Can
you imagine what society would be like if people were no longer ambitious? If
everyone went through life mindlessly accepting whatever role they were born
into? This is how Hannah More believes society should be run as described by
her in Village Politics. In this
dialogue, More uses the clever Jack character to explain to the dimwitted Tom
character the dangers of questioning society and going against political order.
More
argues that everyone in society has a specific role, and everyone should stay
in whatever role that is. More urges the lower class to avoid radicalism
stating, “study to be quiet, work with your hands, and mind your own business,”
(More 18). While Tom attempts to
question the political developments in France, (Village Politics was written
during the French Revolution), Jack always overcomes him, as Tom hardly seems
like an informed citizen. However, the idea of a structured social hierarchy
isn’t the case and society has benefited greatly from it, in my opinion. More's
vision of the masses yielding obedience to the elites has hardly ever been the
case, as some of the world’s greatest innovators and visionaries have risen
from the poorest of the poor to the richest of the rich.
One
of the many examples of this is John D. Rockefeller. An American industrialist
and philanthropist, Rockefeller was the founder of the Standard Oil Company,
which dominated the oil industry and was the first great U.S. business trust.
Rockefeller revolutionized the petroleum industry and also defined the
structure of modern philanthropy. His story is like many other Americans who
revolutionized and greatly benefited society.
Had Rockefeller subjected himself to the “role” he was born into in society, America would have been much worse off in the development of the oil industry than they were otherwise. The success of the United States, and the world for that matter, has been built off of visionaries like Rockefeller. With an idea, hard work, and a little bit of luck, one can transform previous beliefs and amaze the world with contributions. If everyone was either labeled an “elite” or one of the masses, and had to accept and follow that role. Society would be light years behind what it is today. We would be losing out on the majority of the great inventions and contributions to society, by eliminating the majority of the population’s ability to do something great. The struggle for power is what drives society. Those with the best ideas, the hardest working, and most intelligent people will naturally become the elites, running society. People should never subject themselves to stay in a social pedistool society places on them. Accept it for the moment, but work your way up. The burning fire inside Rockefeller’s stomach, to get out of his bad situation, to make something of himself, would be all but ash if he was happy with his role in society, as More would have hoped. Had this been the case, or if it ever becomes the case, it will be our own downfall.
images:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6f/John_D._Rockefeller_1885.jpg/220px-John_D._Rockefeller_1885.jpg
http://www.brandsoftheworld.com/sites/default/files/styles/logo-thumbnail/public/082010/StandardOil_Indana.gif
I agree with everything you say in this post, and the first thing that comes to my mind is entrepreneurs. Rockefeller was an entrepreneur: he had an idea and the skills necessary to make his idea successful. If everyone blindly accepted his or her societal “role,” I believe we would not be as technologically advanced. Take Steve Jobs, one of the founders of Apple. Without the pursuit of his vision of personal computers, we would not have our Apple laptops, iPhones, iPads, and iPods that we love and cling to. Society is better off with entrepreneurs, and therefore people who dream and pursue their ideas, no matter where they fall in society.
ReplyDeleteI am all about upward mobility in society and I appreciated the incorporation of Rockefeller on your way to proving this. I'd also like to make an argument for More by saying it is important for people to enjoy what they are doing with their lives. Never being satisfied and striving to improve is always a good thing, but for the sake of argument I think More might be saying a little something different. Not everyone can be president nor should they and I think that More is saying. It's important to accept all of the things that you are good at, and like Rockefeller if you have an unrecognized skill it is essential that you work your butt off to bring that talent and hard work to light
DeleteThis is a very interesting post Mr. Benjamin Fry. I agree with you 100% that ambition has made America a dominate force. The professional world is full of people who went from "zero to hero". It was ambition that ended slavery for African Americans and desegregated Traditionally White Institutions. The only problem with motivating ambition stories are, they have the tendency to leave out important aspects. Many people have ambition which turns into being stubborn. They allow their ambition to blind them from their sense of reality. Going to college requires ambition, but is it worth 100,000 dollars in loans? Dr. King's ambition caused white America to fear him. He was assisinated because of it and for some time African Americans hopes died right along with him. Having ambition is great and can take you far in life, but it distorts your version of reality causes you harm. I am not saying Dr. King died in vain, but it took a strong toll on the black race and their movement. Making that sacrifice to attend college is not wrong, but studies have shown most people die without finishing paying off their loans.
ReplyDeleteI find your point about Rockefeller to be very enthralling and very true. There are dozens of instances where people who born in lower standing social position rose up against traditional ways to made great successes for themselves and society. Take Andrew Carnegie for example. He was the son of Scottish immigrants and made great investments steel industry. If Carnegie hadn’t risen above those who oppressed him (the elite) he would have never greatly expanded the steel industry, and obtained the wealth that allowed him to donate to many philanthropic endeavors such as schools, and libraries, which helped our country to grow. If ambition is indeed squashed by the conservative notions seen in The Village People, our country would not be as prosperous, or known for its rags to riches stories as it is today. However, Moore’s notion that one who is uninformed, and yet attempting to overcome traditional institutions is foolish to do so. If one is not an informed citizen it is most likely the case that their attempt to overcome their social standing will fail. The success stories of those who have persevered in the past encompass individuals who make smart decisions, and are well versed in the steps they must take in order to be successful. I believe Moore isn’t necessarily attempting to make the point that all nontraditional forms or society are bad, but more so, the fact that an uninformed citizen ends up making poor decisions, where as an informed citizen is able to make decisions that will benefit him, whatever they may be.
ReplyDelete