To what cost will one go to obtain equality and peace? Is equality so valuable that it out weights individuality and human rights? These are questions that each individual must ask themselves before pursuing the coveted ‘human equality. ‘ For centuries people have tried to develop states with equality and peace, but in order to obtain this, human rights and creativity must be forgone. It seems that with equality comes censorship; a term used to describe a faction that controls information and using this control for benefit.
The film Harrison Bergeron is a story of a dystopia society in which equality and peace is artificially maintained by the government. In the Republic by Plato he believes state should run with class divisions that are determined by ones natural capacities, not choice. Censorship was portrayed in both of these literatures, and it is my opinion that censorship does not out weight the benefits Of human freedoms and creativity. Contrary to this opinion it is vital to evaluate both sides of the spectrum, that both these states could work and equality and peace could be maintained.
Don’t waste your time!
Order your assignment!
Written by Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. Harrison Bergeron is film that depicts a dystopia, where human equality is artificially maintained. Vonnegut portrays a society in ‘2081 that is finally equal’ and is completely censored under the misconception of equality. The movie shows that even under extreme control no one can truly be ‘equal’ or censored. This is proven when Harrison, the protagonist, could not deal with betraying his own values and beliefs and thus took action against the state by trying to expose the state of its handicapping and censorship.
This proves hat even under the most extreme control humans can not be suppressed for lengthy periods of time. Although the state was harmonious and everyone was equal, it came with the cost of censorship. In Plato’s Republic the myth of the metals was used to persuade citizens into following the class divisions, Bronze (Worker), Silver (Solider), and Gold (Philosopher). Citizens of this society were property of the state, with no particular family; the state raised each child. As a result of this, each child’s soul was evaluated to see which class they would fall under, thus their futures would be determined.
If the child had a soul that was rational then the child was a philosopher, if spirited then solider and if appetitive then a worker. Even if this destiny was not what the child wanted, it did not matter, freedom of choice was not granted. This theory was said to keep the state in harmony as everyone did what was necessary for their job and no one got involved with each others business. In my opinion this form of peaceful state is ‘human-less. ‘ What makes a person human is their individual creativities and their right to express it.
If ndividualities are unable to be expressed, then are we human at all? If one was to look at all ‘greats’ in history, it was their individual way of thinking which made way for major discovers, theories, inventions, revolution, the list goes on. Without a way for one to express their individuality how could the human race function? Would we not just be stuck in one place, never progressing nor digressing? In my opinion the answer is yes! If creativity and freedom came with the cost of civil war and chaos then bring it on.
Pride, courage, sadness, basic emotion are all what makes us human, and if these motions drive us into civil war and chaos than so be it. would rather live in a state that fights for its beliefs than in a state where no one really knows what beliefs and rights are. One should rather stand for his/her own thoughts and feelings rather than settle for someone else’s. The Republic and Harrison Bergeron is the utter depiction of censorship, although they both produce a just state, it comes with a great cost, human rights and freedoms. Contrary to my views, would be of the ones of individual’s who believe in equality at all costs.
It would be argued that the Republic covered all areas; it ensured that all work would be done, that the state would be protected and it would be governed by the smartest of the people. All of which supports the state and it’s functioning, instead of supporting the individual. The Republic decided what would be the best for the individual, instead of the individual deciding its own freedoms. If each person’s destiny was determined by their natural capabilities then, these people would be doing a job most suited to them, thus no one should have a need to go against the state.
As long as everyone stayed within their ‘metal division’ the state would run peacefully and there would not be any chaos or civil war. For a state like the one depicted in Harrison Bergeron, where their lives are completely perfect and equal, it’s easy to see why this state would be preferred. Everyone is happy as they truly don’t know any different. One and all are equal so there is no jealousy, greed or lust. This state kills anyone that does not follow the rules, therefore everyone is just. Although they are all handicapped and the government is ontrolling, there is equality and peace.
Fortunately due to handicaps no one truly knows they are being handicapped therefore there is no way for a revolution. Because equality and peace is the goal, and no one is harmed in the process, then it is a perfect form Of state. In order to obtain social equality and peace both freedom and creativity must be forgone. Individuality is what makes the human race, without differentiation there would just be robots. In the Republic and Harrison Bergeron, censorship was used in order to produce a state that had equality and/or peace.