Liberty and Tyranny Paper

#1
VOLtownUSA

VOLtownUSA

Déjà vu all over again
Joined
Jan 19, 2010
Messages
24,721
Likes
567
#1
*Help Please*

I'm having to do a "critical review" of Mark Levin's "Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto". Problem is, I have no clue how to start the thing. Anybody got any tips or ideas for a first sentence at least? I feel like if I had a couple lines to get me started I could go from there pretty easily.

The assignment says " The student will provide a basic synopsis of the work, identify the author's thesis, determine if the author offered valid proof of the stated thesis and offer alternative points of view."

I have read the book and can't really say I disagree with anything he said. I am admittedly not well-versed in politics, in fact my only real knowledge of them comes from this Us History class for which this paper is for. Anyway, any help and opinions would be much appreciated.
 
#3
#3
is this for a UT class or a college class? If it is... Its a trap. Better go liberal on your view of the book and hammer it

full disclosure... I have not read it
 
#4
#4
VolsNSkinsFan said:
is this for a UT class or a college class? If it is... Its a trap. Better go liberal on your view of the book and hammer it

full disclosure... I have not read it
Click to expand...

No kidding. Safe bet for an opening line: Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto provides a glimpse into the dystopian future that awaits America should its leaders implement the fascist and anti-labor policies espoused by its author, Mark Levin. Guaranteed A, imo
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#6
#6
dreVol said:
No kidding. Safe bet for an opening line: Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto provides a glimpse into the dystopian future that awaits America should its leaders implement the fascist and anti-labor policies espoused by its author, Mark Levin. Guaranteed A, imo
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

My professor is actually Conservative and likes the book. Kinda gives me pause with bashing it too much :).
 
#7
#7
VOLtownUSA said:
It's for Roane State, won't be at UT till next year sadly.
Click to expand...

Well thats cool, just get-r-done. But what I learned in college, is that you dont write papers on how you feel, you write what the professor wants to hear/read. If they read something they disagree with, you are going to get hammered

So figure out what the teacher wants to read/hear first.
 
#8
#8
VOLtownUSA said:
My professor is actually Conservative and likes the book. Kinda gives me pause with bashing it too much :).
Click to expand...

If your professor is conservative, then I would not use my suggested opener.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#9
#9
VOLtownUSA said:
My professor is actually Conservative and likes the book. Kinda gives me pause with bashing it too much :).
Click to expand...

I would bash it since I I'm pretty sure Levin supports a very aggressive foreign policy and moral authoritarianism. I chuckle when people like that talk bout liberty vs tyranny.
 
#10
#10
Locate his argument
Find situations in which one could argue against
Demonstrate how you think author would respond
Pick the best argument and defend
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#11
#11
nbakerld said:
I would bash it since I I'm pretty sure Levin supports a very aggressive foreign policy and moral authoritarianism. I chuckle when people like that talk bout liberty vs tyranny.
Click to expand...

so small govt only when they support small govt? Haven't heard this one before.
 
#13
#13
The whole book is basically about Conservative vs. Statist. His basic argument in the book is this:
The difference between the Conservative and Modern Liberal(his capitalization) is that for the former, "the civil society has as its highest purpose its preservation and improvement," whereas for the latter it is "the supremacy of the state." Because people and society do not fit his view of how things should be, the Modern Liberal uses the power of the state to force change, resulting in a soft tyranny. In order to not confuse the Modern Liberal with classic liberalism, Levin uses the term "Statist" throughout the book.

This is similar to what professor Lovett, my RS prof, says the Progressives do. They feel they can change people into how they thing they should be and want to use the government to do so. He (Lovett) sums it up as Conservatives "Know that people are flawed but, hey that's ok. You learn from mistakes and get better for it." and Statists (Liberals for Lovett) "Hey, you're not perfect, but we can make you that way". These of course highly paraphrased but as close as I could get considering the lecture he said that in was over a month ago lol.
Thoughts?
 
#14
#14
VOLtownUSA said:
The whole book is basically about Conservative vs. Statist. His basic argument in the book is this:
The difference between the Conservative and Modern Liberal(his capitalization) is that for the former, "the civil society has as its highest purpose its preservation and improvement," whereas for the latter it is "the supremacy of the state." Because people and society do not fit his view of how things should be, the Modern Liberal uses the power of the state to force change, resulting in a soft tyranny. In order to not confuse the Modern Liberal with classic liberalism, Levin uses the term "Statist" throughout the book.

This is similar to what professor Lovett, my RS prof, says the Progressives do. They feel they can change people into how they thing they should be and want to use the government to do so. He (Lovett) sums it up as Conservatives "Know that people are flawed but, hey that's ok. You learn from mistakes and get better for it." and Statists (Liberals for Lovett) "Hey, you're not perfect, but we can make you that way". These of course highly paraphrased but as close as I could get considering the lecture he said that in was over a month ago lol.
Thoughts?
Click to expand...

For your paper:
Do your best to reproduce his argument in the most charitable (to the author) manner possible.

Once that is complete, think of the very best hypothetical argument against his premises and conclusions.
 
#15
#15
therealUT said:
For your paper:
Do your best to reproduce his argument in the most charitable (to the author) manner possible.

Once that is complete, think of the very best hypothetical argument against his premises and conclusions.
Click to expand...

:hi: Sounds good, I'll see what I can do.
 
#19
#19
therealUT said:
For your paper:
Do your best to reproduce his argument in the most charitable (to the author) manner possible.

Once that is complete, think of the very best hypothetical argument against his premises and conclusions.
Click to expand...

TRUT, help the lad out. You know you love this stuff.
 
#20
#20
VolsNSkinsFan said:
Well thats cool, just get-r-done. But what I learned in college, is that you dont write papers on how you feel, you write what the professor wants to hear/read. If they read something they disagree with, you are going to get hammered

So figure out what the teacher wants to read/hear first.
Click to expand...

I'll give you the professor perspective - it's not about what I want to hear; it's about what the assignment was. Amazing how many students ignore directions and freelance.

Do what the assignment says. Use appropriate headings and present the material as requested.
 
#21
#21
volinbham said:
I'll give you the professor perspective - it's not about what I want to hear; it's about what the assignment was. Amazing how many students ignore directions and freelance.

Do what the assignment says. Use appropriate headings and present the material as requested.
Click to expand...

zachry. My first sentence would somehow regurgitate my directions.
 
#22
#22
volinbham said:
I'll give you the professor perspective - it's not about what I want to hear; it's about what the assignment was. Amazing how many students ignore directions and freelance.

Do what the assignment says. Use appropriate headings and present the material as requested.
Click to expand...

Sorry I didnt word it right... What I meant was listen to what and how the teacher is presenting the material. Follow the assignment and word the paper using the teachers teachings and main issues they bring up during class.

What I meant was if your teacher is a huge liberal, and you write a rightwing rant, you are not going to get an "A" no matter how well you present your argument. If you regurgitate what the teacher has been teaching in class, he/she will at least acknowledge that you have been paying attention in class and have learned something and therefore give you a decent grade.

In my view, college was like the Jersey Turnpike. Every few miles you had to pay. 50 cents here, a quarter there, and you are moving on. If you dont pay enough or try to pay in pesos or euros, you are not going anywhere. So figure out what the toll booth attendant wants and move on
 
#23
#23
VolsNSkinsFan said:
In my view, college was like the Jersey Turnpike. Every few miles you had to pay. 50 cents here, a quarter there, and you are moving on. If you dont pay enough or try to pay in pesos or euros, you are not going anywhere. So figure out what the toll booth attendant wants and move on
Click to expand...

Nice analogy :good!:
 
#24
#24
OK, I've gotten a good start (page and a half) and now I'm getting into the counterpoints section. If any of ya'll have read the book I would really appreciate any ideas to get me started with this section. :hi:
 
#25
#25
VOLtownUSA said:
OK, I've gotten a good start (page and a half) and now I'm getting into the counterpoints section. If any of ya'll have read the book I would really appreciate any ideas to get me started with this section. :hi:
Click to expand...

Have you read the book?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top