Ashley Ng, Period 8, 3/11/22

 Modern Mythology 2022

Ashley Ng

Period 8

3/11/22

Literacy & Learning:

In class recently, there was a discussion of a quote from Grendel about the difference between legitimate force and coercive repression. For some context, the quote is, "Law rules the land. Men's violence is chained to good (i.e., to the king): legitimate force that chops the bread-thief's neck and wipes its ax." The discussion resulted in a single reason behind the difference, which is perception. To all the law-abiding citizens, the punishment that befalls the bread-thief is perceived to be just. To the bread thief, it might not be just because of their circumstances that led up to the thievery. And to all other thieves, the punishment serves as an example of what happens when a thief is caught. 

The quote is ultimately a metaphor and so, the conversation moved on to the topic of tyranny. When the rule of a tyrant becomes the law, it's seen as coercive repression. To the tyrant, their actions are seen as just and the quelling of an uprising constitutes the use of legitimate force. To the masses suffering under the tyrant, the quelling of the uprising would be coercive repression. The same can be said of conquest. There's always a side that strikes first. The other side has to decide whether to surrender or strike back. Each side has its own justification for the use of force. Perception and justification go hand in hand. 

For this conversation, my thoughts immediately went to the things I learned in AP US History. When becoming a citizen of a county, a person agrees to give up some of their rights for the greater good. That's how a government maintains order, by balancing freedom and safety. There are times in history when the US government has overstepped its boundaries, like after the events of 9/11 when a lot of freedom was taken away out of fear and paranoia. But a majority of US citizens were forgiving of those actions because they believed in the common good. To most of the citizens, the actions of the US government were legitimate. Of course, there are many other current debates that fall under the same category, such as gun laws, abortion rights, and mask mandates. The one thing in common with all those topics would be the two sides to the debate: the government with established laws and the minority pushing against those laws. This made me realize that perceived legitimacy comes from the compliance of the collective. When the compliance of the collective is no longer there, then legitimate force is no longer legitimate and is instead coercive.