Results 1 to 4 of 4
Main points to hit for very short essay?
I would first like to apologize for making another thread about this, but I didn't want to intrude upon the other.
My composition class has been assigned a very short, I'm talking about limit of 2000 words, persuasion type essay. We have been required to stick to 3 main points, each with 2 subtopics.....my problem is just that.
I have chosen communism as my topic of persuasion. There are so very many arguments to make and points to elaborate upon that I am completely enveloped in chaos here. What should I stick my focus on?
I'm (trying) to stick to the Marxism-Leninism philosophy, but she wants more than just the philosophy and economic elaboration.
I thought about bringing up how, as one opinion, communism (or rather socialism) is the best environment for democracy to flourish. And how it inevitably promotes freedom and equality, contrary to common capitalistic propaganda. But they would be mainly subtopics.
Could someone help me organize my thoughts? It would be very much appreciated.
I would focus on the organization of a communist society and the actual working of a socialist gift economy rather than the marxist-leninist theory behind transition to communism and critique of capitalism. Just a suggestion. You could focus on all the various aspects of marxist-leninist theory, but you would need a lot more than 2000 words for it.
That's a bit broad, don't you think? Can you still change the topic to something more focussed? What does the requirement with the subtopics mean, does it just mean to have 2 sections per main point? In that case, I would handle it like this:
main point = aspect of society people care about (equitability, incentives, control over your own life)
subsection 1 = how capitalism sucks at that
subsection 2 = how socialism could be better here
I would start with a view of a given amount of stuff and diminishing marginal utility of income and leave the twists (meaning aspects capitalism is usually claimed to be better at) for later.That's a horrible idea. You have to start with broadly shared ideas about the common good, and then show how getting closer to these ideals requires a fundamental change of society. A gift economy is not a broadly shared goal, not even among people who are very sympathic to socialism.
A broadly shared idea is that unemployment is wasteful for example. A broadly shared idea is that gambling in a casino is unproductive. Say that and then draw parallels to what investors do. There are investors who have streaks of success, but this doesn't constitute proof of a special investor talent. If you follow the dart-throwing patterns of a thousand monkeys to simulate investment decisions, some of these monkeys will also display much better decisions than others. Given that having money increases your ability to get more money, we can expect a very uneven distribution of wealth to develop in any society that uses money, regardless of how talent and willingness to work are distributed. A game of Monopoly ends with a very uneven wealth distribution even if the players make completely random decisions.
Thanks guys. Sorry it have taken so long for me to respond, I've been really busy this weekend.
Yeah, it's really too broad. But, she never tried to talk me out of it, and being the freak I am, I decided, "Hey, why not?".
It isn't limited to that, but I figured it might be simpler to leave it as such with most of the points.
That does sound like a good way to tackle the question. I have to add in a few paragraphs as concession to the opposition as well, but I think I will add that in with the last two points.
Thank you again for the assistance.
