Friday, September 4, 2015

Ferguson Riots in STL

                Being from St. Louis and with how the area has been lately with riots this topic of justice in class has resounded with me. What really struck me was how Socrates compared the city to a man’s soul. During that discussion in class I continually thought of how the city of Ferguson was just like the example of an unjust city. The “workers” were trying to be the “guardians” and there was no order. Instead of them doing their own jobs and minding their business, the workers gave into their appetites and began looting and rioting for weeks on end. The workers began to take over as the “governing powers.” They did not necessarily think that they were doing the right thing, but they showed no hesitation in doing the wrong thing.
                I find it interesting how the city and people both gave into their appetites. The people caused the city to become unjust. They all lost their reason and became out of order causing the rest of the city to fall out of order. There is also a certain irony how it all has been playing out. The people rioting and looting are and were demanding justice, yet, the ways they show how they feel are unjust. They demanded something they were not willing to comply with. And I feel therein lies the problem. These people have their own views of justice and think that anyone who disagrees with them is sending a personal attack on them causing violence. Rather than going to a person or group to amend and help work towards bettering society, these people are very much demonstrating the idea of “My way or the highway” saying how they refuse to cooperate, yet expect everyone else in the area to cooperate with them.

                We have been fortunate enough that the authorities have not taken these offenses in such a way that ruins society more, but if they want to better society, the city and the people need to put their “chain of justice” back into order and bring reason back into their lives.

1 comment:

  1. They did not necessarily think that they were doing the right thing, but they showed no hesitation in doing the wrong thing.... There is also a certain irony how it all has been playing out. The people rioting and looting are and were demanding justice, yet, the ways they show how they feel are unjust. They demanded something they were not willing to comply with. And I feel therein lies the problem. These people have their own views of justice and think that anyone who disagrees with them is sending a personal attack on them causing violence. Rather than going to a person or group to amend and help work towards bettering society, these people are very much demonstrating the idea of “My way or the highway” saying how they refuse to cooperate, yet expect everyone else in the area to cooperate with them.

    I think you've really hit the nail on the head with this observation--I know that we touched on it at least briefly in the class discussion, but I'm glad that you've reminded me of it through this post!

    It seems that the story of Gyges' ring, as well as the rest of the struggle to pin down a definition of justice, incorporate observations of this same phenomenon: the fact that it seems that, in general, we tend to like the ideas of order and justice as a theory--but, then, when it applies to us, we want to be the exceptions to the rule! (This particular Calvin and Hobbes comic strip sums up the whole idea very neatly: http://s765.photobucket.com/user/wineandbowties/media/calvin2.jpg.html )

    In other words, this attitude of "everyone else, but not me" is prevalent in this situation in St. Louis, and the goings-on there provide a picture of this attitude happening on a large scale. Each person wants everyone else to conform to the rules, and each person wants to be the one who is given a free pass on anything and everything. But, of course, with exception after exception, the rules lose any force they may have had--they are no longer fulfilling the very objectives for which they were created! ...Hmm... That train of thought makes me wonder whether things (like rules or objects) or living creatures besides human beings can also be described as having an ergon... I don't remember exactly how our assigned reading addressed that specific idea, so I'll have to go and see whether it was covered!

    But as for the theme of "everyone else should receive the consequences, but I should be able to do as I please"--doesn't it seem a safe bet to say that this attitude is human nature?

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.