Would a Libya happen in America?

For most of 2011, Libya was in a state of civil war with the people against their oppressive dictator Moammar Gaddhaffi. Eventually the people won and Gaddhaffi was captured and killed without trial. During the semester we read 4 sources written by Thomas Jefferson, Crevecouer, Emmerson, and Thoreau. This source specifically relates to Thomas Jefferson's "Declaration of Independence". In the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson reasons that it is ok for the people to overthrow their government if it is corrupt. Jefferson would say that happened in Libya could happen in the US, but it would not be the exact same.

In the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson states:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness"

What happened in Libya was supported and opposed by Jefferson for several reasons. First of all, Gaddafi died after being captured, without a fair trial. Jefferson, in my opinion, would have wanted to see Gaddafi brought to trial instead of being tortured and killed. However, Jefferson would have been in favor of the ousting of Gaddafi. Gaddafi violated the natural rights of man and deserved a trial in order to be punished. Ultimately Jefferson would have been in favor of removing Gaddafi from power, but not for how it was done.

Is what happened in Libya possible in the United States? I think to a certain extent no. While it is possible for the government to be overthrown, it is also possible for the people to express their discontent and have laws changed before it even gets to the level of governmental abuse as seen in Libya. These checkpoints were established in order to prevent something like the Libyan Civil War from happening and are written in the Declaration of Independence and in our Constitution. Because of how our government works, a democracy with checks and balances that ensures the people rights are protected, and the principles our nation was founded on, I do not think a civil war like in Libya could take place again.

Source:http://www.globalpost.com/dispatches/globalpost-blogs/the-casbah/gaddafi-dead-video-initial-capture-exclusive

Transcendentalism was a movement in 19th century America that stated man and society were inherently good and that man should be self-reliant. There are other ideas to Transcendentalism, such as being natural and finding your own connection to the universe. These thoughts can be seen in the works of Ralph Waldo Emerson's "American Scholar" and David Henry Thoreau's "Walden" with their many mentions of nature and of progress. There are key differences between both works, however, and that is on what they view and define the American Experience as. Both Emerson and Thoreau define the American Experience as a time of progress, but they each view it in different ways.

One of the key elements of transcendentalism is the idea of progressing forward. However, their views on progress contrast each other. Thoreau wants to go back to a "natural state", which can be seen in his book "Walden". Walden tells of Thoreau's time in a cabin he built and stayed in for two years near Walden Pond. The main message of Walden is that of the utopia of one is the "American Experience". This idea states that man is happiest when he is self-reliant. American Scholar contrasts this, by saying that it is through science and progress mankind can better itself, thus providing the "American Experience". These ideas both differ from Crevecour's idea of the "American Experience" in several ways. First, both Emerson and Thoreau believe that the political parties harmed Americans more than it helped them. They believe that political parties corrupt and harm individuals, and the only escape is to create ties to nature or to progress through bettering the individual through knowledge. Crevecouer assumed that the individual would be pure, and that democracy would be incorruptible.

Overall I agree more with Emerson's idea of progress through self improvement. Throughout history we can see that with education and self improvement, society itself improves. Albert Einstein and Thomas Edison are two examples of the idea of "individual potential". Albert Einstein, regarded as the smartest man to have ever lived, taught himself calculus at the age of 12. He later went on to be a world renowned physicist and developed the Theory of Relativity. Thomas Edison, inventor of the lightbulb, grew up teaching himself as well. Without his invention of the lightbulb, many inventions of today would not be possible, and life would be unimaginable. I prefer the idea of self-improvement and potential rather than reverting back to a simpler state because of all the potential boons the future holds. If we went back to a simpler time, we would lose all the potential improvements for our society.