Top-Rated Free Essay
Preview

V for Vendetta

Good Essays
831 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
V for Vendetta
V for Vendetta

March 8th 2012

Locke's theory was that man is by nature a social animal. In the state of nature men mostly kept their promises and honoured their obligations, and though insecure, it was mostly peaceful, good and pleasant. Humans know the difference between right and wrong, and are capable of knowing what is lawful and unlawful well enough to resolve conflicts. They are capable of telling the difference of whats theirs and what belongs someone else. Regrettably they do not always act appropriately. The gap between our ideas and words about the world, and the world itself, is large and difficult, but still if one man calls it evil, the man refereed to still has the qualities of good or evil. Peace is normal and we should be able to live together. While respecting each other. We retain the right to life and liberty, and gain the right to just, impartial protection of our property. If a ruler seeks absolute power, he puts himself in the state of war. Men have the right by nature. Hobbes theory was man is not by nature a social animal, society could not exist except by the power of state. Our knowledge of objective, true answers is so feeble, so slight and imperfect as to be mostly worthless in resolving practical disputes. In a state of nature people do not know what is theirs. Property exists solely by the will of the state, thus in a state of nature men are condemned to endless violent conflict. Men cannot know good and evil. If you shut up as you are as told, you have the right not to be killed.

Things the government does to reinforce Hobbes' theory is, they don't tell the citizens the truth and the reality of what they are doing to people at the treatment centre to find a cure for medication. They were abusing people of their rights in order to find a solution for another problem. The government believes that they must give up rights/freedoms in order to be safe. The government pass themselves as moral good but they are the ultimate corruption of power.

The government is telling people that the government is good and that V is a terrorist and that he is the reason why the world is how it is at the moment. V's actions in the movie are very violent but as he says in the film “Violence can lead to justice” In the movie the governments wants to get rid of and blames Immigrants, Muslims, homosexuals etc. For the problem that the London government faces and for the reason why such a government exists to protect the people. V believes this is wrong and he wants to stop the government from their bad actions and judgement. Some freedoms given would have been not being able to leave past 11. Not being able to speak your own mind etc.

In V for Vendetta citizens natural rights are violated, and V's actions were indeed necessary. In Locke's theory he defended the claim that men are by nature free and equal against claims that God had made all people naturally subject to a monarch. He argued that people have rights, such as the right to life, liberty, and property, that have a foundation independent of the laws of any particular society. Locke used the claim that men are naturally free and equal as part of the justification for understanding legitimate political government as the result of a social contract where people in the state of nature conditionally transfer some of their rights to the government in order to better insure the stable, comfortable enjoyment of their lives, liberty, and property. I believe that Locke's theory is correct in this situation rather than Hobbes theory, in the film V for Vendetta because people should be allowed to do what they want at whatever time they need, people should have the right of freedom in their religion or beliefs, and people can decide for themselves what is wrong from right. In the film there is a curfew of not being able to leave your house past 11 pm . Evey left her house past curfew and she is approached by some Englishmen who take it upon themselves, under the guise of the government, to stop her. Locke’s theory states that you should be able to do what you want and know the difference between good and evil. She should have been able to do what she wanted without have been bothered. The London government was mainly against Immigrants, Muslims, and homosexuals. The government should have no say on what people think. The government is restricting people from saying what they want, that is until V tries to stop them, and everyone comes as a community to bring the government down on November 5th. Therefore people should be able to do what they want and have the rights and freedoms as everyone else and be equal.

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    According to Hobbes, a government is needed to create social order. Because humans are naturally self-persevering, they are always in a state of conflict with one another. There are fundamental laws that a government set is place to restrain natural human…

    • 789 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    After analyzing how Locke and Hobbes understand the state of nature it is evident that they share many ideas but they also show essential differences in their ideas. Hobbes regards the state of nature as a state of war, in which natural law is established only after a process of reasoning. This process leads men to the conclusion that they must somehow find…

    • 397 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Mankind can never be at peace because of the violence that is going on in the world. It doesn’t have to be several people but only one person that can ruin it for everyone. For instance, not everyone has the same thoughts as everyone else. Many people can disagree on little things and make them big things and start using violence to try and settle conflicts. Violence is the thing that ruins the world by not being at peace. This is an example of Hobbes because he believed that people can act on their evil impulse. Ralph is an example of Locke because he is respectful to others by not treating them badly, but treating them equally.…

    • 639 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    For Hobbes, the need of an outright power, as a Sovereign, took after from the utter ruthlessness of the State of Nature. The State of Nature was totally grievous, thus objective men would will to submit themselves even to outright power with a specific end goal to escape it. For John Locke, 1632-1704, the State of Nature is an altogether different sort of spot, thus his contention concerning the social contract and the way of men's relationship to power are subsequently entirely distinctive. While Locke uses Hobbes' methodological gadget of the State of Nature, as do for all intents and purposes all social contract scholars, he utilizes it to a very distinctive end. Locke's contentions for the social contract, and for the privilege of residents…

    • 152 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In Locke’s’ piece, Of the State of Nature Chapter II, he emphasizes the positive views of human nature. Locke supports a no-government form of rule. He believes that man can rise above injustice and keep a fully functioning society without rule or as he puts it they can have “A State of perfect freedom to order their actions, and dispose of their possessions and persons, as they think fit…..” (Locke). If you give man the freedom to make his own decisions and choices he will make the correct ones. Freedom of choice is what is needed to keep a society intact and functioning, individuals in a society need to feel as if they are in charge of their own destiny. The natural rights of life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness are backed up by the notion of freedom and choice of…

    • 464 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Chapter 18

    • 1729 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Locke agrees with Hobbes that the purpose of government is to create order in society but contends that people are reasonable and would cooperate with each other and could rebel if ruler were tyrant. Ruler stays in power only as long as he has consent of those governed. He said people had natural rights, including right to life,…

    • 1729 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    Hobbes vs Locke

    • 1466 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Both Hobbes and Locke shared similarities within their political theories; however their theories also had some major differences. Both men were responding to the crisis of the 17th century and they were highly influenced by the scientific revolution. Hobbes and Locke rejected all previous theories regarding human nature. They used the same methodology, and the men accepted an atomistic view of society. They believed that individuals were rational and were motivated by self-interest. Hobbes and Locke traced their theories from a state of nature to the social contract. They agreed that the legitimacy of the government rested on the consent of the governed. Together, both men rejected legitimate political authorities such as Divine Right of Kings, brute force, historical tradition, and feudal contracts. Both political philosophers offered interesting arguments pertaining to government, human nature, and the state of nature.…

    • 1466 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Better Essays

    Locke believes that before we form civil society by consenting to establish government, we live in a State of Nature. He describes this pre-political state as,...a state of perfect freedom to order their actions, and dispose of their possessions and persons, as they think fit, within the bounds of the law of nature, without asking leave, or depending on the will of any other man. (Locke, 1980, p.81)The State of Nature is ruled essentially by human nature. Liberty, equality, self preservation, reason, and property are the most prominent principles that Locke feels are innate to humans. Locke explains how nature intended for all men to be equal,...creatures of the same species and rank, promiscuously born to all the same advantages of nature, and the use of the same facilities should be equal amongst another... (Locke, 1980, p.8)Locke comes to the conclusion that humans are self preserving in the State of…

    • 4014 Words
    • 17 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Locke Vs Hobbes Essay

    • 669 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Locke, as a Christian, believed that God grants us with unalienable rights that, “no one ought to harm another in his Life, Health, Liberty, or Possessions” (Chapter V of Property). Under Locke’s form of government one’s rights are protected most famously written in the Declaration of Independence. Hobbes however did not think that the government had any obligation to protect the rights of its people and “To this war of every man against every man, this also is consequent; that nothing can be unjust. The notions of right and wrong, justice and injustice, have there no place. Where there is no common power, there is no law; where no law, no injustice” (Of the Natural Condition of Mankind as Concerning their Felicity and Misery). With more rights, people will enjoy more safety than simply the protection required by a Hobbesian Monarch. Therefore, these nations organized under the principles of Locke are more powerful by treating their subjects as human beings capable of making good decisions and worthy of natural rights. As it is more enjoyable to live in such a nation, in a time of war countrymen are more likely to willingly fight to protect the nation and rights given to…

    • 669 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    V for Vendetta

    • 1043 Words
    • 5 Pages

    “V for Vendetta” and “1984” have very similar plots and set ups but they also have very important differences. Both the film and the book are based on totalitarian societies in which the government attempts to control as much of the peoples lives as possible. Also in both the book and film the protagonists realize that they are being manipulated and that they no longer want to live this way. One of the important differences though is in the set up. The book is set in 1984 while the movie is set sometime in the future meaning more technology and new challenges.…

    • 1043 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Hobbes VS Locke

    • 273 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Thomas Hobbes and John Locke both had very different views on society and government. For Locke, natural rights could co-exist within a civil society and that natural rights and civil society were not mutually exclusive categories. While Hobbes thinks that the absolute power of the sovereign is simply the price mankind must pay for peace, Locke believes that absolute power is never a remedy for the state of nature. Hobbes and Locke also greatly differed in their opinions on the role of the state in society. Locke believed that government had obligations to fulfill, but not rights, and “cannot do as it pleases”. He saw necessary a separation of powers to protect the individual rights of the people, and if these rights were infringed or trust was violated, “people have the right to alter or abolish the government. These views were directly opposite to Hobbes. Hobbes was in favor of the opinion that the people have formed the government for peace and security, and that in return, people should not be allowed to change, judge, or protest against their government. He thought that an absence of government could lead to possibility of violent death, and therefore “government should never give up its power”.…

    • 273 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Locke Vs Hobbes

    • 508 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Thomas Hobbes believed that a ruler with absolute control was necessary, while John Locke held that government should be at least partly be influenced by the people. Locke also believed that the people had the right and responsibility to overthrow their government if their needs are not being satisfied. On the contrary, Hobbes was more pessimistic. He believed in the Social Contract, thinking that once people handed their will to a ruler by putting them in power, that ruler had total power over them and could not be overthrown. Hobbes believed that this transfer of power was how man is able to get out of the state of nature and formed society.…

    • 508 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Both of the philosophers had very differing views on mankind and equality. There were three main points in Hobbes’ argument about mankind. The first was that man is naturally vain and selfish. The second point always made was that people are moved by two emotions: the desire of power and the fear of death. The third point that was commonly presented is that each man is ultimately equal in that any man can kill, or be killed by another man. There were also three main points in Locke’s argument about mankind. The first point was that knowledge humans obtain is done so by observations and experiments, rather than theory. The second point was that any immoral behavior from an individual was the product of the environment in which the individual lived. The third point was that people have natural rights…

    • 914 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    V for Vendetta

    • 935 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Describe the opening scene of the visual text. Explain how it helped you understand what the text was about using examples of the visual and oral language features to support your ideas.…

    • 935 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    John Locke believed that individuals in a state of nature would be bound morally, this would usually not make them harm each other, but without a government to protect them from those willing to break the moral code, they would have no sense of security and would live in constant fear. At the same time Locke also stated “that all government in the world is merely the product of force and violence, and that men live together by no other rules than that of the beasts, where the strongest carries it...”(Uzgalis) and this belief was the basis for his educated view and explanation of the social contract. Even though John Locke believed in this, in some way it would also mean that he would be negating a very central distinction between legitimate and illegitimate government. He believed that legitimate government could come through violence as long as the…

    • 639 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays