. Print.
Hart, John. Revolutionary Mexico: The Coming and Process of the Mexican Revolution, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1987. Print.
Chang and Pu give the impression that nationalism prevails over individual sensuality when intellectuals are faced with a dilemma between the two. The writers elaborate that one’s country is more important than the pursuit of love, even when love has been endorsed in its purest form. Love will always be discarded for the sake of revolution, which is a theme that Liu finds repeated by several writers. In the story, “Lust, Caution,” Chia-Chih sought to deliver Mr. Yee to the assassin’s bullet for a long period.
Her emotions were overshadowed by the feeling that she had something greater to do than to commit to the pleasure of love. The endurance of the thought to carry out the plan can demonstrate how strong the feeling of revolution is compared with love. People would expect the intensity of love between Jiang Mei and Qi Hong to prevail over revolution, but it does not. Liu explains that Chinese intellectuals have an extraordinary impression of the sublime prevailing over love.
Qi Hong had tried to remain in Beijing, expecting the influence of love to make Jiang Mei change her mind. However, the mentioning of her father, who died for the revolution seemed to have strengthened Jiang Mei’s decision to stay in China and be among university students who protested.
Analysis
Eileeng Chang and Zong Pu portray that when intellectuals are faced with a dilemma between love and revolution, they choose revolution, especially in China. The writers give the impression that one’s country is more important than the pursuit of love, even if the feeling of love is long-lasting. They describe the behavior of university students and graduates towards love when there a revolution in place.
In the story, “Lust, Caution,” Chia-Chih sought to deliver Mr. Yee to the assassin’s bullet for a long period without suspecting that she might end up entangled in love. Her emotions were overshadowed by the feeling that she had something greater to do than to commit to the thought of love.
Chang describes her commitment to carry out the plan by saying, “after two weeks tormented by worry, she finally received a jubilant call from Yee Ta-Tai” (22). Chia-Chih was worried that she would not be able to assist the group carry out the plan to assassinate Yee if she were not connected to Yee Tai-Tai. She was obsessed with carrying out the plan more than any thought of love. It indicates she valued the revolution more than romantic love.
The endurance of the thought to carry out the plan can demonstrate how strong the feeling of revolution is compared with love. It is not rare that the love of her colleagues could endure for more than two years, but her commitment to carry out the plan remained as strong as it were two years ago.
Mr. Yee wondered that “how far in advance – two years, the entire trap had been premeditated” (Chang 44). The need is more enduring than love. Chia-Chih demonstrates her resilience and her commitment to the revolution within the two years of separation.
The presence of Mr. Yee and his influential power almost made her develop emotions. Being a girl who had never fallen in love, it would have been easy. Chang describes that “every time she was with Yee, she felt cleansed as if by a scalding hot bath; but now everything she did was for the cause” (23). The revolution involved assassinating those who collaborated with the Japanese invaders.
The love emotions that tried to emerge were overwhelmed by the greater cause. She always had to use her experience in overcoming feelings of love. Chang elaborates that “she had built a powerful resistance to forming emotional attachments” (37). She used the technique to stop any thoughts of love for Mr. Yee.
Even though she hated most of the group members, she knew that the calls for a revolution were much greater. The author elaborates that “she was so obviously regretting the whole business; the rest of the group began to avoid her” (22). The main reason for her regrets was that it seemed as if Mr. Yee had realized the trap and evaded. She considered herself a failure.
The feeling of failure felt like someone who has lost a loved causing sleepless nights and depression. Kuang Yu-min, the mastermind behind the operation, had spoken to her through Wu (Chang 25). The rest of the group did not contact her, yet she was willing to continue with the plan after two years of separation.
Chia-Chih changed her mind to save Mr. Yee the last minute she felt love for him. Mr. Yee, on the other hand, had a wonderful experience to realize a beautiful girl like her would love him. The writer elaborates that “so she had loved him – his first true love” (Chang 44). However, he did not care to execute her colleagues. He was sure that such an action would make her hate him eventually (Chang45). Mr. Yee claims that “she wouldn’t have loved him if he had been the sentimental type” (Chang 45).
Mr. Yee saw an opportunity to kill two birds with one stone. One is to keep his secret love story sealed, and to restore honor to his department. He never cared if he would have wanted to search for her, and enjoy to be loved by her. The political significance of the outcome was more important than love.
Eileen Chang appears to give the impression that a woman might have second thoughts of choosing love over revolution. On the hand, Zong Pu elaborates that even the intellectual female may be persistent in the quest for a revolution instead of love. She uses Jiang Mei’s character to support her point. Jiang Mei was determined to stay in China and be part of the revolution instead of boarding a plane to America to be with her first love (Pu 273).
In Chang’s story, both the man and the woman had strong political reasons to influence their behavior. In Pu’s story, the main female character is attached to a strong political movement when the main male character relies only on personal thoughts of love to influence his actions.
People would expect the intensity of love between Jiang Mei and Qi Hong to prevail over revolution, but it does not. Her love for him can be seen when Xiao Su criticizes Qi Hong. She utters, “How can you say such things? I love him, I love him” (Pu 258). She is resistant to criticism that touches Qi Hong.
Xiao Su mentions that she should forget him for his violence and cruelty. Jiang Mei replies that “Yes, I’ll forget him when I die” (Pu 266). It was a sign of resolution, but in the end, revolution prevailed over her decision to stay in China when Qi Hong flew to America. A decision she claims that she can never regret even if she loves him so much that she cannot forget about him.
Love should be able to convert Qi Hong to carry placards beside Jiang Mei, and protest. It would be love that makes people do things for their loved ones, but their perceptions are divided. It appears that intellectuals are sure of their paths and cannot easily be diverted by the influence of love, no matter how strong it appears. Neither could Qi Hong join the revolutionary movements for the sake of love nor Jiang Mei abandon revolutionary movements in China for prosperity waiting in America (Pu 270).
Each person was loyal to his/her dreams than to the influence of love, even though they claimed that they have more for love than for dreams. Qi Hong claims, “I wish I could kill you and take you with me in a coffin” (Pu 270). On the other hand, she claims, “I’d rather be told that you were dead than know you were living in such a cowardly way” (Pu 270). Eventually, the influence of love changes neither their dreams nor their decisions.
Qi Hong had tried to remain in Beijing, expecting the influence of love to make Jiang Mei change her mind (Pu 271). However, the mentioning of her father, who died for the revolution seemed to have strengthened Jiang Mei’s decision to stay in China and be among university students who protested. Her decision was already firm on political movements, and love only made her sigh with emotions.
It did not make her change her dreams or actions. Zong Pu gives an impression of both a male and a female character that are determined to keep on with their dreams. Eileeng Chang demonstrated that a woman might have second thoughts at love when a man is more resolved to fight for national needs than individual ones.
The writers tend to give the revolution theme a stronger engagement than love. Zong Pu makes the places where emotional feelings are displayed to be accompanied by the characters in tears. However, Pu makes the demonstrators have a happy mood, which may put the revolution in a better picture.
Love develops in bitterness, and revolution is cast in happiness. As a result, the revolution appears more attractive to the reader. Jiang Mei tells herself that even though it is bitter, she has to endure “this last-minute” (Pu 273). It may be perceived as one last minute of pain for love, and then lasting greatness for revolution. On the other hand, Eileen Chang never develops the theme of love until the story reaches a climax.
Revolution has been developed as the main theme, and love as the subordinate. Chia-Chih’s love for Mr. Yee emerges after he bought her a rare type of pink diamond (Chang 37). The price of eleven gold bars may have much to do with what Mr. Yee was willing to do for her, but not for the sake of revolution.
At the beginning of the “Red Beans,” Jiang Mei opens the box with the two red beans sorrowfully but meets the party leaders with a lot of enthusiasm (Pu 274). Eileen Chang portrays that love may be regrettable, but not revolution. Jiang Mei elaborates this by her distasteful look at the crucifix picture, where the red beans had been kept. She does not want to have memories of those days (Pu 250).
Liu (210) discusses that the formula of love and revolution becomes a concern of modern theorist because it has been used repeatedly by Chinese writers. The Chinese writers, in most cases, make love to be subordinate to revolution. Love is expected to generate individual happiness. Revolutions are associated with a collective struggle.
They are expected to create heroism, and fulfillment of a better life for all members of the community. Eileen Chang elaborates the message by emphasizing the matter of everyone through Jiang Mei. Jiang Mei and Qi Hong try to find out the meaning of the philosophy of everyone (Chang 255).
Chang can elaborate on the differences in perceptions between the two characters. Qi Hong does not care about the collective good. He only cares about his career and individual success. On the other hand, Jiang Mei finds collectivism more important than individual success.
Revolution is one thing that shows payment to her mother, herself, her country, her roommate, Xiao Su, and the death of her father. Love only shows recompense to herself and Qi Hong. The choice is simpler considering the beneficiaries of revolution. For this reason, love has to be in subordination to revolution.
Love and revolution do not exist independently but reinforce each other. Liu states that “they are inextricably combined, enveloped by the light of idealism” (211). Liu (211) tries to show that love makes the fantasy of collective happiness much stronger. Politics without love would not have been strongly pursued. One would look at the sacrifice they have made for revolution, and gain more impetus.
Liu (210) discusses that the combination shows the “over-determined relation between the collective power and individual sensuality that elaborate how Chinese intellectuals went to extraordinary lengths to portray their utopian dream of a stronger and more modernized China” (210). The discussion shows that the extraordinary action of Chinese intellectuals has been emphasized by accompanying revolution with love, where revolution is chosen at the expense of love.
The writers have been able to achieve more by using female characters in the revolution than if they would have used male characters only. Liu (104) discusses that female bodies can be used critically to convey revolutionary ideologies, which gives a different picture from the repressive patriarchal system of traditional China.
Zong Pu uses Jiang Mei and Xiao Su to gives a critical picture of women’s determination to fight for revolution and forsake love. It is unexpected from the patriarchal system. The women were supposed to follow their lovers wherever they went. Eileeng Chang uses Chia-Chih to emphasize a form of determination that could last for more than two years.
Before the revolution women were defined by their natural seductive bodies. Liu (104) discusses that seductive women’s bodies are used as instruments to convey revolutionary ideology. Eileen Chang uses Chia-Chih’s natural seductive body as they were entering the Indian’s jeweler shop. She narrates, “She knew she was watching her, and so slightly exaggerated the swivel of her hips” (Chang 28). What women commonly use for love has been diverted for the benefit of the revolution.
The issue of class struggles also emerges in the revolution. Liu discusses that some writers “link gender identification to class identification” (104). Chang (4) elaborates the class identification of gender through the display of diamond rings and black caps. The revolutionary role played by the female gender is linked to the higher class.
On the other hand, Zong Pu (251) uses Jiang Mei, whose class fell lower when her father died. The revolutionary struggle has an association with the higher classes, who have a different perception of the meaning of love. The two writers use two girls who are not spoilt, who knew for the first time. They were expected to give their purest love. Forsaking that love shows a great sacrifice.
Conclusion
The matter of love being subordinated to revolution is a common theme in Chinese literature. The writers usually use love and revolution, side by side, to elaborate the level of sacrifice that the characters were able to take to fight for revolution. The two writers have made the theme of revolution over love stronger by using young girls, whose love is pure, and have not been spoilt. The critical use of determined female characters gives the revolution a stronger impact because women are expected to choose love over revolution.
The two writers have enhanced the seductive women body in their descriptions, but show that the seductive bodies are used for revolution instead of love. When Chang shows that a woman can change her mind, Pu gives Jiang Mei a more resolute determination even though the intensity of their love is stronger compared with that of Chia-Chih towards Mr. Yee. Chinese intellectuals tend to have a stronger stand towards nationalism than they have towards love.
Works Cited
Chang, Eileen. Lust, Caution and Other Stories, London: Penguin Books, 2007. Print.
Liu, Jianmei. Revolution Plus Love: Literary History, Women’s Bodies, and Thematic Repetition in Twentieth-Century Chinese Fiction, Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2003. Print.
Pu, Zong. “Red Beans.” Writing Women in Modern China: An Anthology of Women’s Literature from the Early Twentieth Century. Ed. Amy Dooling and Kristina Torgeson. New York: Columbia University Press, 1998. 247-273. Print.
The novel Cement by Gladkov vividly portrays social and political relations in Soviet Russia and their impact on the life of ordinary citizens. The main events took place in the 1920s when Bolsheviks came to power. The novel demonstrates that one of the true insights of Communism is its understanding of the manner in which all human institutions and activities become perverted to the selfish use of particular groups. Whereas progressive liberalism has hoped for progress through the general education and enlightenment of man, the sectarians and the Communists understand that it will take more than persuasion and education to unseat the powerful from their places of domination. In this sense, we must understand the sectarian note of apocalyptic judgment upon the rich and powerful.
From the very beginning, the novel portrays that social and personal relations in Russia were determined by the Communist Party and communist ideology. In the novel, the communist hero Gleb cannot tolerate that after his return from the war his wife Dasha turns out to be “a free Soviet citizen” (Gladkov, p. 52), who sees in him more a comrade than a husband. She tells him that in his absence she almost had to pay with her life for her part in revolutionary activities and after her liberation has become accustomed to free sexual intercourse with other comrades. She wants her husband Gleb to accept this way of life and is not jealous of herself when another woman tries to win his love. As Gleb cannot conquer his jealousy of her lover, she rebukes him: “You need a woman as a slave you are a good leader but in your life a bad communist” (Gladkov 78). Both husband and wife are so much occupied by Party work that there is no more any question of home life. When after a heavy day’s work they meet in their room, they feel that the thought of personal happiness is: “worthless” (Gladkov, p. 296).
The fact about Revolutionary Russia is that the powerful groups have shown no tendency whatsoever to allow the state to wither away. Quite the contrary, they have been steadily increasing and maintaining their autocratic power. Some of them, like the Communists, wanted a dictatorship, not of the proletariat but of the saints. Its result would have been identical to that of Soviet Russia. But the wiser of them understood that since man used positions of power to exploit the common good, the only solution was to make these positions of power subject to the control of all men in a democratic manner. Gladkov portrays that the Polja who has taken an active part in the civil war is deeply disappointed by post-revolutionary life. As the author in this novel also depicts some bureaucratic and debauched Party members, Polja’s complaints sound convincing: “Is this the necessary result of our suffering and our sacrifices?” (Gladkov, p. 216) she asks, looking at her comrades, who ‘theoretically are all heroes, but in practice only do their utmost to get easy jobs’ (57). She attempts in vain to recover something of the heroism of the civil war in the grey ‘working day’ (Gladkov, p. 57) of the NEP, but she is misunderstood by people around her. She begins to neglect her work and is finally expelled from the Party because she has openly protested against the NEP, ‘the restoration of capitalism’ (Gladkov, p. 193). It is remarkable that the main characters of the novel, the orthodox communists Gleb and Dasha, do not agree with this Party decision and turn against the bureaucratic Party members: they are much more dangerous according to them than this disillusioned romantic woman. In works dealing with the NEP, the type of the vacillating intellectual is of less importance: it is seen that during this period such a type of revolutionary can more easily fulfill his social task because it is not accompanied with so much horror and cruelty as during the civil war. The conflict between pity and duty becomes more superficial and he often succeeds in adapting himself. The Communists recognize this truth as it applies to capitalism but fail to see that it also includes the Communists themselves. Here we have one of the reasons why the sects, for all their similarities to Communism, led to democracy while Communism has led to totalitarianism. The Marxians saw this clearly, and it was implicit in all the doctrines of sin held by the sects. Yet modern believers in progress have completely ignored this fact (Suny, p. 32).
The novel teaches readers that revolution and the new social order changed the values and morals of people. For instance, Dasha even allows their child to pine and die in a children’s home, because Party work must come first. For a moment it seems as if Gleb, too, can accept the new morality when Dasha has a narrow escape from death on a dangerous expedition: ‘she had become dearer to him and more than his wife] a new friend”’ (Gladkov, p. 145), but soon jealousy returns to torment him. What is remarkable is that Gleb, the slave of the old bourgeois morality, seems in this conflict more engaging and more natural than Daša, who has some forced traits. This appears also from her words to a weaker friend: “Let our hearts be of stone” (Gladkov, p. 271). In the end, she decides to leave Gleb. Finally, Gleb finds all his happiness in his work with which he achieves enormous results. When he succeeds in getting concrete works, closed down in the war, going again, and the workers cheer him, all personal sorrow drops away from him (Suny, p. 31).
The truth of this concept is tragically clear, however, to anyone who realistically faces modern history. For example, take man’s development of science. Here surely there is if there is anywhere, an unalloyed step forward. What but good is there in man’s learning to control nature for man’s welfare? Yet the control of nature found by science is control of nature not by all men, but by a few, and the consequence is that the possibilities of concentrated power also grow with science. What begins as the control of nature by man ends all too often as the control of some men by others. Consequently, it is precisely the modern age of science that has made possible the modern form of totalitarianism. Cement presents that all stress is laid on the goodwill and not on the vacillation and uncertainty of Sergej, a typical intellectual, who is one of the minor characters in the novel. He tries to convince himself by means of his intellect that “man is a worthless part of the whole” (Gladkov, p. 283), but from his spontaneous reactions it appears again and again that “not mankind’ but ‘man” (Gladkov, p. 278) is the most important thing for him. When the bourgeois are driven out of their houses he thinks that ‘this cannot be a Party measure’ (Gladkov, p. 186); when former officers are ridiculed he wants people ‘to talk with the enemies as with human beings’ (Gladkov, p. 226). He is not highly thought of by his comrades: ‘Intellectuals are always timid asses in the Party: they always feel slighted and guilty,’ they say, alluding to him. His reaction to this is again ambiguous.
In sum, the novel portrays that the Soviet regime and revolution changed all aspects of life: political, social, and cultural. People were inclined to forget their old traditions and accepted communist ideology. The Communists and the sectarians, seeing that all man’s social structures are corrupted by self-interest, understood that each stage of man’s progress is also a decline. In short, the efforts of man to climb the ladder of progress are never unambiguously successful.
Works Cited
Gladkov, F. V. Cement. Northwestern University Press; Translated edition, 1994.
Suny, R. The Russian Revolution and Bolshevik Victory. Wadsworth Publishing; 3 edition, 1989.