http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-26116868
In the March 2011 Pro-democracy
protests erupted across the country of Syria. The uprising started after the
arrest and torture of some teenagers whom painted revolutionary slogans on a
school wall. The Syrian government under President Assad has been accused of
government corruption and abuse of human rights. The government then sent
security forces to calm the pro-democracy protests but they did the exact
opposite. The security forces opened up fire on the protesters killing several
and triggering national protests demanding the resignation of President Assad.
President Assads regime have been accused of deliberately attacking areas with
large amounts of civilians with chemical airstrikes. Since the beginning of the
unrest in Syria more than 200,000 Syrians have lost their lives and 11 million
more have been forced to flee their homes as rebels fight the Assad regime.
I
found that this article related to our John Locke conversation about social
contract. Locke believes that the government has the responsibility to protect
natural rights such as life and liberty. As we stated in class “governments
that seek to subvert these natural rights are illegitimate and therefore can be
overthrown.” The citizens of Syria believe that their social contract that they
have with the Syrian government has been violated. The social contract has been
violated because the Assad regime is torturing and killing large amount of
Syrian citizens. I believe that the Assad regime has violated the social
contract between the government and the citizens. Giving the Syrian citizens
the right to revolt against the government. Do you think that John Locke would
agree that the Assad Regime broke the social contract that they have with the
citizens of Syria?
How about I turn the question back on you clem...;-)
ReplyDeleteDo you think Locke would approve of what happened in Syrian in 2011? And how about Hobbes? Do subsequent events better support Locke or Hobbes in this instance?
I do believe that Locke would approve of the protests against the Assad Regime. These events better support Locke because the regime had a contract with the people to protect them and they have failed. It better supports Locke than Hobbes because as stated in class citizens shouldn't disobey/rise up against the Sovereign.
DeleteThat is such a sad story to read. The people of Syria clearly didn't want a leader who was going to attack and kill them. I think that Locke would agree that Assad's regime broke their social contract with the people of Syria. I don't think anyone ever would say "yes, I agree that you can attack my family and I whenever, for whatever reason". I think this story is the perfect example of when it is appropriate to retaliate against something unjust, especially when it is clearly in violation of the social contract. The Syrian government doesn't sound like they're protecting the natural human rights of anyone in their country. There isn't a way to justify what the regime is doing, and the Syrian people have a reason to react.
ReplyDeleteIt is difficult to determine who is doing what is "right" or just in this situation. The leader of Syria is not doing anything justly by attacking and harming the Syrian citizens, but the people retaliating are not handling the situation justly either. I think that Locke would agree that the Syrian government, under President Assad, abused their power and that with this, gave the citizens of Syria a reason to revolt.
ReplyDeleteIn Chapter IX, Locke states that: men's uniting into commonwealths and putting themselves under government is the preservation of their property. By submitting themselves to the government, those civilians do not mean to follow all the commands and bear all the actions which made and done by the government unconditionally. Civilians want the common consent to be the standard of right and wrong and they want a known and indifferent government. As Locke states that:"In the state of nature there often wants power to back and support the sentence when right, and to give it due execution" (Locke, 58). Clearly, John Locke would agree that the Assad Regime broke the social contract that they have with the citizens of Syria since it does not perform in a way that the civilians have expected it to be.
ReplyDeleteIn Chapter IX, Locke states that: men's uniting into commonwealths and putting themselves under government is the preservation of their property. By submitting themselves to the government, those civilians do not mean to follow all the commands and bear all the actions which made and done by the government unconditionally. Civilians want the common consent to be the standard of right and wrong and they want a known and indifferent government. As Locke states that:"In the state of nature there often wants power to back and support the sentence when right, and to give it due execution" (Locke, 58). Clearly, John Locke would agree that the Assad Regime broke the social contract that they have with the citizens of Syria since it does not perform in a way that the civilians have expected it to be.
ReplyDeleteIn Chapter IX, Locke states that: men's uniting into commonwealths and putting themselves under government is the preservation of their property. By submitting themselves to the government, those civilians do not mean to follow all the commands and bear all the actions which made and done by the government unconditionally. Civilians want the common consent to be the standard of right and wrong and they want a known and indifferent government. As Locke states that:"In the state of nature there often wants power to back and support the sentence when right, and to give it due execution" (Locke, 58). Clearly, John Locke would agree that the Assad Regime broke the social contract that they have with the citizens of Syria since it does not perform in a way that the civilians have expected it to be.
ReplyDeleteI believe that both sides are acting unjustly, as there is a clear disconnect between the two. Both have broken the social contract as the regime has not held up its end of the bargain by protecting the people, but the people have not given their support to the regime either.
ReplyDelete