Why Is Democracy So Difficult?
Mob Violence Blog
As a part of the United States Bill of Rights, people are allowed to gather and protest peacefully. Because of this right, many important issues have gained popularity, as well as more people wanting to solve them. When change does happen, the people feel powerful, as they were a part of that change. This is how a democracy works; people have the power to make change happen and, as long as it’s done correctly, that change can happen without anyone getting hurt.
So what happens when people do get hurt? What happens when a protest turns violent? Most importantly, why did it turn violent in the first place?
The main reason why a protest may turn violent is because of a lack of democracy. If the people don’t feel like they are being heard, they will do whatever it takes to be heard. They will do whatever it takes to gain back power.
A good example of this is in Charles Dickens’ A Tale of Two Cities. The novel takes place during the French Revolution and shows how difficult it was for French peasants and middle class citizens during that time. One chapter in particular, chapter 22 in book two, describes a violent mob scene that involves a group of these minorities. The mob starts when people learn that Foulon, who told peasants “that they might eat grass”, faked his death and is now being held prisoner at a hotel. The people wanted revenge and marched to the hotel, where Foulon was found tied up with grass on his back. The mob captures him and drags him to a lamp post, where he is hung three times before dying and, even after he is dead, “his head was soon upon a pike, with grass enough in his mouth for all of Saint Antoine to dance at the sight at.
So what led to this violent act? The main reason was that peasants and common folk had no money, no voice, no power, nothing. They felt worthless. However, anyone that is a part of a violent mob can instantly feel powerful, as putting someone’s life in danger is seen as just that. Dickens describes this, saying, “From such household occupations as their bare poverty yielded, from their children, from their aged and their sick crouching on the bare ground famished and naked, they ran out with streaming hair, urging one another, and themselves, to madness with the wildest cries and actions” (221). The peasants needed to feel powerful even if they really weren’t. This was especially important during the French Revolution, as France had no democracy. It was just a big power hot potato game. This is what ultimately caused the Revolution. The common folk wanted power, causing them to want revenge on anyone who currently had power, leading to violence that eventually put someone else in power. This cycle continued until the end of the Revolution, and even then, France still had no democracy.
In today’s society, most protests are peaceful when compared to the mobs during the French Revolution. However, there are still minorities as far as political power goes. Over the past year, we have seen so many teens expressing their opinions on many pressing issues, the biggest one being gun violence. Many teenagers have participated in and even planned some rallies and protests that have made a huge impact on society. However, teens are seen as lazy, narcissistic, internet-addicted and unaware. These labels describe teens as almost worthless, and has made many teens feel as though their voice doesn’t matter. The truth is, however, that teenagers have strong opinions on a lot of things that could change society as we know it. Their voice is just as important as anyone else’s and deserves to be listened to.
Mob violence is ultimately caused by a lack of democracy and people feeling as though they are not heard. Dickens portrays this through his novel by showing how the common folk of the French Revolution felt and acted. It also shows how and why the French Revolution was so violent and went on for so long. A lack of democracy can be used not only to explain the minorities during the French Revolution but also minorities in today’s society. In both cases, the minority felt as though their voice was not only not being heard, but that nobody wanted to hear it. Democracy should include everyone, not just a certain group of people. Everyone should be able to feel powerful and be able to make a lasting impact on society.
Justice and Vengeance Blog
Justice and vengeance are often compared to each other. Most of the time, this comparison points out the huge differences between the two and how they can almost never mix. However, in Charles Dickens’ A Tale of Two Cities, which takes place during the French Revolution, many people believe that vengeance can, in fact, be justified. One popular example of this in the book is the murdering of the Marquis, whose death seemed to be justified because of his wrongdoing on the rest of society. So, can justice, in today’s society and in French society back in 1780, ever be justified?
Vengeance cannot be justified in any way. Justice is defined as “just behavior or treatment: a concern for justice, peace, and genuine respect for people”, while vengeance is defined as “punishment inflicted or retribution exacted for an injury or wrong”. The definitions alone show how drastically different the two are from each other. The main idea for justice is respect and peace, while the main idea for vengeance is punishment and self-gain. Getting your revenge on someone shows no respect to anyone and does not enable peace in any way. All vengeance does is create a cycle that creates more vengeance that creates a bigger cycle and so on. It does not justify your actions nor the actions of the person you got revenge on in the first place.
Even in the case of the French Revolution, where there was almost no justice system, vengeance is never a good replacement for justice. Take the murdering of Monseigneur the Marquis from A Tale of Two Cities that was previously mentioned. Because he was a noble, peasants absolutely despised him and decided to use a knife that was “driven home into the heart of the stone figure attached to it” (130). However, murdering him did next to nothing. All it did was create more violence in the already violent revolution. On top of that, those who cared for him now wanted their revenge. This is the start of the cycle, a cycle that drove the French Revolution downhill for a very long time.
However, I do think that you can achieve vengeance through justice. Going back to the definitions, you can’t achieve respect and peace through revenge, but you can achieve revenge through respect and peace. In other words, justice can help you get revenge on someone, but revenge cannot help you get justice. If you want revenge on someone, the best way to do it is to argue against them in court instead of murdering them. That way, you can give them the punishment they deserve in a respectable, peaceful and just manner.
Justice and vengeance are two different things. One allows for peace among society and one is used only for self gain and getting revenge. Vengeance can never be justified and should never replace justice, no matter where and when.
The Marquis dead in his bed with a knife through his heart
A violent protest during the French Revolution