Analysis Of ' Iron ' By Robert Russell, Arendt, And Cox

Good Essays

Being a junior member of the Justice Department, I have evaluated such cases from Irons and Herman, along with the philosophical readings from Hume, Russell, Arendt, and Cox. With the different perspectives, but ample similarities between them all, we are able to tie in present day events with certain ban’s and policies implemented today. Iron’s prologue starts off by noting that the Supreme Court has so much power to choose what cases it sees and a majority of cases that have tried to be reversed, have not been. Iron’s goes on to mention that racial discrepancies, gender differences, background, and education all come into effect the outcome of cases. As seen in Hume’s writing, there are prejudiced decisions made by figures of authority …show more content…

The combat Hume brings up is between liberty and authority. Having the the freedom to say whatever we would like comes with our First Amendment right, but when it comes to certain things, we must obey higher authorities commands and not say things in certain settings. Hume states, “Liberty is the perfection of civil society; but still authority must be acknowledged essential to its very own existence” (Hume, 23). We need authority in our societies to maintain order, but liberty to remain independent. American civilians now have an extreme amount of rights, more than other countries around the world, but it took the United States time to get there. Next, in the late 1800’s into the 1900’s, Bertrand Russell explains his thoughts on the controversy of liberty, freedom, and democracies in “Liberty and Ideas”. Places where liberty is not prevalent, power is taking over. He admires Karl Marx for reasons that he speaks about how the English used to have no voice within the government. With having no chance to explain their points of view, they had benefits in their society which gave them a better life. The political people in authority secured the government well, but did not listen to outside opinions. Russell explains Russia’s government as a, “Clique supported in comparative affluence and comfort by a subsidized army and police force” (Russell 65). Stalin brought his people agony and despair. During this

Get Access