Analysis Of ' V For Vendetta By Allan Moore And The Norsefire Government

History has a tendency to repeat itself.  One of humanity’s most popular ways of getting its point across is through violence.  When words are no longer enough to argue a point, human casualties not only directly solve the problem, but symbolically send a message to all those affected as well.  Just as the American colonies fought against the British for Freedom when their voice was no longer heard, and just as the Islamic extremists used terrorism to send an evil message to America, both V and Chancellor Sutler used violence to gain a voice in a world of chaos.

Thus, small groups invite invaders and foster dissent. Hobbes to accepted that man bestowing his power in one leader, “is more than consent, or concord; it is a real unity of them all, in one every man, I authorize and give up my right of governing myself, to this man, or on this condition, that thou give up thy right to him, and authorize all his actions in like manner.” (CWT III, 38). The preceding quote was Hobbes’s opinion of a social contract. This, Hobbes believed, was essential to man escaping the state of nature, and to the formation of a responsible government.

In V for Vendetta, there are many symbols that represent the fascist society. Marinetti’s reading, The Founding and Manifesto of Futurism, he writes about the “beauty” that can be seen in fascist work. Marinetti’s manifesto declares, “we affirm the world’s magnificence has been enriched by a new beauty: the beauty of speed.” In this example, the machine is a car and it is appealing because of its power. In V for Vendetta, FATE is the computer used by the leader where he can see what the people of London are doing. “You said I love you...” (p. 184) The leader has love for the computer and we can see how he almost worships the machine and talks to it. The leader makes little contact with the people of London. For example, “The mouth” who oversee propaganda and the other branches give public announcements. The leader

First, Hobbes says that nature is chaos. There are no rules, and the only means of protection are the strengths of each individual. There is no trust among anyone, and each individual only cares about his or herself. Hobbes develops the right of nature, or self-preservation, out of these circumstances. Each individual has a right to think of self-preservation in a world where no one can be trusted. One might think that this wouldn’t fix the problem of the natural chaos. However, Hobbes explains that the focus on self-preservation will be so powerful that individuals will make covenants that will be adhered to because they preserve everyone and hence oneself. This is in accordance with Hobbes’ concept of the laws of nature. He explains the laws of nature to be: seek peace, forfeit rights, and keep covenants. Humans pursuing self-preservation would realize that by seeking peace and forfeiting rights such as taking what one wanted from others as one saw fit self-preservation is easier and more achievable. This also requires the formation of governments to enforce the covenants made. Otherwise, there would be no way to know for certain that the covenants would be respected and upheld. With the formation of government come concepts such as justice. Hobbes bases his definition of justice on the very thing that created the government: covenants, and the keeping of those valid or

Thomas Hobbes was the first philosopher to connect the philosophical commitments to politics. He offers a distinctive definition to what man needs in life which is a successful means to a conclusion. He eloquently defines the social contract of man after defining the intentions of man. This paper will account for why Hobbes felt that man was inherently empowered to preserve life through all means necessary, and how he creates an authorization for an absolute sovereign authority to help keep peace and preserve life. Hobbes first defines the nature of man. Inherently man is evil. He will do whatever is morally permissible to self preservation. This definition helps us understand the argument of why Hobbes was pessimistic of man, and

In Hobbes….he reveals how firmly he disagrees with traditional natural law theorists, Hobbes sates that, “I put for a general inclination of all mankind a perpetual and restless desire of power after power that ceases only in death.” In other words, Hobbes reveals that he believes that men cannot be satisfied by the “cultivation of virtue” as a political end; man will fight for more power until the fight itself kills them. According to source Hobbes states that, “All men have in common is the continual fear and danger of violent death” (Hobbes, 1956: Ch.13, 107-108). Hobbes is basically stating that because death is less likely to occur when there is peace, men will therefore desire a peaceful society only because it is in their best interest. Source , Hobbes states that, “The passions that incline men to peace are fear of death, desire of such tings are necessary to commodious living, and a hope by their industry to obtain them.” These are prime examples of where the tradition view towards natural law contrasts with Hobbes theory. Natural law tradition generally believes it is human nature to have peace, and avoid evil, where Hobbes on the other hands believes man is only interested in having peace because it is for his own benefit. In current terms, Hobbes has a more realist view on natural law tradition.

“People should not be afraid of their governments, governments should be afraid of their people.” In an authoritarian government, the citizens listen to their director because they have this fear within them, that if they do not do what is asked of them they will face consequences. But in reality, the citizens have power over the government and the government is the one that is living in fear. At any moment someone can threaten the government. This has been seen through terrorist acts such as 9/11 terror attacks, and this has been demonstrated in the movie V For Vendetta. In the movie V For Vendetta, V attempts to bring freedom and justice into a society that has been corrupt from having an authoritarian government. He threatens the government and tells them a year in advance that he will blow up the most important building in their city, but the government was not able to stop him. V wanted the city of London, England to have freedom and rights, free press, and to no longer have to live in fake fear, all three which are factors of an authoritarian government. In V For Vendetta, it is displayed that the citizens have no rights and freedoms, the media is controlled by the government, and that the government creates fear.

The film 'V for Vendetta' directed by James McTeigue addresses the idea of governmental authority and control in our society. One key scene where this is portrayed is in the opening, where Evey goes out to visit Gordon Deitrich after curfew. The futuristic landscape of a totalitarian England is displayed here, where the oppressive party in power have created a culture of fear to ensure the conformity of the citizens. However, in contrast, the final scene of the film where a crowd converges to watch Parliament blow up, illustrates a further idea. That when united, it is the people who have the power to change their society, through rebellion and political uprising.

Alike, V for Vendetta explores the fear in a totalitarian regime with propaganda, controlled by the Norsefire party. The Chancellor uses oppression as a method to maintain control. The Norsefire party demonstrates attributes of the Nazi regime in Germany. These texts, depict what can happen when governments take over the society, but there are some citizens who are willing to sacrifice their lives to ensure freedom for the people. Both V for Vendetta and Fahrenheit 451 pay close detail to its setting, where they can convey oppression and fear to their societies with their strict rules, in the future.

Thomas Hobbes and John Locke both share the common vision of the role of a social contract to maintain order in a state. However, their philosophies were cognizant of a sharp contrasting concept of human nature. This essay aims to compare and contrast the social contracts of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke in respect to their definition of natural law. This essay will first analyze the pessimistic Hobbesian approach to the state of nature, the inherit optimistic approach of Locke, and then observe how their definitions directly affect their social contract.

Also, they transfer some of these rights to a select few members of society that use those rights to maintain the laws of the covenant. An ideal covenant, in Hobbes' mind, would be a large, powerful "leviathan" government to make and regulate laws at a high level of efficiency, hence the title of his work (the bible refers to the "leviathan" as a massive sea monster." Hobbes derives his Third Law of Nature from the second, which states it necessary that "men perform their covenants made" (31), because a covenant becomes void is any member violates or is reasonably suspected of violating the regulations of the covenant. In order to fortify what appears to be a fragile idea of a social contract, the members of the contract need to set up some sort of governing body that will punish violators of the covenant. The level and extremity of the punishment is important, because "the terror of...punishment [must be] greater than the benefit they expect by the breach of their covenant" (31). The idea is not only to punish those who break the laws of the social contract, but to scare off individuals from ever doing so. To carry out the regulations of a society, the members establish a commonwealth, which represents the general sentiment or voice of the society either through one leader or an assembly of them. The Third Law of Nature creates a sound society where peace is

While Hobbes uses Laws of Nature in his logical argument, they appear to be less universally binding compared to Locke’s. Indeed, they specifically apply in circumstances where an individual’s life feels secure. In principle however, humans are generally inclined to comply with them. Conversely, in the practical life situation, the desire for self preservation takes precedence. Hence, a civil society

Of the many symbolic masks, the Guy Fawkes mask stands out as one of the most effective, often being used as a “masked identity” in order to make profound statements. Not only does this secret identity create more attention to the “masked one” but it also diverts attention to the cause rather than the identity. Literally using a mask, Fawkes was the main influence of the character “V”, in James McTeigue’s, V For Vendetta. V’s connections and motivations to Guy Fawkes, his attempt to justify himself as a terrorist, and V’s concealment of his true identity, collectively define the message that V conveys to his audience: to break parliament and take control of their own country.

It’s a title with a strong letter used as somewhat like a alliteration to exaggerate the ideas within this film, ‘V for Vendetta’, directed by James McTeigue, this defines what the true meaning of injustice which seems to be over exaggerated through action, sci-fi and thriller scenes. ‘V for Vendetta’ is a type of film where in a future, where there was a British tyranny or corruption in the government, a shadowy freedom fighter plots to overthrow it with the help of a young woman. This film shows the message of the best advice is to stop fighting it and embrace the fact that you have been given an opportunity if you chose to view it with a different set of eyes. And yet there will be many who miss this opportunity as they feel a false sense of security operating in the belief systems that harbor fear, anger and hate rather than letting go to face the very emotions that enslave them.This film uses fancy quotes or catch phrases, with a strong act of violence in acting around the main character(s), especially the protagonist ‘V’ and to the eventuality, ‘Evey’ at the end of the story. Special effects and the fanatical costume visuals (with the famous Guy Fawkes mask) all is used intently to make the audience with a tint of exhilarance, to make them think, what does this mean? What is the idea that V is trying to show in injustice? Through elements found in the film I’ve found that,......

“V for Vendetta" is a movie about freedom, about human struggle against the state, the government of the sacrifice of a symbol. V for Vendetta was born from the successful combination of a sudden, seemingly incongruous things: out of the comic’s conventions and the anti-globalization pathos. I think this movie is a combination of the of Lewis Carroll’s abstract absurdity and George Orwell’s totalitarian nightmare. Alice meets with Hitler. Evey dressed up and went out on a date, but instead of rabbit hole, she found the black "funnel". Once the British had already made a movie "It Happened Here," an alternative fantasy on the theme of the Nazi’s occupation of England - now the enemy did not come from outside but from the inside. In the near future, England is living under a power of tyrant, neurotic clown with flabby face. Supreme Chancellor autocratically governed the country. Bishops are concerned about the moral health of the nation. People are constantly live in fear of external threat after the tragic virus attacks a few years ago. Every person sentenced to death if he keeps a Koran. Same thing for the "unnatural" sex. There was nothing else to be executed for;