1988 Aristocracy, the privileged class of people usually of high birth, has existed from the very beginning of civilization. Aristocracy was never thought of as odd or unacceptable, on the contrary it was thought to be benevolent. As a result, people have become so familiarized with the concept of aristocracy that they often find fault in other institutions such as democracy. In Democracy in America, author, Alexis De Tocqueville, indicates that both aristocracy and democracy have their advantages and disadvantages, but it becomes obvious that Tocqueville leans towards aristocracy rather than democracy. Tocqueville opens the text by addressing the aristocracy institution. Tocqueville mentions that “a man always knows his forefathers and respects them; he thinks he already sees his remote descendants and he loves them.” But he argues that aristocracy causes men to sacrifice “[their] personal gratifications” and it allows men to “sacrifice themselves for others” rather than mankind itself. Based on the statements above, Tocqueville openly declares that aristocracy does not benefit people as a whole, it merely benefits the individuals. Those individuals unconsciously place others above their own selves, they praise those who have passed long ago, and they seek to please others in the present. On the other hand, aristocracy has “the effect of closely binding every man to several of his fellow citizens.” Through aristocracy, the groups of people display kinship amongst themselves; therefore, they are more tightly knitted together verses community as a whole. Aristocracy nonetheless encourages social class and distinction, which is highly discouraged in democracy. In addition, Tocqueville opinionates his view point of democracy. In democracy there are “those who went before are soon forgotten; of those who will come after, no one has any idea…” Rather than accepting the ideas of remembering and cherishing one’s forefather in the past and present, democracy encourages individualism. In democracy people “owe nothing to any man, they expect nothing from any man; they acquire the habit of always considering themselves as standing alone, and the apt to imagine that their whole destiny is in their own hands.” There was not one man that was higher than the other or more rich and powerful that could influence the population. Everyone was equal; one group alone could not use the population of their own desires. Democracy gave man the freedom to do as they will without any
2. Analyse and contrast elite, pluralist and Marxist theories of the state. Which interpretation do you find most convincing?
The aim of this essay is to examine the three major theories of the state before concluding which of them is, in my opinion, most useful when examining the relationship between the state and civil society in the UK. I will first attempt to briefly outline the three theories. Following this I will offer some definitions and distinctions as well as highlighting…
What is Sociology?
Chapter 1, p 3-37
You should be able to:
• Sociology- the study of human behavior in society and how people react, they look to save the people, they get the base of where it is coming from and examine it
• Sociological imagination- By C.…
HIGH INCOME- people live in the rich region
MIDDLE INCOME- people live rural villages
LOW INCOME- poverty city
Thinking globaly helps us learn more about ourselves.
3 kinds of change important in the development of sociology
the rise of a factiry-base economy
the explosive growth of cities(caused social problems such as violence)
new ideas about democracy& political rights
COMET'S 3 STAGES OF SOCIETY
MORAL GROUNDS OF AFFLUENT WESTERN DEMOCRACIES FOR EXCLUDING POOR IMMIGRANTS
The move by many people from the third world countries to affluent Western societies depicts efforts to escape the consequences of poverty and oppression. Most of the people are; however, prevented from reaching the Western democracies. There are concerns over the immoral nature of preventing the individuals from accessing opportunities in the Western societies.…
Sociology is often criticised for being similar to common sense, but sociology differs from common sense in a number of ways. Common sense is based on the main beliefs of a society, whereas sociology gathers evidence to examine and analyse the main beliefs of society.…
The brief period of democracy after the French revolution in 1789 was a time of terrifying persecution of all those who disagreed with the leaders. With all of that happening a long with the unstable democracy and bloody civil war, the compromise came a long and this was among small groups and other smaller groups that created more specialized goals. Each aimed for total victory rather than compromise. Each group wanted to seek revenge after what happen rather than let it go.…
(Hons) Sociology, University of Essex
M.A. (Sociological Studies) University of
D. Phil. University of Sussex
Doctor honoris causa University of Turku, Finland
Lecturer in Education, University of Sussex
Lecturer in the Sociology of Education,
King's College, London.
Reader in the Sociology of Education,
University of London.…