1. If Edmund Burke were alive today, would he support neo-conservatives like Irving Kristol; social conservatives like James Dobson; and/or neoliberals like Milton Friedman? Why or why not?Edmund Burke believed in traditional conservatism; he stated that though humans were slightly rational, they could not be trusted to decide what was “right” and “wrong.”Reasons why Burke would support neo-conservatives:1. Both do not advocate violence; Neo-conservatives believe that spreading state violence is not the way to spread ideas and values; Burke hence was against the French Revolution2. Burke relies on prudence for the sake of order, therefore minimizing state intervention. Conservatives believed in an interventionalist foreign policy3. Both believe freedom is a universal right4. NOT: Kristol’s goal was to promote democracy abroad and Burke’s goal for gov’t was a natural aristocracyReasons why Burke WOULD support social conservatives:1. Both believe that religion provides a pathway for social continuity with the past2. However, Burke focuses more on traditional authority (aristocracy, family, inheritance) while social conservatives focus more on the modernity and seculariziation of politics.3. All believe that the church should play a major role in politicsReasons why he would NOT support neo-Liberals:1. It focuses on liberty and freedom of individual through free markets, trade, and private property rights. Burke rejects the idea of natural rights and the concept of reason/rational; believes that humans have tendency toward irrational behavior2. Neo-conservatives emphasize individualism while Burke believes that individuals are born into society & the pieces that make it a whole. 2. Emma Goldman and Murray Rothbard were anarchists who focused on the individual as a political unit. How does each of their understandings of individualism differ from John Locke’s understanding of individualism?John Locke’s understanding of individualism:- Man is self-interested and define our own aims in the world- Optimizers and weigh our options- Enlightened self-interest: Natural reason leads people to recognize a reciprocal right in others- 3 natural rights: life, liberty, property- Man is only responsible to himself and the law of Nature- Gov’t is voluntary and agreed upon by the peopleEmma Goldman:- sees the individual as a solution to the evils in society; (economy, government, etc)- individual is the heart of society, conserving the essence of social life; society is the lung which are distributing the element to keep the life essence—that is, the individual—pure and strong.”- Individual instinct is the thing of value in the world- Religion, property, government are the dominion of the human mind, needs, and conduct; have ability to pursue anything they desireMurray Rothbard:- man is free when he is not being aggressed against, or “society” is freewhen no aggression or invasion has been committed- by nature, gov’t infringes on our rights- Society is everyone but yourself- Man comes into the world just as himself and the world around him – land & natural resources are given to him by nature; takes these resources and transforms them by his labor and mind and energy into goods more useful to man and society3. Imagine a table conversation between Marx and Lenin, discussing theprogress towards communism in Russia. Do you think Marx would approve? What might he advise Lenin to do differently? to continue doing?How might Lenin respond to these suggestions?Do you think Marx would approve?- Yes, because Marx believed in a primitive communism (products that contribute to the survival of species and development of their productive abilities)- For Marx, materials and economy are the driving force- Lenin saw the rhythm of capitalist development and decay, saw it was a time to act because there was low production, low unemployment,and low capital accumulation- Wanted to maximize economic development & productivityWhat might advise Lenin to do the same?- Marx believed in progress, however, towards an end goal where people are no longer alienated by their labor- Lenin made sure to focus on the working class and their needs; even gave them some private property of their ownDo differently?How might Lenin respond to these suggestions?4. MLK and Malcolm X had differing methods for achieving their goals and different visions for the racially diverse society. Compare and contrast theirmajor differences and similarities. Next, if you were trying to inspire social change, which method would you prefer? Why? Please give several reasons to answer this part of the question.MLK’s method for achieving goals:- Civil disobedience = public, non-violent, & conscientious breach of law undertaken with the aim of bringing about change in laws or gov’t- Willing to accept legal consequences of their actions, shows fidelity to the rule of law- Revolutionary action, militant protest, organized forcible resistance- “The purpose of direct action is to create a situation so crisis-packed that it will inevitabely open the door to negotiation.”- Letter to Birmingham Jail: “Justice too long delayed is justice denied.” “Injustice everywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”- Natural right of all people to be treated equal- 1. Train of abuses 2. Moral responsibility to disobey.. How? By “presenting our bodies” and “Nonviolent direct action which seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue.”- Sit ins in white sections of restaurantsMalcolm X:- Human rights over civil rights (human rights = freedom, respect, dignity; civil rights = relationship w/ gov’t, right to vote, sit on jury, etc)- Black nationalism; bringing freedom to blacks; “Black man should control the politics of his own community.”- People should try to eliminate ills/defects within their own kind- Member of Nation of Islam, preached racial separatism, black power- Supports political progress, give voice to anger & discontent within black community- Advocated using any mean of Self-defense and is deeply unsettled by white power structureMain differences:- MLK was willing to negotiate with whites, while Malcolm X disapproved- Malcolm X wanted to reject white structuralism completely & urged blacks to turn in on themselves and empower race to create own community, economy, etc- Malcolm wanted them