American utilitarianism views politics from an angle of “switch” trolley problem, where the sacrifice of the Canadians saves the larger population of America. Conversely, Canadians view politics as “footbridge” problem, symbolizing its population as an outside force sacrificed despite being originally uninvolved in the problem. By endangering Canadians health by exporting their hazardous waste, Americans push the theoretical “fat man,” Canada, onto the tracks to save its people. The American train symbolizes the inevitable harm and economic disenfranchisement faced by the Canadians because of experialist policy, which is the policy of sending American nuclear waste to Canada supported by president Johnny Gentle. As noted by Katherine Hayles’ …show more content…
Its fatal pleasure is the ultimate form of predeterminism, and its material causes viewers to experience pleasure so intense they forgo food, sleep, and using the bathroom until they inevitably die. Watchers will sacrifice anything to continue watching, and, as seen during an experiment conducted by the AFR, their fingers. While the AFR undergoes amputation to teach its members the futility of the footbridge problem, those watching “Infinite Jest” agree to have digits amputated as a result of addiction to self-indulgent media. The AFR’s main objective has become to find and possess the original “Infinite Jest” cartridge, which they could then use as a weapon. By using “Infinites Jest” as a weapon that predetermines its watchers to death, the members of the AFR subject Americans to fates they had no voice in choosing, just like Americans subjected Canadians to health and economic …show more content…
Almost like a computer, Katherine Hayles has described the recursivity by telling readers to, “imagine a huge novel that has been run through the recursive feedback loops of an intelligent agent program and then strung out along the page” (11). These feedbacks are, as suggested by the title of Wallace’s novel, infinite. Similarly, the AFR’s search for the “Infinite Jest” cartridge and attempts to stop the American predeterminism are as recursive and futile as the footbridge problem. According to Jim himself in a dream relayed to his son Hal, the “Infinite Jest” cartridge was buried with his body, “implanted in” his “very own towering father’s anaplastic cerebrum after his cruel series of detoxifications and convolution- smoothing,” supposedly at the request of his wife, Avril (Infinite Jest 31). Most importantly, Jim was buried near the great concavity that brings the Canadians woe; his magnum opus of predeterminism forever destining the Canadian people to terror under their
There are many more examples of conflicts between Trudeau's thoughts and his actions. For instance, Trudeau has always been uncomfortable with excessive state intervention in the economy. For this reason he has consistently opposed the imposition of price and income controls. But this did not stop him from deciding, in 1975, that a lack of responsibility on the part of business and labour necessitated the introduction of a controls system. Trudeau has spoken of the need for a shift of emphasis in Canadian society from consumption to conservation. And yet, he allowed energy-conservation measures in Canada to fall far behind those of the United States. More than a few times, Trudeau has insisted that it is our moral obligation as Canadians to share our wealth with poorer nations. Nevertheless, he still reduced foreign-aid spending and even put a protective quota on textile imports from developing countries. Trudeau has written about the importance of consensus in government. But again, this did not prevent him, on more than a few occasions, from entirely disregarding the consensus of his cabinet ministers on a given issue, preferring instead to make the decision on his own.
The case study of “What should we do with Jim?” has been read and a set amount of questions has been asked about the reading, which will be answered by the following:
Many Americans are not aware of the political and economic value of the Canada-U.S. relationship, and Canada is consequently not a priority for them.
The American consuming public has a long history of imposing patriotic consumption decisions upon the marketplace. They may be small things, like choosing to consume “freedom” fries over french fries or looking for the “Made in USA” label on products, or they may be forceful actions, like revolutionary era boycotts of British tea or holding foreign food and drug products to American standards. Recent anti-SUV campaigns have grown out of this legacy of consumption protest. The Detroit Project is at the forefront of promoting anti-SUV sentiment to a mass audience.
American Politics in Transition For the United States, as for most states in the world, the 1980’s and 1990’s were a time of change and challenge. During this period the effects of change both within the US and internationally acted as push factors in many areas of life, including economics and politics. This sudden change was primarily due to global shocks and recessions, increased foreign economic competition, the end of the Cold War and the demise of the Soviet Union, the development of revolutionary new technologies, the achievement of post-industrial society within the US, slower rates of domestic economic growth, and the demographic changes within American society. By the Mid 1980’s important developments had occurred within interest groups, political parties. By 1990’s national debates were being held in regard to America’s future in the post-Cold War world, America’s economic competitiveness, culture, morality and the states relationship with society. Five major things must be taken under account when discussing American politics in transition. 1) the basic nature of the American political system, 2) the sources of political change since the late 1960’s, 3) the conservative renewal and the new conservative agenda, 4) the Reagan-Bush legacy in politics and public policy 5) the new political and economic constraints in the era of divided government, and 6) the public policy environment of the 1990s. At the core of American political culture I support for the values of liberty, egalitarianism, individualism, populism and laissez-faire. The nature of this society with also has glorification of the individual, and the rejection of conservative theories of organic society, hierarchy, and natural aristocracy. Being an American means accepting this liberal Democratic creed (laissez faire), while those who reject it are considered to be un-American. America’s political evolution has also been shaped by the continental scale of the American State. The influx of immigration has caused there to be an extraordinary mixture of ethnic, racial, and religious groups spread across a continent-wide expanse that contributed historically to strong religious, racial and regional cleavages. Even its econony was spread throughout the American state. The largest sector of the economy were commercial agriculture, mercantile capitalism, mining, and heavy (capital goods) industry, but these, however, were also diversified into product specific areas. Collectively, the cultural, geographic, and socioeconomic factors had a profound effect on America’s political development because they reinforced the trend towards decentralization and localism that had already been established in the political and legal domains by the American constitution.
Using multiple examples of the malice that is ignited by the manipulation of technology, Nelson has almost an angry tone at the rapid image flow used in modern technology. Using words like “hunt them down” and “monstrous,” it is clear to see that Nelson goes beyond an informative paper by inserting a voice that is disapproving of the effects of new advancements. To further her point, she makes generalization about all people have “ample and wily reserves of malice, power-mongering, self-centeredness, fear, sadism” which the media takes advantage of by enticing viewers into entertainment that may seem immoral (Nelson 301). This targeting of audiences has been a method used by media, but Nelson does not make the argument that the media is at fault for corrupting people, but rather it is a characteristic already present in
Throughout the essay, Mills speaks highly of utilitarianism as a way to construct a happier more stable society. “The creed which accepts as the foundation of morals, Utility, or the greatest Happiness Principle, holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness” (Mill 137). The ideas of such political philosophers such as Mills and Bentham enticed the modern world at the time of their publication, including the people of the U.S. The concept of utilitarianism started shaping America many years ago, and it is important to realize its consequence in modern day
U T I L I T A R I A N I S M. (n.d.). Retrieved May 19, 2014, from http://www.csus.edu/indiv/g/gaskilld/ethics/Utilitarianism: http://www.csus.edu/indiv/g/gaskilld/ethics/Utilitarianism%20notes.htm
John Stuart Mill believes in a utilitarian society where people are seen as “things.” Moreover, in utilitarianism the focus of the goal is “forward-looking”, in looking at the consequences but not the ini...
excused it on the pretense that her views reflected the past times in which she
Stonecipher, Harry C. A Place to stand. 21 Debated Issues in American Politics. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 2000.
Many traditions and values of the American society are beneficial, but some are harmful. Acceptance of utilitarianism will preserve beneficial traditions while replacing the harmful ones. As a result, new traditions, grounded in reason, will emerge, and future generations may wonder how the irrational and unnatural non-utilitarian values had survived for so long.
We all have cravings, be it for snacks or sweets, there is always something we desire. We crave horror in the same way. In Stephen King’s essay, “Why We Crave Horror Movies,” he argues that people need to watch horror films in order to release the negative emotions within us. King believes that people feel enjoyment while watching others be terrorized or killed in horror movies. King’s argument has elements that are both agreeable and disagreeable. On one hand he is acceptable when claiming we like the thrill and excitement that comes from watching horror movies; however, his views regarding that the fun comes from seeing others suffer cannot be agreed with because the human condition is not as immoral as he claims it to be.
McDougall, John N.. Drifting together: the political economy of Canada-US integration. Peterborough, Ont.: Broadview Press, 2006.
The Bystander at the Switch case is a fundamental part of Thomson’s argument in “Trolley Problem.” The basis of her paper is to explain the moral difference between this case, which she deems morally permissible (1398), and the Transplant case, which she deems morally impermissible (1396). In the Bystander at the Switch case, a bystander sees a trolley hurtling towards five workers on the track and has the option of throwing a switch to divert the trolley’s path towards only one worker. Thomson finds the Bystander at the Switch case permissible under two conditions: